StatFile of the Week: The MVC...Better than Ever?

In the past few weeks a number of "bracketoligists" have been trumpeting the downfall of the Missouri Valley Conference. They were overrated last year when they got four bids they say. They'll only get two this year they say. The sky is falling they say. Well, I thought it was high time to see what was up with all of the fuss. Is the MVC really going down the crapper? Or...maybe...could it be better than ever?

The first misconception that has to be dealt with straightaway is the belief that the strength of a conference is measured by the number of NCAA bids that a conference receives. This is not true, period. The number of NCAA bids a league receives is more accurately a measure of the number of top teams in a conference, not to be confused with overall strength. The perfect example of this was last year, when the ACC and the MVC both received four bids. Analysts and talking heads everywhere could not believe that the selection committee had allowed such a travesty to occur. I mean, this was the ACC, on principal they should have more teams in the dance than the MVC. Granted, the ACC was a better conference than the MVC, top to bottom. To compare the two conferences, lets look at their respective RPI stats from last year:

ACC
AVG RPI Rank: 68
Low RPI Rank: 160
Median: 70

MVC
AVG RPI Rank: 93
Low RPI Rank: 233
Median: 36

Two things are obvious in looking at these stats. First, The ACC was better on average. Second, the bottom of the conference was weaker in the MVC. The third stat however, explains why there should have been no argument over the four MVC bids from last year. The top of the MVC was nasty last year, just plain nasty. Looking back, the only controversy around the MVC should have been why they only got four bids, as opposed to the SIX they deserved. Missouri State had an RPI of 21 and a SOS of 46, and Creighton had an RPI of 39 and a SOS of 55. Both teams had single digit losses. The ACC's best candidate from last year for a fifth bid. Maryland, which had an RPI of 49, a SOS of 14 and twelve losses. This does not however, mean that the MVC is a better conference. It merely means it had a larger upper echelon last year.

This year the MVC's RPI numbers are up across the board. The conference's non-conference record improved slightly over last year, while playing a harder schedule. The average RPI rank in the conference has jumped from 93 to 78, and the lowest ranked team in the conference is Indiana State (which beat Butler earlier in the season) at 140. So the MVC has improved their conference overall, so shouldn't that mean they get at least as many bids as last year? Of course not.

Last year the MVC had six teams in the top 40 of the RPI. This year they boast only four. Of those four, only Southern Illinois is a lock to get an at large bid. Bradley already has 11 losses, and only has one top 50 win on the season. Translation: probably not going to the Big Dance. Creighton, though faltering of late, looks good to get in with an RPI of 33 and five top 50 wins. Same goes for Missouri State, with an RPI of 34 and a win over Wisconsin on a neutral court. So the conference looks like they are only going to get three teams in, one less than last year. And that is ok. Mainly because the conference as a whole has gotten a lot better in the past year, whether or not that ends up translating into at large bids.

StatFile of the Week: Bottom of the At-Large Barrel

Every year around this time the sports world seems to turn to discussions of projections. Which teams are going to make the NBA playoffs? Which prospects are going to going to go in the first round of the NFL draft? Which teams are going to be in the pennant race this year? But all of these discussions pale in comparison to one seemingly benign topic: bubbles. NCAA tournament bubbles to be exact. Who is going to get in? Who is staying home? Will it be another year of the mid major, or will the Big Six conferences reign supreme? While every at large team possesses its own unique merits and question marks, I thought it would be interesting to look at the bottom five at large teams (by seed) from the last five NCAA tournaments in an effort to better project who might be sneaking in the bottom of the bracket this March. And the awards for mediocrity went to...

TEAM (W-L, RPI, Top 50 W-L, Rd/Nt W-L, Conference W-L)

'06
Bradley (20-10, 33, 7-6, 7-9, 13-8)
Air Force (22-6, 50, 0-1, 8-6, 12-5)
Texas AM (21-8, 44, 1-5, 5-6, 11-7)
Utah State (22-8, 46, 1-2, 9-6, 13-6)
George Mason (23-7, 26, 2-4, 11-6, 16-4)

'05
NIU (20-10, 37, 2-6, 8-8, 11-8)
UCLA (18-10, 38, 1-7, 6-7, 11-8)
UAB (21-10, 49, 0-5, 10-7, 11-7)
Iowa (21-11, 42, 6-7, 8-8, 9-10)
NC State (19-13, 65, 4-8, 8-7, 9-10)

'04
UTEP (22-7, 46, 1-3, 8-6, 15-6)
BYU (19-8, 31, 2-4, 8-8, 11-5)
Air Force (22-6, 70, 3-1, 9-6, 12-3)
Richmond (20-12, 47, 2-10, 11-8, 12-7)
South Carolina (23-10, 45, 9-6, 9-7, 10-9)

'03
BYU (23-8, 19, 2-6, 10-7, 12-4)
Butler (24-5, 35, 1-3, 13-5, 15-3)
SIU (24-6, 34, 2-2, 10-6, 18-3)
Colorado (20-11, 46, 4-6, 6-10, 10-8)
NC State (18-12, 53, 2-8, 5-9, 11-8)

'02
Mizzou (21-11, 52, 4-7, 8-8, 10-8)
Utah (19-8, 29, 4-3, 7-6, 11-5)
Tulsa (25-5, 30, 0-4, 12-3, 17-4)
Wyoming (20-8, 64, 5-4, 8-7, 12-4)
SIU (26-7, 50, 3-2, 13-7, 16-5)

Avg: 21-9, 43, 3-5, 9-7, 12-6

Looking over the profiles of these teams certain trends and characteristics begin to pop out, and they are about what you would expect. Only two of the twenty-five teams had losing conference records, and only two of the twenty-five had losing Rd/Nt records. As well, only three of the twenty-five had RPIs above 60. One interesting and unexpected note is that the highly hyped “big win” factor does not seem to be nearly as important, as eight of the twenty-five had either one or zero wins against the RPI top 50. Now, taking into consideration that the selection committee has been anything but consistent (For example a team such as NC State in '05 reaching the tournament while last year's Missouri State team (20-8, 21, 4-8, 8-6, 12-7) did not), there are a few teams that would seem to already be in huge bubble trouble based on the trends of the past five years (All stats as of 2-13):

Too Low to Go (RPI deficient)
Syracuse (62)
Gonzaga (64)
Wichita State (71)
Washington (75)
LSU (80)

Home Sick (Rd/Nt deficient)
Providence (1-6)
Michigan (2-6)
Michigan State (3-7)
Purdue (3-8)
Georgia Tech (2-7)

Full of Cupcakes (Conference deficient)
Northern Iowa (7-9)
Arkansas (4-6)
UConn (4-6)
Florida State (5-7)
Maryland (4-6)

On the other side of the bubble debate are a few teams that seem to exemplify the traits seen of the bottom at large teams of recent years. These teams are probably a little more safe to make the tournament than many people think.

Security Blankets (Top 50 RPI, 2+ Top 50 wins, winning Rd/Nt, winning Conference)
Kansas State
USC
Stanford
West Virginia
Missouri State

Hopefully this little diatribe was somewhat helpful in better understanding what makes a team an at large contender. And hopefully it also gives you a little fuel for your prognosticating fire, at least until you have to pick your bracket for the office pool.