UPDATE BELOW
Everyone likes these "blind profile" exercises. I'm not really sure why -- Mystery! Intrigue! The excitement of the unknown! -- but I'll play the game and throw out some resumes.
Here are the parameters for the exercise:
Everyone likes these "blind profile" exercises. I'm not really sure why -- Mystery! Intrigue! The excitement of the unknown! -- but I'll play the game and throw out some resumes.
Here are the parameters for the exercise:
- The teams indicated have no chance to earn an automatic qualification to the field;
- The teams indicated are purely bubble teams (I'm not going to throw out any red herrings, which eliminates fabricated mysterious drama);
- I'm going to utilize the efficiency data because, well, I want to.
The metrics I will utilize are as follows:
- Offensive efficiency national rank;
- Defensive efficiency national rank;
- Efficiency margin national rank;
- Strength of schedule rank (based on opponent's efficiency margin);
- Quality wins (wins are against teams with an efficiency margin in the nation's top 20);
- Record.
For the purposes of our discussion, let's say that you can only pick two teams from those presented. Who do you pick? Why do you pick them? Leave your comments below. I'll reveal the teams tomorrow.
TEAM A | ||
| METRIC | NATIONAL RANK | VALUE |
| Offensive Efficiency | (1) | 37.8967 |
| Defensive Efficiency | (30) | 27.5011 |
| Efficiency Margin | (4) | 10.3956 |
| Strength of Schedule | (20) | 0.9173 |
| Quality Wins | (2) | Brown, Hopkins |
| Record | - | 9-4 |
TEAM B | ||
| METRIC | NATIONAL RANK | VALUE |
| Offensive Efficiency | (10) | 34.3542 |
| Defensive Efficiency | (28) | 27.0856 |
| Efficiency Margin | (9) | 7.2686 |
| Strength of Schedule | (25) | 0.2085 |
| Quality Wins | (1) | Cornell |
| Record | - | 8-5 |
TEAM C | ||
| METRIC | NATIONAL RANK | VALUE |
| Offensive Efficiency | (32) | 28.8293 |
| Defensive Efficiency | (6) | 23.6832 |
| Efficiency Margin | (13) | 5.1461 |
| Strength of Schedule | (17) | 1.1458 |
| Quality Wins | (3) | Navy, Ohio State, Georgetown |
| Record | - | 9-3 |
TEAM D | ||
| METRIC | NATIONAL RANK | VALUE |
| Offensive Efficiency | (38) | 27.3307 |
| Defensive Efficiency | (4) | 23.3585 |
| Efficiency Margin | (19) | 3.9722 |
| Strength of Schedule | (19) | 0.9482 |
| Quality Wins | (3) | Duke, Loyola, Ohio State |
| Record | - | 7-6 |
TEAM E | ||
| METRIC | NATIONAL RANK | VALUE |
| Offensive Efficiency | (25) | 29.6290 |
| Defensive Efficiency | (27) | 27.0468 |
| Efficiency Margin | (26) | 2.5822 |
| Strength of Schedule | (45) | -1.0738 |
| Quality Wins | (2) | Drexel, Notre Dame |
| Record | - | 10-4 |
TEAM F | ||
| METRIC | NATIONAL RANK | VALUE |
| Offensive Efficiency | (12) | 33.2881 |
| Defensive Efficiency | (38) | 29.7427 |
| Efficiency Margin | (20) | 3.5454 |
| Strength of Schedule | (11) | 1.8777 |
| Quality Wins | (2) | Navy, Notre Dame |
| Record | - | 8-5 |
---
UPDATE
Team A: Hofstra
Team B: Brown
Team C: Loyola
Team D: Notre Dame
Team E: Villanova
Team F: Georgetown
Ignoring the N.C.A.A.'s selection criteria, the best two teams I'd take from these profiles are Hofstra and Loyola, but what the hell do I know.
0 Responses to “Just Thinkin' About Bubble Teams”
Post a Comment