One distinction that always seems to enter the discussion around Selection Sunday is how teams have performed on the road. But the supposed test of a team's ability to perform in a hostile environment has a qualitative aspect as well. Let's examine the cumulative home records for each of the top 9 RPI conferences (through January 31):
W | L | Pct | Diff from Avg | RPI | |
SEC | 24 | 11 | 68.6% | 5.3% | 5 |
MVC | 34 | 16 | 68.0% | 4.7% | 8 |
B East | 44 | 21 | 67.7% | 4.4% | 3 |
Big 12 | 22 | 11 | 66.7% | 3.4% | 4 |
ACC | 23 | 14 | 62.2% | -1.1% | 1 |
Big 10 | 27 | 17 | 61.4% | -1.9% | 6 |
A10 | 25 | 16 | 61.0% | -2.3% | 7 |
MWC | 17 | 11 | 60.7% | -2.6% | 9 |
P10 | 20 | 20 | 50.0% | -13.3% | 2 |
Total | 236 | 137 | 63.3% |
8 of the 9 conferences have home winning percentages between 60-70%, while the Pac-10 is a huge outlier at 50%. So, even with the advantage of a Thursday/Saturday schedule and significant travel distance, home teams only break even on the Left Coast. If that statistical pattern continues, it will mean that a "bubble" Pac-10 team (say, with a 10-8 conference record) will have about one more "good" win than their competitors in other high-RPI leagues for NCAA at-large spots.
Will it matter, and just as important, should it matter? I can see an scenario in which there are comparisions between Syracuse (1-3 road record in Big East) or Villanova (1-4 road record in Big East) and USC (3-2 road record with wins at UCLA and Oregon). I'm not sure, however, that committee members will correctly weight the abundance of road wins available in the Pac-10 this year for all teams.
The good news is that research shows that road performance is not one of the top six "highly important" determinants of at-large selection. Don't think for one minute though that Dan Guerrero won't have the road argument lined up for his fellow Pac-10 institutions when the selection committee goes behind closed doors.
No comments:
Post a Comment