Selection Sunday thread

[beefncheddar]

The only smart thing Vitale has said - since the Tennessee radio call-in debacle - is that Arkansas has no business being in the tourney after winning just seven league games in the shipty SEC division.

Syracuse won 10 league games in a better conference.

I would have gone Missouri St. over Xavier.

OK, here we go. Define better conference.

/steps back and applies flame-retardent suit

 

[spup1122]

I would have gone Syracuse in over about 10 teams. I am not happy about the mid-major thing, but because I'm so pashionate about how deserving good mid-majors are over medicore big six teams, I'm going to not post around here tonight. At least not on threads about college basketball.

 

[JayFarrar]

I'm shocked that Arkansas got in. But, on the flip side, the "shipty" West Division had three of the four teams in the SEC semifinals, so maybe that meant the West wasn't as awful as some suspected.
I don't like how the power conferences skirted away from the mid-majors in the first round. It guarantees at least one mid-major moving on, but it eliminates another. Perfect example is Butler and ODU playing each other in the first round.
Why not Butler-Illinois and Va. Tech-ODU?

 

[Alma]

The committee ought to pack it in. Seriously...you couldn't make sense out of this ship if you tried.

Try this on: The 50 RPI team, at 19-10, is a 4 seed. The 52 RPI team at 22-10, <i> isn't even in the tournament </i>.

In other news, Vanderbilt is a 6 seed at 19-11 and 48 RPI, while Nevada, ranked all year in the top 15, is a 7 seed with a No. 24 RPI and a 27-4 record. And UNLV, at 27-6 and a 10 RPI, is a 7 seed, too.

And then, in a year when parity was its greatest and more teams won 20 games or more than in the history of the NCAA, you have to shove Stanford into the tourney?

I've never seen it done worse.

Prepare for a ton of upsets.

 

[BYH]

Yeah but Alma the RPI doesn't mean a lot. We were told that last year, when two top 30 teams were left out.

Love the fluidity of the criteria. Love it.

 

[Pringle]

The committee ought to pack it in. Seriously...you couldn't make sense out of this ship if you tried.

Try this on: The 50 RPI team, at 19-10, is a 4 seed. The 52 RPI team at 22-10, <i> isn't even in the tournament </i>.

In other news, Vanderbilt is a 6 seed at 19-11 and 48 RPI, while Nevada, ranked all year in the top 15, is a 7 seed with a No. 24 RPI and a 27-4 record. And UNLV, at 27-6 and a 10 RPI, is a 7 seed, too.

And then, in a year when parity was its greatest and more teams won 20 games or more than in the history of the NCAA, you have to shove Stanford into the tourney?

I've never seen it done worse.

Prepare for a ton of upsets.

Again, Stanford's in and Syracuse is out because they are looking only at their perception of conference strength instead of at individual teams.

It's a cop-out on their part. These conference heads don't care about seeding or anything peripheral - they need validation via No. of teams in, and the committee complied. Terrible.

 

[Cosmo]

I'm shocked that Arkansas got in. But, on the flip side, the "shipty" West Division had three of the four teams in the SEC semifinals, so maybe that meant the West wasn't as awful as some suspected.
I don't like how the power conferences skirted away from the mid-majors in the first round. It guarantees at least one mid-major moving on, but it eliminates another. Perfect example is Butler and ODU playing each other in the first round.
Why not Butler-Illinois and Va. Tech-ODU?

VT-ODU played in the regular season. No repeat matchups.

I just don't see the "mid majors got screwed argument." The only really bad whiffs to me are Arkansas and Illinois, and for the record, I think Illinois is going to beat Virginia Tech easily in Columbus. Maybe that's the pessimistic alum coming up, but I just don't trust Tech.

Drexel wasn't a slam dunk because of its bad losses. It had a nice profile. Missouri State did nothing special in the last five months to warrant a bid. Appalachian State has some bad losses to go along with their nice profile.

And finally, if there's any year where RPI seems meaningless, this is it. According to KenPom.com, Virginia's RPI is 55. 55! Below Michigan! How the fork are they a four seed? And UNLV has a top-10 RPI and gets a seven?

 

[jagtrader]

Drexel went 1-5 against the top three teams in its league.

Missouri State went 0-5 against Creighton and So. Illinois.

These are two- or three-bid leagues. You can't lose to everybody above you as a mid-major and have a compelling case.

 

[Oz]

I just don't see the "mid majors got screwed argument." The only really bad whiffs to me are Arkansas and Illinois, and for the record, I think Illinois is going to beat Virginia Tech easily in Columbus.

Those two could have been Drexel and whoever else, which would have given mid-majors the eight to match last season's. And that would have been fine. To trim the number by two after George Mason's run, though, was simply a bad move.

As for Drexel and Mizzou State with poor records against the top teams in their leagues, you can say the same for darn near any low seed (Arkansas and Illinois come to mind). Except those two schools got fat with home non-conference games while schools like Drexel played only 11 home games this season.

 

[Mystery_Meat]

I just don't see the "mid majors got screwed argument." The only really bad whiffs to me are Arkansas and Illinois, and for the record, I think Illinois is going to beat Virginia Tech easily in Columbus.

Those two could have been Drexel and whoever else, which would have given mid-majors the eight to match last season's. And that would have been fine. To trim the number by two after George Mason's run, though, was simply a bad move.

As for Drexel and Mizzou State with poor records against the top teams in their leagues, you can say the same for darn near any low seed (Arkansas and Illinois come to mind). Except those two schools got fat with home non-conference games while schools like Drexel played only 11 home games this season.

But other than Drexel, who got screwed among the mid-majors? Missouri State had a decent case, but far from an air-tight one. Appy State wasn't getting in. Bradley wasn't getting in. Who should be in that isn't? Just invite a couple more mid-majors because they're mid-majors and we want more mid-majors?

 

[pallister]

The idea that more mid-majors should get in this year because George Mason made the Final Four last year doesn't make sense. Different year, different circumstances. And if you're Drexel and not only don't win your conference tournament, but place what, fourth, in the regular season, you can't really complain.

 

[linotype]

The committee ought to pack it in. Seriously...you couldn't make sense out of this ship if you tried.

Try this on: The 50 RPI team, at 19-10, is a 4 seed. The 52 RPI team at 22-10, <i> isn't even in the tournament </i>.

In other news, Vanderbilt is a 6 seed at 19-11 and 48 RPI, while Nevada, ranked all year in the top 15, is a 7 seed with a No. 24 RPI and a 27-4 record. And UNLV, at 27-6 and a 10 RPI, is a 7 seed, too.

And then, in a year when parity was its greatest and more teams won 20 games or more than in the history of the NCAA, you have to shove Stanford into the tourney?

I've never seen it done worse.

Prepare for a ton of upsets.

To echo Alma's point, this nugget:

Only one at-large team had a worse RPI than UVa. And that team (Stanford) beat Virginia. In Charlottesville.