Welcome to the UPA's College Restructuring Blog. This blog is intended for UPA members to provide feedback to the UPA on the two proposed structures for the future of UPA intercollegiate Ultimate.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Super-Regional Plan: Strength Bids To The DI Championships
What are your thoughts, ideas and concerns on the planned allocation of Division I Nationals strength bids (4) to teams based on an algorithm following Super-Regionals?
I'm always very leery of computer algorithms making the final decision - there's always going to be controversy, and then you rewrite the rules, and then there's more controversy, ad infinitum (see also: BCS).
I'd be much happier with the competition committee that determines the automatic bids to Super-Regionals making the final call, with a strong input from any algorithms you develop. Maybe you even write the rules so as to say that the Committee can only overstep the algorithm in the event of a significant disagreement between the Committee and the algorithm. But still - I'd like there to be one final check between the computers and the decisions.
I find it very funny that you distrust algorithms, but implicitly think that a committee will have a handle on it.
---
What I don't like about the Super-Regional use of an algorithm is that it happens AFTER the events. So we lose the clarity of the game-to-go, because the best teams know they could lose at super-regionals and still get in via the algorithm. I would much prefer having an algorithm determine which super-region gets extra bids, and then decide those bids on the field.
Yeah, I agree. I dont like the idea of losing a game to go and then still getting in via a computer algorithm. Im also with david...i don't trust algorithms.
Teams should have to earn a bid to a Nationals on the field. Each Super Regional should be allocated the same number of bids. Super Regionals should be just that - a geographically defined area larger than the traditional regions from which teams play into a Super Regional. Passes to Super Regionals based upon a regular season of play (which was washed out this year for most on the east coast) should be very limited at most 4 or so teams. And those teams should be required to win an intra Super Regional event to earn a bid to Super Regionals. The NCAA basketball model or regionals should not be followed if the Super Regional option is selected ..
I'm always very leery of computer algorithms making the final decision - there's always going to be controversy, and then you rewrite the rules, and then there's more controversy, ad infinitum (see also: BCS).
ReplyDeleteI'd be much happier with the competition committee that determines the automatic bids to Super-Regionals making the final call, with a strong input from any algorithms you develop. Maybe you even write the rules so as to say that the Committee can only overstep the algorithm in the event of a significant disagreement between the Committee and the algorithm. But still - I'd like there to be one final check between the computers and the decisions.
The failure of the BCS is not a failure of algorithm design. It was flawed by its very nature, before the algorithm designers got involved.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2208108
I find it very funny that you distrust algorithms, but implicitly think that a committee will have a handle on it.
---
What I don't like about the Super-Regional use of an algorithm is that it happens AFTER the events. So we lose the clarity of the game-to-go, because the best teams know they could lose at super-regionals and still get in via the algorithm. I would much prefer having an algorithm determine which super-region gets extra bids, and then decide those bids on the field.
Yeah, I agree. I dont like the idea of losing a game to go and then still getting in via a computer algorithm. Im also with david...i don't trust algorithms.
ReplyDeleteTeams should have to earn a bid to a Nationals on the field. Each Super Regional should be allocated the same number of bids. Super Regionals should be just that - a geographically defined area larger than the traditional regions from which teams play into a Super Regional. Passes to Super Regionals based upon a regular season of play (which was washed out this year for most on the east coast) should be very limited at most 4 or so teams. And those teams should be required to win an intra Super Regional event to earn a bid to Super Regionals. The NCAA basketball model or regionals should not be followed if the Super Regional option is selected ..
ReplyDelete