At-Large Average Criteria (2019)

Of the five primary criteria there are three that come into play in each comparison and by this virtue become the most important. They are record, Strength of Schedule (SOS) and ranked wins. Although ranked wins is, by the rules, result driven and not percentage driven I still capture the percentage because frankly it seems that the RACs incorrectly care about it. The past two years, I’ve gone back and determined the average of all three of these criteria for the at-large teams and for the next teams on the board at the end of the selection process. I have done the same exercise this year.

In 2017, the average for all of the at-large teams for record was 0.776. For SOS it was 0.603 and for ranked wins it was 0.554. (Again, before Ricky starts complaining in that high pitched squeal of his, I know percentage isn’t supposed to be used. I am using it because I believe it’s relevant to selection because the RACs are incorrectly applying this criterion.) In 2018, the averages were 0.744 (record), 0.612 (SOS) and 0.526 (ranked wins). This is obviously a small sample size but the numbers were pretty close.

Here are the 2019 numbers:

• Record – 0.778

• SOS – 0.610

• Ranked Wins – 0.532

So, 2019 is again close to the other two years in all three of the criteria.

For teams, these are the numbers you should be shooting for every year in order to position yourself well in the selection game. In reality, teams really only need to get to two of these numbers to have an excellent chance at selection.

In 2019, of the 20 at-large teams only 2 exceeded all three averages (Chicago and Wesleyan). Eight teams exceeded two of the averages – Birmingham-Southern, Carnegie Mellon, Colorado College, Muskingum, St. Benedict, St. Olaf, Susquehanna (missed the third by 0.001 in SOS) and Wellesley.

It really makes sense why getting two of the three gets you in and that’s because you pretty much have the advantage on every team in the nation as long as you didn’t play head-to-head or had a common opponent. Of the 10 teams that exceeded the average in 2 or more of the criteria, I only had trouble selecting Wellesley and I’m sure the committee didn’t share my trepidation (which was due to their poor schedule and hollow ranked wins). Of the remaining 10 teams, 8 exceeded one of the criteria. The two teams that didn’t exceed any of the three were Hope and Washington-St. Louis. In the case of both of these teams their three criteria were all really close to the averages and the quality of the teams played were outstanding.

Looking at the last teams standing as selection closed on them we find that they all have their warts. Only two of the teams exceeded one of the criteria (Chapman and Mount Union) while the rest didn’t exceed any. Since I don’t know which team was the last selected, I look at the 8 teams that were next in the regionally rankings. Looking at their averages, we find:

• Record – 0.747 (-.031 from the at large teams)

• SOS – 0.578 (-0.32)

• Ranked Wins – 0.408 (-0.124)

The ranked win difference kind of stands out here, doesn’t it? When you talk to RAC members (current and past), they are unanimous in that the quality of the ranked wins suffers greatly in those last few picks. In past years I often complained about at-large bids going to less qualified teams in larger regions. One of the major reasons for this was better ranked win PERCENTAGES! I believe that the NCAA has shed some light on this issue with the RACs this past year AND we saw a reduction by one in the number of ranked teams allowed in both the New England and New York Regions. I do not believe it was a coincidence that there were no surprise at-large selections this year out of the larger regions. I believe it was because the RACs did focus a little more on the quality of the teams and there was a reduction in teams ranked.

Back to those ranked win percentages, however, and you can see that it’s an area to be exploited. Winning is a function of your team’s performance. SOS is a function of your scheduling abilities and some luck. Ranked wins is often looked at as a byproduct of the other two but in truth it really is its own entity. You can target good teams that will help your SOS but a good schedule will also target schools that have a better chance at being regionally ranked.

If I’m a coach putting together my schedule for a team with NCAA Tournament aspirations I need to know these averages and I need to weigh every out-of-conference possible opponent against them. It’s not always possible to tailor the schedule you want but if you lose sight of these numbers then you lose sight of what I think the goal is and that’s a tournament berth.

I’m going to dive a little more into this topic with a focus on the West Region hopefully later this week.