• devils advocate
      registered
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 5:09PM - in reply to Blargh
      • devils advocate
        registered
      • Bo here -- author of letsrun's program. There are two main reasons for discrepancies (unless I have a bug in the program):

        (1) there is a mistake somewhere in the season results
        (2) different interpretations of the common opponent tiebreaking rule

        For (1), hopefully the letsrun sleuths have rechecked these enough that they're accurate. However, with A and B teams it's always a lot of work and you have to be really careful.

        For (2), it's important to realize that the common-opponents rule is not exactly defined in the rulebook. It just says that the committee should break ties using record against common opponents (but how?). So Flotrack may be using a different interpretation than us. This almost never ends up mattering, but this year it does. This program uses the interpretation "take the group of opponents that both teams have faced, and pick whichever has the most wins against that group". Maybe the committee and/or Flotrack use a different interpretation -- I don't know (and would love to find out).

        So the bottom line that I can see is (a) you can't be sure till the committee makes an announcement, and (b) if you want the best guess possible, you have to look through the season results and make a judgement call about the common opponents tiebreaker.
    • xcfann
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 5:17PM - in reply to devils advocate
      • xcfann
      • Looks like Flotrack just came around to your view on the men's list. Maybe they should also recrunch their numbers on the women's list.
    • WonderingAboutGonzaga
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 5:20PM - in reply to xcfann
      • WonderingAboutGonzaga
      • Where and when will be the official word on qualifying teams and at large individuals?
    • Blargh
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 5:20PM - in reply to xcfann
      • Blargh
      • Flotrack has changed their list to include boise state, cal, ucla, and southern utah. Funny that they had a whole live show and they were wrong lmaaoooooo
    • Drama
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 5:20PM - in reply to xcfann
      • Drama
      • It's simply an interpretation of the rules - can you push in via common opponents or simply points. If it is simply points, San Fran doesn't get pushed in and Flotrack is right. If you can push in on common opponents Gonzaga pushes in San Fran and Lets Run is right.
    • ezb
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 5:21PM - in reply to marathnr
      • ezb
      • I don't think it's time differential. I think it is the 2 highest placing 5th individuals (individual meaning a runner not on a qualifying team). Mascari was 6th in his region behind 4 individuals and 1 team qualifier, so probably stands to be one of the 2. Haven't looked at the other regions in detail, but I'd be surprised if other regions had 4 individuals in the top 6.
        marathnr wrote:

        Kewl wrote:
        Any updates on the at large individuals?
        I just went through all 9 regionals and looked at the time gaps from the 4th place individuals to the 5th place individuals. The closest 5th place finisher to a 4th place individual was John Mascari from Indiana State. He was 3.1 seconds from the 4th place individual qualifier (Butler kid).

        This is only if letsrun.com is right with it's prediction of at large teams.
    • eeeeeekihopetheyrein
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 5:25PM - in reply to ezb
      • eeeeeekihopetheyrein
      • any word on the William and Mary Women??
    • wejo
      co-founder
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 5:31PM - in reply to devils advocate
      • wejo
        co-founder
      • We just reran things giving Boise State less points at Pre Nats to try and simulate them not pushing Washington State and under that scenario Washington State would be the final team in and not need to be pushed in.

        Currently we have this:
        27 washington state
        28 boise state
        29 california
        30 ucla
        31 southern utah

        If Washington State doesn't get pushed in our final 4 are this:
        27 southern utah
        28 air force
        29 colorado state
        30 cornell
        31 washington state

        However, the rule is how we originally had it. Boise State does not push only if it does not get in on its own which is what would happen. So Boise State pushes Washington State at #28 which is what we had.

        Scenario #1 above is correct.
    • rojo
      co-founder
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 5:40PM - in reply to xcfann
      • rojo
        co-founder
      • xcfann wrote:
        Looks like Flotrack just came around to your view on the men's list. Maybe they should also recrunch their numbers on the women's list.
        We're confident our men's one is correct. The issue was at #27. Flotrack initially didn't have Washington State getting pushed in at that point as they determined that Washington State would later get in on their own. But that's not the way the rule works. You only worry about the team that is doing the pushing? In this case, Boise State wouldn't get in so you push then and there.

        In terms of the women's results, the difference between us and them is the result of the 23rd qualifier spot, which we have as San Francisco (pushed in by Gonzaga). A bunch of teams have one at-large point at that point in the process and Gonzaga wins our tiebreaker based on a common opponent victory over Princeton. That common opponent is BYU, whom Gonzaga beat at the WCC Champs (the two teams tied on points but Gonzaga is listed as the winner).

        The unresolved question is whether a team can push another team in after winning a common opponent tie breaker. If this cannot happen then Wisconsin and Purdue should replace Gonzaga and San Francisco below.

        One caveat about the common opponent tiebreaker from Bo Waggoner. See below.

        Bo Waggoner says:
        The rule only says that the selection committee can or will use record against common opponents in order to break ties. But how exactly? It doesn't say.

        The program interprets this by taking all the common opponents of the two teams and seeing who has more wins against this group, team 1 or team 2.
        But that's just my interpretation of the rule. It might not be what the committee does! I don't know... :(
    • wejo
      co-founder
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 5:57PM - in reply to devils advocate
      • wejo
        co-founder
      • Here's what the rulebook says about pushing and common opponents. I don't see why you wouldn't go as far out as possible (common opponents) and let them push but it's not specifically stated:

        The NCAA rule book says this about pushing: "The Push Process: The situation may arise when the next team under consideration based upon regional finish from a specific region (Team X) does not have enough wins (points) to earn an at-large bid, but the team immediately behind Team X in regional finish (Team Y) does have enough wins (points) to be the next at-large team selected. In this case, both teams X and Y will receive at-large bids (Team Y “pushes†Team X into the championships) if: (1) The push process has not been used within that specific region earlier in the at-large selection process, and (2) There are two or more at-large positions available in the selection process, and (3) Team Y would not be able to receive an at-large berth on its own -- in other words, when Team X is permanently blocking Team Y. There have been occasions when Team Y has the most wins of the teams under consideration, but the committee can determine that Team Y will receive an at-large berth later in the process. In these cases a “push†is not absolutely necessary and would not be applied."

        and this about common opponents: "4. Records of the teams under consideration against common opponents. If the committee cannot make a decision based upon head-to-head competition, it reviews results against common opponents. a. In order to maintain seven competition opportunities, results versus common opponents must have occurred between the seventh weekend before the NCAA regional meet (i.e., Friday, Saturday and Sunday, Sept. 25-27, 2015) through the conclusion of NCAA Regional Cross Country Championships (scheduled for Nov. 13, 2015). b. The committee evaluates the cumulative record against common opponents, including multiple wins and/or losses against an opponent(s). c. In situations where the record against common opponents’ data is equal between teams under consideration, the committee may give greater consideration to the competition conducted closest to the regional championship date."

        http://www.ncaa.org/sites/defa...282%29.pdf
    • jhgfd
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 6:15PM - in reply to wejo
      • jhgfd
      • It's hard to believe that this push question situation with the women has never happened before. There has to be precedent.
    • Crazytalk
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 6:20PM - in reply to jhgfd
      • Crazytalk
      • UNC women finish 3rd in probably the hardest region and don't make it on either list. Any chance this changes?
    • Kewl
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 6:21PM - in reply to jhgfd
      • Kewl
      • jhgfd wrote:
        It's hard to believe that this push question situation with the women has never happened before. There has to be precedent.
        Is the NCAA announcing officially tomorrow or sunday? Ruins a lot of travel plans if they wait.
    • http://livecoverage.flotrackDP
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 6:44PM - in reply to Kewl
      • http://livecoverage.flotrackDP
      • WomenAuto Qualifying Teams:
        South: Vanderbilt & Mississippi State
        South Central: Arkansas & Texas
        Mid Atlantic: Penn State & Georgetown
        NorthEast: Providence & Syracuse
        SouthEast: Virginia & North Carolina State
        Great Lakes: Michigan & Notre Dame
        MidWest: Oklahoma State & Iowa State
        Mountain: Colorado & New Mexico
        West: Oregon & Boise State

        At Large:
        Washington
        Stanford
        Utah
        BYU
        Michigan State
        Princeton
        Weber State
        Minnesota
        Tulsa
        Kansas
        Wisconsin
        Purdue
        Villanova


        First Team Out:
        NAU
        https://twitter.com/FloTrack/status/665278240051720193
    • Kevin Hadsell
      registered
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 7:01PM - in reply to Crazytalk
      • Kevin Hadsell
        registered
      • I haven't done the list myself. However, I can tell you with 100% certainty, that it does not matter how you win your tie breakers, if you actually do win the tie breaker, it is the same as making it in on straight points. If that means you push someone in, then that's what it means.

        Tie breakers on common opponents has happened before. We lost a bid to NCAA in 2002 to Washington for the last spot based on losing a tie breaker with Washington due to common opponent (Indiana).

        ~Kevin
    • Ricardo
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 7:01PM - in reply to Flotrack has it
      • Ricardo
      • Flotrack has it wrote:
        Heard from a source that something is wrong in your program, Flotrack has it correct, not sure where the error stems from though.
        You might talk to your 'source'.

        Flotrack was wrong . They changed theirs to match Letsrun.

        Letsrun has explained why the women are different.
    • Ron99
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 7:14PM - in reply to rojo
      • Ron99
      • Shouldn't the 9 team tie breaker be determined by total record against all other teams in the tie? If so Princeton should be selected because they're 7-0. MSU is next best at 6-1. Gonzaga is just 1-1.
    • wejo
      co-founder
      • RE: Official 2015 NCAA XC Regional Live Discussion Thread 11/13/2015 7:47PM - in reply to Ron99
      • wejo
        co-founder
      • Ron99 wrote:
        Shouldn't the 9 team tie breaker be determined by total record against all other teams in the tie? If so Princeton should be selected because they're 7-0. MSU is next best at 6-1. Gonzaga is just 1-1.
        Who do you have gonzaga losing too? I'm pretty sure the program has them undefeated.

        Princeton beat more people but the program doesn't factor that I they are both undefeated I believe.