Here we are. The week before conference championships. Just one meet left to change your ranking and get to a less horrible position. At this point, we know the maximum RQSs and exactly where each team has a chance to end up in the rankings.
For reference, if the season were already over, the regionals placements would look like this:
Regional 1: Oklahoma, Kentucky, Nebraska (host) Regional 2: LSU, Boise State, Missouri (presumed host: Arkansas) Regional 3: UCLA, Oregon State, Washington (host) Regional 4: Florida (host), Michigan, Cal Regional 5: Utah, Georgia, Iowa (presumed host: Illinois) Regional 6: Alabama, Denver, George Washington (presumed host: West Virginia)
For the presumed hosts, I just kind of guessed based on general geography.
The regionals tiebreaker for seeds/qualifying is the highest score that isn’t being used among the 6 for RQS.
In case you were curious, this year at regionals the #1 seeds will begin on bars, the #2 seeds will begin on vault, and the #3 seeds will begin on a bye before floor. That means the #1 seeds end on a bye (ughughughughughughugh), the #2 seeds end on floor, and the #3 seeds end on beam.
WEEK 10 RANKINGS
1.
Oklahoma
198.000
Road Score 1
198.350
Road Score 2
198.175
Road Score 3
198.075
Home/Road Score 1
198.025
Home/Road Score 2
197.925
Home/Road Score 3
197.800
MAX RQS:
198.110
Oklahoma has clinched the final regular-season #1 ranking and the #1 overall seed at regionals, also becoming only the second team ever to hit an RQS of 198. It will take 198.100 at the Big 12 Championship to set a new RQS record.
2.
LSU
197.785
Road Score 1
197.700
Road Score 2
197.700
Road Score 3
197.675
Home/Road Score 1
198.150
Home/Road Score 2
197.975
Home/Road Score 3
197.875
MAX RQS:
197.880
As has been the case pretty much the whole season, LSU is safe and warm at #2 and cannot move. Their goal at SECs is not about ranking; it’s about beating Florida.
3.
UCLA
197.500
Road Score 1
197.500
Road Score 2
197.325
Road Score 3
197.150
Home/Road Score 1
198.125
Home/Road Score 2
197.800
Home/Road Score 3
197.725
MAX RQS:
197.695
UCLA jumped ahead of Florida by a whisker on Sunday. The Bruins can go no higher, but with a very similar RQS to Florida and a very similar score left to drop, the final #3 ranking will essentially come down to whichever team scores better at the conference championship. With a slightly higher maximum, UCLA has control.
4.
Florida
197.495
Road Score 1
197.425
Road Score 2
197.325
Road Score 3
197.125
Home/Road Score 1
197.975
Home/Road Score 2
197.900
Home/Road Score 3
197.700
MAX RQS:
196.665
See: UCLA. These teams are likely set to finish 3-4, with a chance of dropping to #5, but whether getting the #3 ranking is even a good thing or not depends on how the second and third seeds end up shaking out.
5.
Utah
197.355
Road Score 1
197.600
Road Score 2
197.150
Road Score 3
196.900
Home/Road Score 1
197.875
Home/Road Score 2
197.625
Home/Road Score 3
197.500
MAX RQS:
197.550
Utah lost ground to UCLA after a low score at Georgia, so while it’s still possible for Utah to pass UCLA and/or Florida, it would take relatively average performances at conference championships from those schools to make it possible along with a season high from Utah. UCLA or Florida would have to go under 197.4 for there to be a chance.
6.
Alabama
197.285
Road Score 1
197.700
Road Score 2
197.225
Road Score 3
197.050
Home/Road Score 1
197.825
Home/Road Score 2
197.350
Home/Road Score 3
197.100
MAX RQS:
197.440
Alabama could move up to #5 after conference championships but is guaranteed to finish no worse than #6, which means our top seeds at the six regionals are already confirmed.
7.
Denver
197.040
Road Score 1
197.150
Road Score 2
196.900
Road Score 3
196.875
Home/Road Score 1
197.150
Home/Road Score 2
197.150
Home/Road Score 3
197.125
MAX RQS:
197.095
In the endless back-and-forth between Denver and Georgia, it was Denver’s turn to come out ahead this week, though with a lower ceiling than the following three teams, DU could be set for a drop after conference championships. Still, Denver is set to finish no worse than 10th, meaning that they will get a #2 seed and will avoid those pesky 1-12-13 and 2-11-14 trouble clusters.
8.
Georgia
197.005
Road Score 1
196.975
Road Score 2
196.925
Road Score 3
196.800
Home/Road Score 1
197.325
Home/Road Score 2
197.250
Home/Road Score 3
197.075
MAX RQS:
197.110
With a higher maximum than Denver, Georgia has an opportunity to move back ahead after conference championships, but unlike Denver, Georgia could fall as low as 12th if things go exactly as horribly as possible for them. That, however, is an unlikely scenario. Much more likely, Georgia will also stay somewhere from 7-10.
9.
Michigan
196.880
Road Score 1
197.150
Road Score 2
196.475
Road Score 3
196.025
Home/Road Score 1
197.825
Home/Road Score 2
197.525
Home/Road Score 3
197.225
MAX RQS:
197.240
Michigan shot back up into the top 10 after finally being able to get rid of that low road score. With another rather low road score to get rid of, Michigan is in the driver’s seat when it comes to which team finishes 7th and gets into that (relatively) cushy 6-7-18 regional. The Wolverines can clinch that spot with a 197.300 at Big Tens. On the other hand, it’s also possible for Michigan to fall as low as 12th, but having a 196.025 still to drop means that Michigan is much more likely to move up than to fall.
10.
Oregon State
196.875
Road Score 1
197.125
Road Score 2
196.825
Road Score 3
196.200
Home/Road Score 1
197.475
Home/Road Score 2
197.325
Home/Road Score 3
196.900
MAX RQS:
197.130
Oregon State is another team that can fall no lower than 12th and is therefore guaranteed a #2 seed. But with a higher maximum RQS, OSU would be able to challenge Georgia and Denver with a big score at Pac-12s and should be able to fend off all the schools ranked below given a reasonably hit meet.
11.
Boise State
196.835
Road Score 1
197.075
Road Score 2
196.700
Road Score 3
196.675
Home/Road Score 1
197.675
Home/Road Score 2
197.025
Home/Road Score 3
196.700
MAX RQS:
197.035
Because of the evenness of Boise State’s counting scores and lower maximum than the teams ranked above, it will be difficult for BSU to move up much or avoid those 1-12-13 and 1-11-14 regionals, even with a strong performance at MRGCs. Most likely, they’re looking at having to beat out a similarly ranked team and will just hope to avoid hosts like Nebraska and Washington.
12.
Kentucky
196.750
Road Score 1
196.950
Road Score 2
196.925
Road Score 3
196.150
Home/Road Score 1
197.475
Home/Road Score 2
197.100
Home/Road Score 3
196.625
MAX RQS:
197.015
Kentucky technically has the ability to move up and challenge some of those higher-ranked #2 seeds, but it would require at least a high 196 and probably a 197 to do so. Is that kind of score going to be attainable in the day session of SECs? In this regard, Boise State (and to a lesser extent Nebraska) may have an edge because they’ll be among the top-scoring teams at their conference championships. Their performances will define the scoring ceilings at those meets, whereas Kentucky’s will not, which makes it harder to get a big number. What Kentucky wants to avoid is the current setup, having to go to Nebraska and beat Nebraska. They’d rather be paired with Boise State or Missouri.
13.
Nebraska
196.640
Road Score 1
197.125
Road Score 2
196.650
Road Score 3
196.550
Home/Road Score 1
197.125
Home/Road Score 2
196.825
Home/Road Score 3
196.050
MAX RQS:
196.855
Nebraska’s ranking could go as high as 11th or as low as 16th depending on how things go at conference championships, with the most likely outcome placing them as the dangerous #3-seed host everyone wants to avoid. Being a host gives Nebraska some degree of comfort, but they really don’t want to fall 15-16 and be in the position of having to beat a Michigan or a Georgia. Even at home, that’s a tough ask.
14.
Missouri
196.540
Road Score 1
196.750
Road Score 2
196.350
Road Score 3
196.225
Home/Road Score 1
197.200
Home/Road Score 2
197.150
Home/Road Score 3
196.225
MAX RQS:
196.735
Missouri can’t get a #2 seed but is guaranteed a #3 seed, so there’s not a whole lot riding on the score at conference championships other than which #2 seed they’d rather be placed with. The current rankings would assure that Missouri avoids hosts Nebraska and Washington, giving them an LSU-Boise State-Missouri regional, which would be the dream scenario. So basically, Missouri wants the scoring at conference championships to suddenly be super harsh so that everyone scores a 2 and nothing changes.
15.
Washington
196.480
Road Score 1
196.450
Road Score 2
196.450
Road Score 3
195.825
Home/Road Score 1
197.175
Home/Road Score 2
196.925
Home/Road Score 3
196.750
MAX RQS:
196.750
Theoretically, Washington could go as high as tying Kentucky for 12th after conference championships, but that’s not going to happen. Washington will be a #3 seeded host and is in the same position as Nebraska, hoping to move up enough to avoid any #2 seeds that would be super difficult to beat even at home.
16.
Iowa
196.400
Road Score 1
196.550
Road Score 2
196.400
Road Score 3
196.175
Home/Road Score 1
196.725
Home/Road Score 2
196.475
Home/Road Score 3
196.400
MAX RQS:
196.510
Iowa is in good position for a #3 seed right now but is not completely safe yet because of the possibility of being passed by Cal, Southern Utah, and George Washington, falling to an unfortunate 19th. It will take 196.350 at the Big Ten Championship for Iowa to assure itself a regional seed.
16.
Cal
196.400
Road Score 1
196.800
Road Score 2
196.400
Road Score 3
195.725
Home/Road Score 1
197.075
Home/Road Score 2
196.775
Home/Road Score 3
196.300
MAX RQS:
196.670
At an equal RQS, Cal is in the exact same position as Iowa, solid but not yet completely safe. Because of a lower score left to drop, however, Cal needs to record only 195.900 at Pac-12s to clinch a seeded spot at regionals, which really should be no problem.
18.
George Washington
196.305
Road Score 1
196.725
Road Score 2
196.375
Road Score 3
196.150
Home/Road Score 1
196.500
Home/Road Score 2
196.400
Home/Road Score 3
196.100
MAX RQS:
196.430
GW currently sits in the seeded places but is in a tough position because Southern Utah is quite likely to move up and because GW’s max RQS is lower than that of all the other potential seeds. To get a spot in the top 18, GW essentially needs to get a season high at EAGLs and hope Iowa, Cal, and Southern Utah all botch their meets during conference championships.
19.
Southern Utah
196.300
Road Score 1
196.600
Road Score 2
195.800
Road Score 3
195.675
Home/Road Score 1
197.025
Home/Road Score 2
196.725
Home/Road Score 3
196.700
MAX RQS:
196.570
Southern Utah missed an opportunity to move up by recording a non-counting score against BYU, but the lowish 195 still hanging around means SUU has the advantage in the race to get a regionals seed, which can be clinched with a 196.325 at the conference championship.
20.
Illinois
196.245
Road Score 1
196.625
Road Score 2
196.150
Road Score 3
196.050
Home/Road Score 1
196.550
Home/Road Score 2
196.450
Home/Road Score 3
196.025
MAX RQS:
196.365
Illinois currently retains an outside, outside shot at a seed, but it’s not really in Illinois’s control. Both GW and SUU would have to record unusable scores, and Illinois would have to score close to or at a season high. The most likely scenario would see Illinois as a very dangerous, floater host that no one wants to draw.
21.
Auburn
196.135
Road Score 1
196.450
Road Score 2
196.400
Road Score 3
195.800
Home/Road Score 1
196.300
Home/Road Score 2
196100
Home/Road Score 3
196.075
MAX RQS:
196.265
Auburn has been eliminated from contention for a seeded place at regionals and will be placed geographically, though that still doesn’t tell us a lot because geographical placements are always tentatively linked to reality at best. You can’t place everyone close to home. Some teams will end up traveling quite far anyway.
22.
West Virginia
195.920
Road Score 1
196.100
Road Score 2
195.950
Road Score 3
195.800
Home/Road Score 1
196.300
Home/Road Score 2
195.950
Home/Road Score 3
195.800
MAX RQS:
196.020
The whole of this next batch of teams is in a consequence-free limbo heading into conference championships scoring. They can’t get seeded, but they’ve also already qualified to regionals. Since we’ve done away with #4, #5, and #6 seeds and are placing only “geographically,” nothing they do in the next meet will change their regional-placement fate. The upcoming performance is more about how threatening they might look for a regionals upset, particularly in the case of a host like West Virginia.
23.
Utah State
195.830
Road Score 1
196.200
Road Score 2
195.725
Road Score 3
195.700
Home/Road Score 1
196.300
Home/Road Score 2
195.850
Home/Road Score 3
195.675
MAX RQS:
195.955
24.
Ohio State
195.815
Road Score 1
196.450
Road Score 2
195.950
Road Score 3
195.475
Home/Road Score 1
196.075
Home/Road Score 2
195.800
Home/Road Score 3
195.775
MAX RQS:
196.010
25.
Eastern Michigan
195.805
Road Score 1
196.225
Road Score 2
195.925
Road Score 3
195.400
Home/Road Score 1
196.000
Home/Road Score 2
195.950
Home/Road Score 3
195.750
MAX RQS:
195.970
26.
Arkansas
195.775
Road Score 1
196.375
Road Score 2
195.350
Road Score 3
195.275
Home/Road Score 1
196.275
Home/Road Score 2
196.150
Home/Road Score 3
195.825
MAX RQS:
195.995
Back from the dead, Arkansas is moving up and could legitimately break back into the top 25 after SECs.
27.
New Hampshire
195.745
Road Score 1
196.075
Road Score 2
195.300
Road Score 3
195.275
Home/Road Score 1
196.450
Home/Road Score 2
196.050
Home/Road Score 3
196.025
MAX RQS:
195.980
28.
Kent State
195.720
Road Score 1
196.125
Road Score 2
195.725
Road Score 3
195.550
Home/Road Score 1
196.425
Home/Road Score 2
195675
Home/Road Score 3
195.525
MAX RQS:
195.900
28.
Iowa State
195.720
Road Score 1
196.600
Road Score 2
196.125
Road Score 3
195.725
Home/Road Score 1
195.775
Home/Road Score 2
195.625
Home/Road Score 3
195.350
MAX RQS:
195.970
30.
Arizona
195.710
Road Score 1
196.275
Road Score 2
195.650
Road Score 3
195.525
Home/Road Score 1
196.100
Home/Road Score 2
195.850
Home/Road Score 3
195.425
MAX RQS:
195.880
31.
Stanford
195.610
Road Score 1
196.275
Road Score 2
195.775
Road Score 3
194.175
Home/Road Score 1
196.325
Home/Road Score 2
195.925
Home/Road Score 3
195.900
MAX RQS:
195.695
Somehow, by some sort of miracle, Stanford has clinched a spot at regionals (though it is still possible for Stanford to finish exactly 36th if other teams get the major results they need, which is insane). The question really is whether Stanford remains a legit upset threat, or if that’s just a preconception based on name. Last weekend’s 193 did not bode well.
32.
Penn State
195.460
Road Score 1
196.200
Road Score 2
195.450
Road Score 3
194.550
Home/Road Score 1
195.925
Home/Road Score 2
195.850
Home/Road Score 3
195.525
MAX RQS:
195.790
Here we arrive at the section of teams that are not yet safe and still have work to do to qualify to regionals. Penn State’s position, however, is still pretty good. It would require a score of only 194.900 to clinch a spot at regionals regardless of the performance of other teams.
32.
BYU
195.460
Road Score 1
195.450
Road Score 2
195.000
Road Score 3
194.850
Home/Road Score 1
196.425
Home/Road Score 2
196.350
Home/Road Score 3
195.650
MAX RQS:
195.685
A mid-195 on Monday took BYU from a tie for 35th to a much more comfortable tie for 32nd. The work isn’t done yet, but a 195.200 at the MRGC Championship would confirm the spot at regionals.
34.
North Carolina
195.430
Road Score 1
195.675
Road Score 2
195.525
Road Score 3
195.400
Home/Road Score 1
195.875
Home/Road Score 2
195.625
Home/Road Score 3
194.925
MAX RQS:
195.620
North Carolina did its job against UCLA, though the task to keep this position for one more week is not an easy one. UNC will need 195.425 at EAGLs to guarantee a spot at regionals.
35.
Maryland
195.410
Road Score 1
195.450
Road Score 2
195.275
Road Score 3
195.225
Home/Road Score 1
195.800
Home/Road Score 2
195.625
Home/Road Score 3
195.475
MAX RQS:
195.525
After a weak showing at the Big Five, Maryland is suddenly in a much more dangerous and unfortunate position when it comes to qualifying because of this low max RQS. Maryland’s fate does not lie in its own hands. If BYU, Central Michigan, and Minnesota all come out with season highs, Maryland cannot advance to regionals regardless of the score at Big Tens. It will be a day of watching results and hoping the teams ranked below count falls.
36.
Central Michigan
195.370
Road Score 1
195.775
Road Score 2
194.950
Road Score 3
194.125
Home/Road Score 1
196.575
Home/Road Score 2
196.375
Home/Road Score 3
195.625
MAX RQS:
195.860
CMU sits right on the edge of falling out of the regionals spots, but that counting 194.125 provides for a misleadingly low ranking. There’s still plenty of work to do at the conference championship, but CMU can control its own regionals fate and would clinch a spot with just 194.925.
37.
Minnesota
195.350
Road Score 1
196.075
Road Score 2
194.900
Road Score 3
194.825
Home/Road Score 1
196.800
Home/Road Score 2
196.050
Home/Road Score 3
194.900
MAX RQS:
195.745
Minnesota is currently not in the regionals spots, you guys. How did this happen? A fairly healthy picture was rendered the opposite of that after another 194 at the Big Five, meaning Minnesota has to bring it at Big Tens to continue its season. A fairly high max RQS does, however, mean that Minnesota also still controls its own fate and can qualify outright regardless of the results of other teams, but it would take 195.725 at Big Tens.
38.
Western Michigan
195.270
Road Score 1
195.575
Road Score 2
195.475
Road Score 3
195.300
Home/Road Score 1
195.475
Home/Road Score 2
195.200
Home/Road Score 3
194.900
MAX RQS:
195.405
Western Michigan is still hanging on by a thread in the quest to make regionals, though that opportunity is very dependent on Central Michigan and Minnesota both doing poorly at conference championships and not increasing their RQSs while WMU also scores on or around a new season high. It could happen, but it’s not the most likely result.
39.
Michigan State
195.035
Road Score 1
194.775
Road Score 2
194.650
Road Score 3
194.600
Home/Road Score 1
195.625
Home/Road Score 2
195.600
Home/Road Score 3
195.550
MAX RQS:
195.240
Michigan State has been officially eliminated from contention for regionals, as has every other team ranked #40-#82.
In summary, our top six seeds are already set. They could change order, but they won’t change their statuses as #1 seeds. We’ve still got a bit of a mess around the border between the #2 seeds and the #3 seeds, but it basically boils down to Washington and Nebraska hosting regionals and in a clawing fight against a team in the Boise State, Kentucky, Missouri collective to see who gets the second spot along with a heavily favored #1 seed. Regardless of how the teams end up being paired, that will be the most exciting part of regionals day.
Iowa, Cal, George Washington, Southern Utah, and Illinois will go to battle for the final three seeded places, with Cal, Southern Utah, and Iowa having the inside tracks because of higher maximum scores.
For qualification to regionals in the top 36, it comes down to Penn State, North Carolina, Maryland, BYU, Central Michigan, Minnesota, and Western Michigan competing for the final five spots. Two will fall short.
Detailed previews of the major conference championships will come later in the week.
Unheralded stars of the week Gymnasts from schools outside the top 25 who scored over 9.900
Brianna Comport, Bridgeport – Beam 9.950 (Tuesday), 9.925 (Friday) Classic Comport. Her rankings on both beam and floor will qualify her to regionals (presumably the WV regional) as an individual, where she will have to beat every person ever born to have a shot to make nationals, but could. She will certainly enter as the favorite to win both pieces at USAG nationals, where she finished 2nd on beam, 3rd on floor, and 2nd as a team last season.
Rachel Stypinski, Kent State – Beam 9.950 Jordan Hardison, Kent State – Floor 9.925 Stypinski ranks 9th on floor and 11th on beam and will travel to regionals with her team and a serious chance to make nationals as an AAer or an event specialist. Last season, Stypinski missed qualifying for BB by .025 and for floor by .050.
Maddy Cindric, Arizona – Beam 9.925 Krysten Howard, Arizona – Beam 9.925 Beam was all the highs and all the lows for Arizona this week, featuring three scores under 9.6 but also these two 9.925s. Arizona is unlikely to prove a major spoiler threat at regionals this year, but having Cindric back in the AA makes that a lot more realistic.
Jamyra Carter, Northern Illinois – Bars 9.950 Carter has been exclusively a bars specialist all four years at NIU and currently ranks 13th. She’s another that will be competing at regionals without a team and whom we’ll have to remember to keep an eye on for individual qualification.
Amanda Fillard, NC State – Bars 9.925 Chelsea Knight, NC State – Bars 9.925 It all just sort of fell apart for NC State there, didn’t it? The home 196 that these bars scores achieved couldn’t make up for road scores that never broke the 195 barrier. Depending on where she gets placed, Knight will be a contender for an AA spot at nationals, currently ranked 34th.
Hailey Garner, Arkansas – Bars 9.925 Presumably the first of many. Garner’s bars and beam will be a big part of Arkansas restoring itself next season.
Emma Cullen, Penn – Bars 9.925 Penn!It hasn’t been a great season for Penn in the rankings, currently last of the Ivies, but it has been an improvement over last season, and a score of 192.450 this weekend would give Penn its highest RQS since 2004.
Tyra McKellar, Towson – Floor 9.925 Towson just missed on on being a reasonable contender to make regionals, but with McKellar’s bars and floor scores that hit the 9.9s and a very competitive group of beamers,all of whom are returning next season, there’s reason for optimism.
26 thoughts on “Week 10 Rankings and Final RQS Scenarios”
With UCLA as my favorite team, an alumna of both OSU and UW, and tickets to the UW regional, man am I pleased with the how the rankings are shaking out. I’ve been hoping for this all season…keeping fingers crossed! Thanks for your all your terrific work, BBS, and for converting me into a huge college gym fan.
Loading...
Wow that is a dream scenario for you! I hope it works out. UCLA, OSU, and Washington would be an awesome regional competition to watch. Not to mention it would likely also include Stanford, so you could see Price compete, as well.
Loading...
Oh man, I forgot about Stanford. You are right, that would be great!
Loading...
I’m probably going to get tickets to the Washington regional too. I would love for UCLA, OSU, and Stanford to all be there. Does anyone have recommendations about when to arrive or seating (reserved vs. general admission, location in the arena)?
There’s a slim chance Cal could be there as well if they have a bad meet at Pac12s and drop below #18, unlikely but possible — so UCLA, Oregon St., Washington (host), Cal, and Stanford, it’s the Pac12 Part II The Sequel.
Loading...
I would love to see the regional pairings stay as they are (I know it won’t happen). The Kentucky/Nebraska, Boise State/Missouri/Arkansas (I wouldn’t count out the hogs at home . . . yet), OSU/Washington match ups would be great. Plus, I would love to see a Utah/Georgia rematch and the pairings look good for Denver.
Loading...
Oh yeah, Alabama and Denver as saying to the current regional pairings, “yes please” and you know Utah would love to have revenge on UGA for the 2015 regionals loss at Cal. As for Oregon St. and Washington that looks awesome and if both teams have hit meets and with the Huskies being at home, I’d say UW looks good for the upset win.
I don’t expect any #1 seeds to fall at regionals (at most a #2 could come out on top but that appears unlikely given the separation between the top six and the next seeds), but many of those #2 and #3 seeds are going to be in a battle with a few of the #19-25 teams also smelling a potential upset if things go their way…
And just because we love the looks at of this, it means everything will predictably go with all the #1s winning their regional and the #2s finishing second leaving all their challengers in the dust.
Loading...
Thanks to your blog (and the Gymternet) I feel totally caught up on RQS and how teams qualify to nationals. I don’t however understand what means to be “seeded.” The only sport I watch is gymnastics, so perhaps this is common knowledge that I am not aware of with regards to an NCAA Championship. If anyone has a moment and can clarify, it would make my day. Xo
Loading...
The top 18 teams are “seeded” 1st to 18th based on RQS and then placed into regionals based on that ranking in a snake format (Regional 1 would have teams ranked 1st, 12th, 13th, Regional 2 has teams ranked 2nd, 11th and 14th, etc.). The remaining teams in 19th-36th RQS position are distributed geographically meaning they could get stuck in a regional with really hard teams to beat depending on where they are located in the country, regardless of their ranking.
Loading...
I definitely don’t understand the seedings. It definitely appears to punish #1 seed. A better grouping of the seeds would be, in my opinion:
1+7+18
2+8+17
3+9+16
4+10+15
5+11+14
6+12+13
Thoughts?
Loading...
Yeah, I think every year we all kinda look at this and go: “Why does the 1 seed have to beat the 13 seed to get to the semi-finals when the 6 seed only has to beat the 18 seed?” It is rather counterintuitive to have a system that utilizes seeding in such a way that it actually punishes the higher seeded teams. I will say, though, that this year especially is a case in which it would take quite the freak situation for the 1 seed not to qualify to semi-finals. It would take a combination of a season low from the 1 seed and season highs from both the 12 and 13 seeds to accomplish this. If this actually happened, I would argue that it wouldn’t be right for the 1 seed to completely blame the seeding system for their failure to qualify to nationals. If you have your worst meet of the entire year in the meet that qualifies you to nationals, you primarily have yourself to blame for the way your season ended. I still don’t think this makes the way they set up the regional meets right or sensible at all, but it does put it into perspective to realize that the 1 seed couldn’t get screwed by the system without contributing to the mess pretty significantly themselves.
Loading...
I think, in theory, the seeding rules we have are good. In practice, sometimes not, especially if the top 15 or so teams are fairly tightly bunched, then it definitely punishes the top seeds. We don’t have that problem so much this year because, like Mary said above, it would take a complete disaster for any of the #1 seeds to not qualify.
Loading...
Not sure why you think facing 7th and 18th is better than facing 12 and 13th. Currently number 12’s high score of the season is about OUs lowest score. The snaking puts more pressure at the bottom of the top 6 seeds and creates more potential for upsets either in those regions. Also creates some tension for the number 2 slot for the regionals with top seeded 3 seeds. Question of outcome is part of why people go to meets – and they do want to sell tickets.
Loading...
I’m not sure I really follow what you’re saying about facing 7th and 18th not being better than 12th and 13th. Since the top 2 teams from each regional move on, you don’t need to beat the second-highest ranked team in your regional, you only need to beat the third-highest. That means we’re comparing the difficulty of beating the 13th ranked team to the difficulty of beating the 18th ranked team. This year, that means beating a team whose season high is 197.175 (13th ranked Nebraska) versus a team whose season high is 196.725 (18th ranked George Washington). That’s nearly half a point between those teams’ season highs, which would actually makes a noticeable difference. As far as your point about this creating tension which will sell tickets, I completely agree. I don’t contest the notion that there is a reason behind the seeding method, I just contest the notion that the seeding method gives the greatest advantages to the highest ranked teams.
Loading...
BYU and Southern Utah are neck and neck after three (SUU up by .250). Both teams are already counting a fall though, which doesn’t bode well with increasing their rankings.
Loading...
Stacey Webb just got a 10 on beam!!!
Loading...
Watched the meet – really pretty routine. That meant as much to them as winning. I thought the BYU scores were a bit high but they are such an improved team over past years it is kind of exciting. SUU is really up and coming – so glad that college gymnastics is broadening out a bit. The future is going to be a bit more interesting. Amazing that there are now 4 really decent teams in Utah.
Loading...
Final: BYU: 195.650, SUU: 195.625. Shame about the falls because they were both on pace for really good scores (BYU counted a fall on beam and SUU counted a fall on both beam and floor).
Loading...
Looks like SUU won’t be able to use their score at all, but BYU does get a little bit of a boost, as they had a 195.2 home score to drop. I think adding .09 (.45/5) moves them up into a tie for 32 with PSU.
Loading...
The falls in this meet we’re freaking amazing. Someone could make a solid gif set out of them.
Loading...
I’m hearing that Kocian’s shoulder is being held together with chewing gum and string, so it will be interesting to see how much work (if any) she will get at Pac-12s.
With a #1 seed secured, does Val rest her again this week, or is a conference title important enough to trot her out there? Or will there be enough crack in Palo Alto that the Bruins can get away with Pua and Rechelle Dennis again?
Loading...
She is such a frail little thing – not sure that doing the AA every week was a smart decision. Love watching her but that is a lot of strain on an already precarious body. She is a joy to watch but she has had so many injuries. A little coddling might not come a miss. They are deep enough in all events to use her sparingly for the rest of the season. It would be nice for her to make another season. Other teams, i.e. Utah, are surviving with a team of 10 and Cal is handling things without Williams (one of the saddest things to not have her in the lineup). Kocian’s long term health is more important than a tenth or two. I personally want to watch her for a few more years.
Loading...
Lol but they literally have her train one day a week plus competition day. Much less than she did as an elite so she may be less worse off than it seems.
Loading...
A large group of us are traveling to the Arkansas regional (because it’s the closest in driving distance to TX). Can’t wait to see who officially gets placed there! Side note: Crossing my fingers OSU makes top 2 in their regional!!! Lighting all the candles!!! (yes, totally a gymcastic gymnerd reference) Would love for them to make it to NCAA’s as a team again!
Loading...
Auburn might be there… They’re either going to Arkansas or Florida. How much clout does the SEC have with the regional assignments? Auburn may have a better chance at an upset top two finish at Arkansas then they do at Florida.
With UCLA as my favorite team, an alumna of both OSU and UW, and tickets to the UW regional, man am I pleased with the how the rankings are shaking out. I’ve been hoping for this all season…keeping fingers crossed! Thanks for your all your terrific work, BBS, and for converting me into a huge college gym fan.
Wow that is a dream scenario for you! I hope it works out. UCLA, OSU, and Washington would be an awesome regional competition to watch. Not to mention it would likely also include Stanford, so you could see Price compete, as well.
Oh man, I forgot about Stanford. You are right, that would be great!
I’m probably going to get tickets to the Washington regional too. I would love for UCLA, OSU, and Stanford to all be there. Does anyone have recommendations about when to arrive or seating (reserved vs. general admission, location in the arena)?
There’s a handy map at the bottom of this page that shows the layout: http://www.gohuskies.com/sports/2016/6/14/gymnastics-tickets.aspx
There’s a slim chance Cal could be there as well if they have a bad meet at Pac12s and drop below #18, unlikely but possible — so UCLA, Oregon St., Washington (host), Cal, and Stanford, it’s the Pac12 Part II The Sequel.
I would love to see the regional pairings stay as they are (I know it won’t happen). The Kentucky/Nebraska, Boise State/Missouri/Arkansas (I wouldn’t count out the hogs at home . . . yet), OSU/Washington match ups would be great. Plus, I would love to see a Utah/Georgia rematch and the pairings look good for Denver.
Oh yeah, Alabama and Denver as saying to the current regional pairings, “yes please” and you know Utah would love to have revenge on UGA for the 2015 regionals loss at Cal. As for Oregon St. and Washington that looks awesome and if both teams have hit meets and with the Huskies being at home, I’d say UW looks good for the upset win.
I don’t expect any #1 seeds to fall at regionals (at most a #2 could come out on top but that appears unlikely given the separation between the top six and the next seeds), but many of those #2 and #3 seeds are going to be in a battle with a few of the #19-25 teams also smelling a potential upset if things go their way…
And just because we love the looks at of this, it means everything will predictably go with all the #1s winning their regional and the #2s finishing second leaving all their challengers in the dust.
Thanks to your blog (and the Gymternet) I feel totally caught up on RQS and how teams qualify to nationals. I don’t however understand what means to be “seeded.” The only sport I watch is gymnastics, so perhaps this is common knowledge that I am not aware of with regards to an NCAA Championship. If anyone has a moment and can clarify, it would make my day. Xo
The top 18 teams are “seeded” 1st to 18th based on RQS and then placed into regionals based on that ranking in a snake format (Regional 1 would have teams ranked 1st, 12th, 13th, Regional 2 has teams ranked 2nd, 11th and 14th, etc.). The remaining teams in 19th-36th RQS position are distributed geographically meaning they could get stuck in a regional with really hard teams to beat depending on where they are located in the country, regardless of their ranking.
I definitely don’t understand the seedings. It definitely appears to punish #1 seed. A better grouping of the seeds would be, in my opinion:
1+7+18
2+8+17
3+9+16
4+10+15
5+11+14
6+12+13
Thoughts?
Yeah, I think every year we all kinda look at this and go: “Why does the 1 seed have to beat the 13 seed to get to the semi-finals when the 6 seed only has to beat the 18 seed?” It is rather counterintuitive to have a system that utilizes seeding in such a way that it actually punishes the higher seeded teams. I will say, though, that this year especially is a case in which it would take quite the freak situation for the 1 seed not to qualify to semi-finals. It would take a combination of a season low from the 1 seed and season highs from both the 12 and 13 seeds to accomplish this. If this actually happened, I would argue that it wouldn’t be right for the 1 seed to completely blame the seeding system for their failure to qualify to nationals. If you have your worst meet of the entire year in the meet that qualifies you to nationals, you primarily have yourself to blame for the way your season ended. I still don’t think this makes the way they set up the regional meets right or sensible at all, but it does put it into perspective to realize that the 1 seed couldn’t get screwed by the system without contributing to the mess pretty significantly themselves.
I think, in theory, the seeding rules we have are good. In practice, sometimes not, especially if the top 15 or so teams are fairly tightly bunched, then it definitely punishes the top seeds. We don’t have that problem so much this year because, like Mary said above, it would take a complete disaster for any of the #1 seeds to not qualify.
Not sure why you think facing 7th and 18th is better than facing 12 and 13th. Currently number 12’s high score of the season is about OUs lowest score. The snaking puts more pressure at the bottom of the top 6 seeds and creates more potential for upsets either in those regions. Also creates some tension for the number 2 slot for the regionals with top seeded 3 seeds. Question of outcome is part of why people go to meets – and they do want to sell tickets.
I’m not sure I really follow what you’re saying about facing 7th and 18th not being better than 12th and 13th. Since the top 2 teams from each regional move on, you don’t need to beat the second-highest ranked team in your regional, you only need to beat the third-highest. That means we’re comparing the difficulty of beating the 13th ranked team to the difficulty of beating the 18th ranked team. This year, that means beating a team whose season high is 197.175 (13th ranked Nebraska) versus a team whose season high is 196.725 (18th ranked George Washington). That’s nearly half a point between those teams’ season highs, which would actually makes a noticeable difference. As far as your point about this creating tension which will sell tickets, I completely agree. I don’t contest the notion that there is a reason behind the seeding method, I just contest the notion that the seeding method gives the greatest advantages to the highest ranked teams.
BYU and Southern Utah are neck and neck after three (SUU up by .250). Both teams are already counting a fall though, which doesn’t bode well with increasing their rankings.
Stacey Webb just got a 10 on beam!!!
Watched the meet – really pretty routine. That meant as much to them as winning. I thought the BYU scores were a bit high but they are such an improved team over past years it is kind of exciting. SUU is really up and coming – so glad that college gymnastics is broadening out a bit. The future is going to be a bit more interesting. Amazing that there are now 4 really decent teams in Utah.
Final: BYU: 195.650, SUU: 195.625. Shame about the falls because they were both on pace for really good scores (BYU counted a fall on beam and SUU counted a fall on both beam and floor).
Looks like SUU won’t be able to use their score at all, but BYU does get a little bit of a boost, as they had a 195.2 home score to drop. I think adding .09 (.45/5) moves them up into a tie for 32 with PSU.
The falls in this meet we’re freaking amazing. Someone could make a solid gif set out of them.
I’m hearing that Kocian’s shoulder is being held together with chewing gum and string, so it will be interesting to see how much work (if any) she will get at Pac-12s.
With a #1 seed secured, does Val rest her again this week, or is a conference title important enough to trot her out there? Or will there be enough crack in Palo Alto that the Bruins can get away with Pua and Rechelle Dennis again?
She is such a frail little thing – not sure that doing the AA every week was a smart decision. Love watching her but that is a lot of strain on an already precarious body. She is a joy to watch but she has had so many injuries. A little coddling might not come a miss. They are deep enough in all events to use her sparingly for the rest of the season. It would be nice for her to make another season. Other teams, i.e. Utah, are surviving with a team of 10 and Cal is handling things without Williams (one of the saddest things to not have her in the lineup). Kocian’s long term health is more important than a tenth or two. I personally want to watch her for a few more years.
Lol but they literally have her train one day a week plus competition day. Much less than she did as an elite so she may be less worse off than it seems.
A large group of us are traveling to the Arkansas regional (because it’s the closest in driving distance to TX). Can’t wait to see who officially gets placed there! Side note: Crossing my fingers OSU makes top 2 in their regional!!! Lighting all the candles!!! (yes, totally a gymcastic gymnerd reference) Would love for them to make it to NCAA’s as a team again!
Auburn might be there… They’re either going to Arkansas or Florida. How much clout does the SEC have with the regional assignments? Auburn may have a better chance at an upset top two finish at Arkansas then they do at Florida.