I know we are now starting the NQS season and I was thinking about NQS and what does it really matter? To me it seems like it matters for the team in 30-36 range, but for the top teams, I see little or no benefit for a program to push to raise their NQS. Sure its nice to say “we are #whatever” but other than that I see no tangible benefit for a program to be ranked 1 versus say 10. If it was basketball, there is a definite benefit because you get to compete close to home and fans, but with only 4 regions, you get no geographic benefit. In theory you might get a lighter match up in the first round? But they have moved teams before based upon location. So am I missing something? So much attention to the top of the NQS when it seems trivial. Shouldnt we be more interested in the teams in the 30s?
We are looking at the “bubble teams” and that is usually the most fun watch because it comes down to the last meets and conference championships. NQS doesn’t matter as much as RQS, when there were 6 regionals as oppose to 4, and certain regionals were a breeze.
Although the top 16 are seeded, and you would like to be #1 if possible because you go against 8,9, 16.
Right now Oklahoma would have the best regional with seeded 8 LSU, 9 Bama, and 16 Southern Utah. Although both LSU and Bama could bevdangerous, but Southern Utah isn’t really a threat, so you really need to be worried about beating one team and not two. Plus Oklahoma is at home, so these teams would be the best suited for them to have an easier run to nationals.
Meanwhile the worst bracket right now is 4 Utah, 5 UCLA, 12 Kentucky, and 13 Ohio State. This one all the teams are worrisome, Ohio State is not a team you want to overlook. Meanwhile, Kentucky has been on fire and shown capable of going 197.8. This regional would be held at UCLA, so that is an advantage for UCLA.
2 Florida, 7 Auburn, 10 Denver, 15 Missouri is also another regional right now that would not be fun if you have a missed routine to count. The host would be Denver, so that is also an advantage for them. I wouldn’t want to be any of these teams. Florida could have a few shaky vault landings and get eliminated. Missouri peaks at regionals, and Auburn has shown that they can have a few landing misses.
3 Michigan, 6 Cal, 11 Oregon State, and 14 Georgia this one would be at the only neutral site, Pittsburgh. This one is not the easiest regional, but probably 2nd easiest with Georgia not being able to benefit from Georgia scoring. OSU and Jade Carey could put up a fight, and with Michigan still not free of beam issues they couldn’t afford too many mistakes. A few 9.7s on beam and they might find themselves eliminated.
After the top 16 the other teams go according to “region”, which we know is not the case.
I wish they would just do a seeded ranking for all 36 teams. At this point with a play in, regional semi-final, and regional super final, there is no need for regional play as there is no advantage in terms of travel.
But ultimately when it comes down to it, NQSis more about bragging rights and to be seeded going into regionals. You want to be #1 going in.
Right now this is a tight battle.
A few teams have some 194s they can throw out and New Hampshire at 52 right now has two 192s to replace. If they can replace that with a 195/196 each time they will sky rocket into the top 36.
Meanwhile LIU (46th) has been going 195s the last few meets and would like to replace some 194s, which would move them up potentially.
Pitt is in 38 and hosting regionals and they would love to qualify a full team. They have 2 low 195s that if they replace with 196 would put them in a better spot.
So confirms what I thought, NQS means little to the top seeds. Honestly, at this stage it looks like only Oklahoma can afford a shaky performance and still advance. Pretty much every regional you better have a solid weekend.
These are just the seeds for now, still plenty of time for the teams to move up or move down or move out.
Michigan State at 19th is at 196.565 with a 195.725 still counting. A 196.600 at their next meet would allow them to bump to 196.72 and ahead of Georgia in 14th.
Southern Utah (having one of their best seasons ever could also move up as they have a 197 counting and two low 196s counting.
NQS is also really important for non-seeded teams due to the 4 play in meets. Hopefully NCAA has corrected the error that caused NC State to do a play in despite being ranked higher.
It should be straight 28-36.
I hope that NCAA just seeds everyone according to NQS ranking and distributes according to eliminate any weak or strong regionals.
Historically, the top 8 are the predominant teams that end up going to nationals. Same when it was top 12. It’s rare to see more than 1 team outside of the top 8, or outside the top 12 previously, make it to nationals. So, I think there is real value in getting an NQS inside the top 8. Not sure if there’s a benefit of the doubt on scoring with judges or it boosts confidence or some other factor or combination of factors but you don’t want to be on the outside looking in come regionals.
Possibly, but I would say its more because they are the best teams than because they received some type of benefit from being ranked in the top 8, if that makes sense? Of course there is going to be correlation between ranking and performance. But all the hand wringing about inflated scores is just that. Oklahoma, Florida, Michigan, Utah, etc are the best teams regardless of inflated scores and NQS. If by some freak calculation one of them ended up ranked 10, I would feel confident they still would come out of their region. The concerns about NQS and inflated scoring should be focused at teams in the 30-40 range.
I agree that the immediate consequences are more severe for the bubble teams in that range because it’s about your season ending or not. But outside the top 4 teams, there’s quite a bit of parity in teams ranked 5-12 and, to some degree down to rank 16. yet if you’re ranked 5-8 in NQS the likelihood of making nationals is a lot higher, which is a big deal for all of those teams.
@cuuf One reason that NQS is important for the top teams in SEC and PAC 12, is that it determines whether a team is placed in the AM or PM session of the conference championships.
A SEC or PAC 12 championship is highly coveted, and statistically no team has ever won the meet from the AM session. It also makes it challenging for individual titles to come from the first session.
PAC 12 standings are fairly close to what the NQS shows, at least in terms of dividing the sessions.
SEC is a different story.
Florida, Auburn, LSU, Alabama are currently in the PM session.
This is unfortunate for Kentucky, which is currently 2nd in the standings with a 4-1 record.
Auburn is currently in 6th but ranked 2nd by NQS.
Auburn was able to rest Gobourne and Lee against Missouri, which they ended up losing. They didn’t want to lose the meet, but nothing was really lost because the meet didn’t negatively impact their NQS.
I would prefer that regular season standings within conference is what is used for seeding the conference championships, so that conference meets have more importance. Otherwise it just crowns a “regular season champion”, which is a fairly new recognition.
Florida can clinch the regular season champion this Friday against Kentucky. Interestingly enough, if Kentucky can pull the upset against Florida, Kentucky would clinch at minimum a share of the regular season title with 5 wins. Florida would be 5-2.
Only Alabama would be able to tie them as they are 3-2. They would need to beat both LSU and Missouri.
Kentucky could win outright if they beat Florida and Auburn. Which is going to be extremely challenging.
Big 10 championship sessions are different. IIRC, when the teams compete at the two Big 5 meets this weekend, the outcome of the meet determines the placements. If you finish in the top 3 at either meet then you get to compete in the evening session.
Big 10 has to do the Big 5 meets because the conference is so large that it would be just about impossible to have dual meets within conference and be open to non conference meets due to the schedule.
This might change int he future as we have been seeing more of the larger meets happening and also lots of tris and quads. For TV purposes, the networks like the duals better.