Login |
U Sports Hoops — Men
University Basketball in Canada
provided by Martin Timmerman
Current Season Past Seasons Teams Records Awards Championships Pros Search & More Contact Women's site

U SPORTS Final 8 Selection Criteria for the At-large Berth

The section below that details the criteria for the at-large berth was retrieved March 6, 2022 from the U Sports website at the URL Playing Regulations 2021-22 Season.

The applicable section has reduced the number of criteria from previous years and says:

A Selection Committee will use the following five (5) criteria to determine the at-large berth for the 2021-2022 season ONLY. The committee will consider the performance of each team in each criterion and rank them accordingly. The committee has a degree of discretion in its rankings within each criterion. For example, the committee may consider a regular season record of 19-1 to be equal to a 21-1 record even though 21-1 is mathematically superior.

  1. Final regular season conference record.
  2. Strength of schedule (using RPI).
  3. Top 10 rankings: Take the average ranking of the teams placing in the Top 10s for the season.
  4. Play-off Performance.
  5. Games vs. other teams under berth consideration and teams that have already qualified for the national championship (if required).
Note: There are inherent challenges in simply comparing at face value how deep a team advanced into the play-offs in one conference to another conference without looking at the nuances and making some distinctions and judgments. Out of consideration to the number of teams in each conference, the at-large berth applicants' play-off performance will be reviewed and sorted into clusters.

The top cluster will consist of:

  1. The RSEQ and AUS applicants that advanced to the play-off final and lost in the final. (The 2nd placed team in the play-offs out of 5 teams in the RSEQ) (The 2nd placed team in the play-offs out of 8 teams in the AUS)
  2. The OUA and Canada West applicants that advanced to the semi-finals. (The 3rd or 4th ranked team from the Final 4 out of 17 teams in Canada West) (The 3rd or 4th ranked team in the OUA play-offs out of 18 teams in OUA)

The second cluster will consist of:

  1. The RSEQ and AUS applicant who won the bronze medal or who lost in the semi-finals if no bronze medal exists. (3rd or 4th team out of 5 in RSEQ)
  2. The Canada West applicant who lost in the divisional final.
  3. The OUA applicant who just missed out of the semi-finals (5th out of 18)

Teams Already Qualified for U SPORTS Final 8
TeamLeagueHow qualified
VictoriaCanada West WestCanada West Champion
BrockOUA WestOUA Champion
McGillRSEQRSEQ Champion
DalhousieAUSAUS Champion
AlbertaCanada West CentralCanada West Representative
QueensOUA EastOUA Representative
SaskatchewanCanada West EastHost Team

1) Regular season conference record
PosTeamLeagueW-L RecordPercentage
1Carleton OUA East14-01.000
2UBC Canada West West16-20.889
3Ottawa OUA East13-30.812
4Regina Canada West East12-40.750
5McMaster OUA West11-50.688
6UPEI AUS7-70.500

2) Strength of schedule (using RPI)
PosTeamRPI value
1Carleton 0.627
2UBC 0.592
3Ottawa 0.575
4Regina 0.570
5McMaster 0.557
6UPEI 0.527

3) Average Top 10 ranking for the season (assigned #12 if not in Top 10 a specific week)
1Carleton 1.23
2Ottawa 3.23
3UBC 7.05
4Regina 11.55
5McMaster 11.91
6UPEI 12.00

4) Playoff performance
1Carleton OUA East1
2Regina Canada West East1
3McMaster OUA West1
5UBC Canada West West2
6Ottawa OUA East2

5) Games versus other teams under berth consideration or already qualified
1Carleton 820.800 L-Regina W-McGill W-Ottawa W-Ottawa W-Queens W-Queens L-Queens W-Victoria W-Alberta W-Saskatchewan
2Regina 440.500 W-Carleton L-Alberta W-Saskatchewan W-Saskatchewan W-Saskatchewan L-Saskatchewan L-Victoria L-Saskatchewan
3Ottawa 330.500 W-McGill W-Queens W-Queens L-Carleton L-Carleton L-Queens
4UPEI 120.333 L-Dalhousie W-Dalhousie L-Dalhousie
5McMaster 120.333 L-Brock W-Brock L-Brock
6UBC 140.200 L-Alberta W-Victoria L-Victoria L-Victoria L-Saskatchewan

Statistical information maintained by Martin Timmerman. Please provide feedback to: MartinTimmerman@gmail.com