Selection Sunday is Shaft Sunday

[AJ]

for both us and Mo. State. Its like the selection committee went out of their way to dis both of us. Mo. State is snubbed again despite the 3rd highest RPI in the MVC and a victory over Wisc. We were the highest RPI team not to get into either tourney. Not only did the NCAA change the selection process to our disadvantage but they passed over us to put Fresno St. in with a RPI of 88 and Providence with a 75 RPI and only 18 victories. I know we put ourselves in this position but its clear the NCAA plays favorites. They decided to punish both of us for the questionable win in December.

[Tonka]

I think if you would have pulled out a one win against either of these teams you may have gotten in. You played SIUC twice and went 0-2. You played Creighton 3 times and went 0-3. A win over one of these two teams I believed would have helped.

[AJ]

Tonka,

Not that it really matters, but I am a SLU fan and a 25-year season ticket holder, not a Mo. State fan. Still, I think Mo. State is a class program who is clearly being snubbed by the NCAA. I don't know how else you explain not getting invited for 3 years with RPIs of 34, 21, and 38.

I don't disagree with your assessment of MS, but how do you explain, Purdue, Stanford, and Old Dominion ?

[Bay Area Billiken]

It would have been better for both SLU and Mo. State if Mo. State would have simply accepted the defeat, which was per the rulebook, and moved on. But no, Mo. State and the MVC had to keep the issue alive, even into the week of the MVC Tournament. If the NCAA actually watched the entire tape of that 51-50 SLU victory, perhaps it saw enough of both teams.

SLU was actually the team with the second highest RPI to get snubbed completely. The first team was Akron of the MAC, RPI 67.

Re SLU, unfortunately I'm fully conditioned to expect these things. Once I saw NC State's name listed, I knew we were in big trouble. When I saw Providence and Fresno State's names, I knew SLU's goose was cooked.

SLU's final RPI per kenpom.com was 74, which should have given SLU the second to last NIT bid per a pure following of the RPI. Dayton was also snubbed at 75. Once the 8 NIT "automatic" bids were awarded, the NIT's 24 remaining at large bids should have cut off at #75 Dayton, per a pure following of the RPI.

So this esteemed NIT College of Retired Coaches, in essence, replaced #67 Akron, #74 SLU, and #75 Dayton with #76 Providence (Big East), #88 Fresno State (WAC), and #90 North Carolina State (ACC). It is too bad for SLU that NC State went on that unexpected ACC Tournament run to the ACC final, as I'm quite sure that run resurrected NC State from the abyss. The NIT also bypassed Lorenzo Romar's Washington Huskies (RPI 81) to get Fresno State and NC State. IMO, Washington is a better team than Fresno State.

And it is too bad for SLU that the number of "automatic" NIT bids to the lesser conferences swelled all the way to 8 bids, exactly 25% of the entire NIT field.

Then the NIT Committee Chairman, C.M. Newton came on ESPN2/ESPNU and said the Committee assigns each coach to follow a conference all year, looks at the RPI, the Sagarin (Don't you love how that suddenly entered the picture. Was it without prior notice?), and that the coaches ultimately vote based upon which team they would not want to play as coaches. Can it get any more subjective than the latter, which Newton basically said was the ultimate deciding criteria?

My friend who went to Long Beach State just called, beside himself as to how Stanford got an NCAA bid. My Mom called right before that with the same question re Stanford. I felt the same when I saw Stanford's name listed as the last school named for the NCAA. My only 2 explanations are:

1. What Courtside noted, namely that the NCAA Tournament Committee included the UCLA (Pac-10) AD.

2. The old conference quota system, that the NCAA says does not exist, in fact really does exist.

Or is it that Stanford is Stanford, the Hoover Institution/George Shultz/Condoleeza Rice/Tiger Woods Exception to all rules?

The NCAA did sentence Stanford to what appears to be an early NCAA exit in Lexington, KY against Louisville, which will be playing a de facto home game right down the road. But you never know. Once you are given a chance, you have a chance.

[Battlecat455]

It's disappointing to be left out of the NIT, to be sure. The whole selection process is discouraging. There simply is no margin for error if you aren't in a power conference. I loved Bilas' rationale that the second division teams that were selected were more deserving because they have more talent. What is the point of playing the games in the first place? Stanford over Air Force is mind boggling after a convincing head to head defeat on Stanford's floor. It's a farce to pretend that the tournament is anything more than a validation process for the power conferences to maintain their alledged superiority. If it's all about who has the prettiest team on paper, we can set the tournament in October and be done with it. It's going to be VERY difficult to move up the ladder.

[Cowboy]

It's going to be VERY difficult to move up the ladder

yep, that is very true

[AJ]

I usually don't string post, but theis Stanford thing is outrageous. These guys have a 65 RPI, one quality victory outside of their own conference (Virginia), a generally soft non-conference schedule, 5-5 their last ten, a first round loss in the conference tourney and they get in over Air Force, a team that beat them by 30 at home, with a 30 RPI and Mo. State with a 38. I've never written the NCAA before but I am going to do it now. This is proof the process is rigged.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Consider this:

BCS Leagues

ACC: Conf. RPI #1, 7 NCAA bids.

SEC: Conf. RPI #2, 5 NCAA bids.

Pac 10: Conf. RPI #3, 6 NCAA bids.

Big 10: Conf. RPI #4, 6 NCAA bids.

Big East: Conf. RPI #5, 6 NCAA bids.

Big XII: Conf. RPI #7, 4 NCAA bids.

Other D-1 Football Leagues:

MWC: Conf. RPI #8, 2 NCAA bids.

WAC: Conf. RPI #9, 2 NCAA bids.

C-USA: Conf. RPI #11, 1 NCAA bid.

Higher Mid-Majors:

MVC: Conf. RPI #6, 2 NCAA bids.

Horizon: Conf. RPI #12, 2 NCAA bids.

Colonial: Conf. RPI #13, 2 NCAA bids.

A-10: Conf. RPI #10, 2 NCAA bids.

(A-10 is not technically considered a mid-major.)

You can draw your own conclusions re if a quota system is really in effect. The A-10, WAC, and Horizon may well have received only 1 NCAA bid had the #1 seed not lost in the conference tournament in the case of the A10 and WAC, and the highest Horizon RPI team, Butler, not lost in is conference tourney.

My friend out here who watched the selection show with me insists that Stanford got that NCAA bid to give the Pac-10 6 bids, because the Pac-10 had to be even with the Big Ten, which got 6 bids, given that the Pac-10 is rated ahead of the Big Ten this year. Pac-10 elder stateman, Lute Olson, who gives an annual State of the Pac-10 speech at the beginning of the Pac-10 Tournament, insisted that the Pac-10 should get 6 NCAA teams this year.

It looks like there was a de facto higher mid-major quota of 2. Ditto for the D-1 football Mountain West.

[courtside]

>I usually don't string post, but theis Stanford thing is

>outrageous. These guys have a 65 RPI, one quality victory

>outside of their own conference (Virginia), a generally soft

>non-conference schedule, 5-5 their last ten, a first round

>loss in the conference tourney and they get in over Air

>Force, a team that beat them by 30 at home, with a 30 RPI

>and Mo. State with a 38. I've never written the NCAA before

>but I am going to do it now. This is proof the process is

>rigged.

Missouri St. has exactly TWO non-conference roads win all season at S. Florida, 15th place Big East team, and at 7-22 UNC Wilmington. Only three RPI top 50 wins, two of which were Bradley.

0-5 vs top two MVC teams...and only NCAA teams

Loss at home in bracket buster

No MVC tourney final.

Mo St. isn't at or near top of list of teams who have a case for possible selection.

Where is this case for Mo St?

[Cowboy]

I'll play conspiracy theorist here....the Committee and the bunch of writers they had in Jan/Feb to mimic the process INSIST there is no quota or even look at how many teams from a conference get in...so much talk that one may want to think they are being less than truthful

[AJ]

BAB:

Your analysis makes more sense every time you look at the numbers. When you consider that the #5 RPI conference got 6 bids, #7 got 4. Logically, the MVC should have gotten 4 or 5, particularly when both Bradley and MS were top 40 RPIs. This appears to be payback for last year when Packer and the BCS conferences all whined about the number of bids the MVC got, ignoring the fact that 2 of their teams got to the sweet 16. I hope SIUC and Creighton both go deep in tourney.

[Bay Area Billiken]

The only 3 things Mo. State had going for it was its RPI (36), its win over Wisconsin, and its conference RPI (#6). But I think the NCAA has figured out the MVC RPI (rigging) approach.

I also do not think the Mo. State/MVC complaining, contacting the NCAA, not accepting the SLU loss and moving on, helped Mo. State's cause one bit. If the NCAA actually watched that game tape of the SLU game, it probably saw all it needed to see re Mo. State.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Unfortunately my allegiance to SLU, my alma mater, and the MVC attacks on SLU this season, starting with the body slamming of Kevin Lisch in the SIU game, going on to the Mo. State win for SLU that Mo. State and the MVC refused to accept, and then this recent all out STL media offensive against SLU, make it a bit more difficult for me to root for the MVC. Plus, SIU is literally mining SLU's turf for players.

This being said, as an Illinois native from Quincy, part of me would like to see a SIU v. Illinois matchup in Round 2 in Columbus. And SIU, as the higher seed, would actually be wearing the home whites, which could only happen in the NCAA. On the other hand, I have some allegiance to fellow Jesuit school, Holy Cross, of the non-scholarship Patriot League. But overall there, I would like to see that SIU v. U of I game happen. It would be pupil (Chris Lowery) going up against his old teacher (Bruce Weber).

And I have nothing against fellow Jesuit Creighton either, for that matter.