NCAA Field

[slufan13]

Just because a team wins a game doesn't mean they deserved to be in the Tournament. Syracuse, Vanderbilt, and Tulsa had zero business being in. Tulsa shouldn't have even been in the conversation. Syracuse and Vandy couldn't even win 20 games. Both have pitiful losses and neither have the full season resume to get in. It's a joke, but the committee is protecting the big boys.

[Box and Won]

I enjoy seeing Tulsa get in... look at the way it sets off the SPUMAC loyalists. Faith in Haith! Haha.

[Box and Won]

Frank Haith leads a charmed life.

[Bizziken]

I am in the small minority when it comes to St Bs. They didnt pass my eye test at all. I have no problem with them being left out. If they would have had a hard OOC then I would reconsider. You cant play cupcakes and then go 14-4 in conference and expect to get an at large out of the A-10. Dayton, VCU, and St Joes played people in the OOC and they were safe.

When it comes to Syracuse being in the tourney, they clearly are one of the best CURRENT 68 teams in the country as evidenced by them being a 1 point favorite in vegas over our conference darling Dayton.

If all the hand-wringers on here want to claim that the Orange are frauds, go put your life savings on Dayton and then retire in the bahamas. I wouldnt feel too comfortable relying on Dayton to beat the 2-3.

Might not be all that relevant, but 4 of Dayton's current players do have Tournament experience playing against Syracuse's 2-3 in 2014. I think that could be valuable.

[brianstl]

It is better to get Cuse as a first round game than a second round game. Dayton is getting time needed to prepare for their zone.

[billiken_roy]

The NCAA had the perfect opportunity to send a message that cheaters like Syracuse get no favors. Instead the committee "reaches" to include them. Sad.

[DeSmetBilliken]

I missed this.

[Bay Area Billiken]

The trouble with the NCAA Committee is a non-BCS school never knows what the real criterion is going to be. That's because the real truth is there are no real criteria. It is an ad hoc process. The NCAA just invents criteria to meet its needs, its end, which is obviously and clearly to put as many BCS Power 5 (+ 1 or 2) teams in the NCAA as possible.

This reminds of the long ago day in a County Law Library, when the veteran Chief Judge came into the Law Library and said to the young Law Clerk, "This is my decision. Your job is to give me my reasons."

Baghdad Bob himself would have been a better spokesman for the NCAA Committee than Joe Castigione.

Free Baghdad Bob.

[TheChosenOne]

This reminds of the long ago day in a County Law Library, when the veteran Chief Judge came into the Law Library and said to the young Law Clerk, "This is my decision. Your job is to give me my reasons."

Sounds like Mike Nifong in the Duke Lacrosse case (I would highly recommend that 30 for 30).

[Pistol]

This thread is awesome - solidifying the board's unity!

I'm on the same page as most of you. Syracuse has absolutely no business being here, Michigan and Vandy were really disappointing inclusions, and Tulsa is one of the all-time most confounding inclusions - if not the most. Temple was a reach. And St. Mary's, Valpo, SDSU, and Monmouth - I feel really bad for all of them. It's a shame on an eye test level because those are the programs that make this event so much better - the mid-level BCS conference teams are what the NIT is made for. But I think there's a pretty strong objective case to be made on these, as well.

The other thing I'm struggling with is geography. I know they like to stick to their Overall-1-to-68 seeding process as strictly as possible, but they make exceptions to keep teams from the same conferences as spread out as possible within the brackets. Why can't they do a better job geographically, too, since they claim to give 1-4 seeds preference in that regard?

Why not make KU the Midwest #1 seed (Chicago) and put Virginia as #1 in the South (Louisville)? What about the 2-seeds? What's wrong with putting Villanova in the East to play in Philly (did they play too many games in that arena)? Then you could put Xavier in the Louisville regional. Michigan State got the best possible draw as a 2-seed geographically, but the Big East schools are swapped. I don't get it; it'd be more fair to the schools and it'd sell more tickets.

[Pistol]

The trouble with the NCAA Committee is a non-BCS school never knows what the real criterion is going to be. That's because the real truth is there are no real criteria. It is an ad hoc process. The NCAA just invents criteria to meet its needs, its end, which is obviously and clearly to put as many BCS Power 5 (+ 1 or 2) teams in the NCAA as possible.

This is so on point. They allow themselves flexibility by not having an actual set of guidelines. So the idiot in charge goes on CBS for a brief interview every year and lists a different set of priorities.

For example: "We put a high value on teams going on the road in the non-conference." - Monmouth gave itself a ridiculous non-conference schedule and pulled off some nice upsets. And they're passed over for some mid-tier BCS conference programs that barely went on the road at all in the non-conference because they don't have to.

[Billiken Law]

This thread is awesome - solidifying the board's unity!

I'm on the same page as most of you. Syracuse has absolutely no business being here, Michigan and Vandy were really disappointing inclusions, and Tulsa is one of the all-time most confounding inclusions - if not the most. Temple was a reach. And St. Mary's, Valpo, SDSU, and Monmouth - I feel really bad for all of them. It's a shame on an eye test level because those are the programs that make this event so much better - the mid-level BCS conference teams are what the NIT is made for. But I think there's a pretty strong objective case to be made on these, as well.

The other thing I'm struggling with is geography. I know they like to stick to their Overall-1-to-68 seeding process as strictly as possible, but they make exceptions to keep teams from the same conferences as spread out as possible within the brackets. Why can't they do a better job geographically, too, since they claim to give 1-4 seeds preference in that regard?

Why not make KU the Midwest #1 seed (Chicago) and put Virginia as #1 in the South (Louisville)? What about the 2-seeds? What's wrong with putting Villanova in the East to play in Philly (did they play too many games in that arena)? Then you could put Xavier in the Louisville regional. Michigan State got the best possible draw as a 2-seed geographically, but the Big East schools are swapped. I don't get it; it'd be more fair to the schools and it'd sell more tickets.

On Nova, they deliberately scheduled only three games at Comcast Center, or whatever the hell it's called these days, so that they would be eligible to play there.

However, the committee made sure Oklahoma City will be packed sending OU, Texas and TAMU there.

As for the overall field, the committee sent the message that conference tournaments have consequences....if you're a mid major. If you're a Power 5 team then getting blown out in the first round doesn't mean jack.

[Pistol]

I have no problem with all the Texas and Oklahoma teams playing in Oklahoma City in the first two rounds. Oklahoma does have the farthest to travel for its regional of any 2-seed, too, but I'm sure they're not too bummed given the early draw.

But yeah, the Xavier-Villanova swap makes perfect sense to me. They're about even (all the 2-seeds are pretty close, actually), so why not reward each with the best road possible?

I get why they can't swap Duke and Cal - to prevent 2 Pac 12 teams in the same half of a regional - but there's no reason they couldn't swap the Big East 2 seeds.

It does seem like the message gets louder every year that the BCS schools are going to get their way and smaller-conference teams don't mean anything. When Vandy got in, it felt like them saying, "Yeah, we know the SEC was garbage this season but do you have any idea what that football contract is worth to us here at CBS?! There's no way we're limiting them to 2 teams!"

The most baffling aspect, given that as the obvious unspoken narrative, is the love for the AAC. It's a second-tier conference like the A10, and they got absolutely taken care of. That's a bit of a mystery to me. Michigan, Vandy, Syracuse, et al - we all know why they get the benefit of the doubt.

[Bay Area Billiken]

The NCAA had the perfect opportunity to send a message that cheaters like Syracuse get no favors. Instead the committee "reaches" to include them. Sad.

The NCAA only sent that message to the Little Guy, St. Mary's, out in the Moraga East Bay Hills.

The NCAA had collective memory loss re Syracuse.

[SLU_Nick]

This opinion will absolutely change if SLU is ever the one bounced out to a terrible BCS school --> I like the unpredictability and eye test.

I dont care how high SBU's rpi was, they stink.

[slu72]

This is so on point. They allow themselves flexibility by not having an actual set of guidelines. So the idiot in charge goes on CBS for a brief interview every year and lists a different set of priorities.

For example: "We put a high value on teams going on the road in the non-conference." - Monmouth gave itself a ridiculous non-conference schedule and pulled off some nice upsets. And they're passed over for some mid-tier BCS conference programs that barely went on the road at all in the non-conference because they don't have to.

Syracuse hardly ever goes on the road for the bulk of their OOC schedule. What's worrisome here is you can see the stars aligning for a total BCS NCAA in the not too distant future. Let's hope there are a bunch of mid upsets on this week and about 4 mids make the sweet 16.

[kwyjibo]

Last year, after many years of relying more on the RPI there seems to be a move away from that. But as Pistol said this appears only to work in big conference teams favor (hey if RPI OR big wins OR "other metrics" are good then the big conference teams are in--no such triple looks for other schools). What is really unique is the treatment of the American the same way the A-10 used to get treated. The selection has always been biased but those biases helped SLU in Conf-USA and in A-10. Now it looks like the A-10 bias got transferred to the AAC. This is really bad for college basketball. I will definitely look at more efficiency metrics (like the Wiz) in the future.

One of the best bracketologists is Patrick Stevens and he wrote an excellent article summing up the mess here (Lunardi also had a rant that was helpful):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2016/03/14/bracketology-a-2016-ncaa-tournament-bracket-selection-postmortem/

[DeSmetBilliken]

It seems that every year there is a power conference team that people criticize their selection into the NCAA Tournament. Every year, that seems to win at least one game. Several end up in the Sweet 16. Not saying that they'd beat Michigan State, or necessarily even Dayton, but I thought of this as the "experts" we're carrying on about Syracuse being unworthy of a bid.

[ACE]

It seems that every year there is a power conference team that people criticize their selection into the NCAA Tournament. Every year, that seems to win at least one game. Several end up in the Sweet 16. Not saying that they'd beat Michigan State, or necessarily even Dayton, but I thought of this as the "experts" we're carrying on about Syracuse being unworthy of a bid.

Could undeserving teams like Vandy and Syracuse win a couple of games in the Tourney? Absolutely, but that doesn't justify their inclusion in the field. There are a lot of teams that didn't make the field who would also be capable of winning a couple games in the tourney, IF given the opportunity. The relevant question is which teams earned an invitation based on how they performed during the regular season - that's where Syracuse and Vandy should have failed.

[Cowboy]

-the committee members for this year came from:

Oklahoma

LSU

Michigan St

Stanford

Creighton

Duke

UNC-Asheville

BYU

Northeastern

Ohio U

-I doubt he answers, but I would ask Castiglione for voting breakdown for, oh, let's say Syracuse, was it strictly along power conference to other membership?

-putting basketball people on the committee makes too much sense, so why not do it?

[Bay Area Billiken]

This opinion will absolutely change if SLU is ever the one bounced out to a terrible BCS school --> I like the unpredictability and eye test.

I dont care how high SBU's rpi was, they stink.

The Bonnies are actually a very good team, with 3 really good players. I suspect if they had not blown that lead vs. Davidson and lost in OT in the A10 Tourney quarterfinals Friday night, the Bonnies dance.

Also, had Wichita State won the Valley Tournament, I suspect the Bonnies dance. Juan Bid would have visited the Valley, no question, opening up an NCAA spot. The Bonnies had a significantly better RPI (30 vs. 47) than Wichita State, which is living more on reputation these days than merit.

The scary thing from the SLU standpoint is an A10 Regular Season Co-Champion did not get an NCAA Tournament bid, and one with an easily NCAA qualifying RPI of 30 at that.

One of the great mysteries is the inexplicable rise of the American, which garnered 4 NCAA bids, of which one at large (Cincinnati) was barely inside the line, meaning IN, and two (Tulsa and Temple) were well outside the line.

The new mystery is what, if anything, even determines the line. The ultimate answer there certainly appears to be $$$.

[DeSmetBilliken]

Could undeserving teams like Vandy and Syracuse win a couple of games in the Tourney? Absolutely, but that doesn't justify their inclusion in the field. There are a lot of teams that didn't make the field who would also be capable of winning a couple games in the tourney, IF given the opportunity. The relevant question is which teams earned an invitation based on how they performed during the regular season - that's where Syracuse and Vandy should have failed.

I was suggesting that they earned it.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Cracking the Code:

There are 68 Bids, 32 automatic, of which 23 went to Juan Bid Conferences, and 36 at larges.

This leaves 45 slots after Juan Bid has paid his visits, of which 9 are automatic bids, and 36 are at large bids.

The conference breakdown is telling:

Power 5: 31 bids, of which 4 of the Power 5, the Big 12, the Pac-12, the ACC, and the Big Ten, EACH had 7 bids. To even out the Top 4 conferences each with 7 bids, gift bids were bestowed on Michigan of the Big Ten (RPI 56) and Syracuse of the ACC (RPI 72). It is unlikely a mere coincidence that each of the top 4 Power 5 leagues each received 7 bids.

The SEC, worst Basketball conference (Conference RPI 6) among the 5 Power 5 football conferences, has 3 NCAA teams, including the gift bid to Vanderbilt (RPI 63).

That leaves the 4th ranked Big East (non-football) with 5 NCAA teams, the 7th ranked A10 with 3 NCAA teams, the 8th ranked American (football) with 4 NCAA teams, and the 13th ranked Missouri Valley with 2 NCAA teams.

Conclusion: Conference slotting, exactly what the NCAA claims does not happen. Again, Baghdad Bob would make a good NCAA Committee spokesman, much better than Joe Castiglione.

Another reason the Bonnies may have lost out is the NCAA was not going to give the A10 more NCAA teams than the SEC.

But what remains the most inexplicable of all is how the American was given 4 bids, including 2 gift bids to outside the line 58 Tulsa and 60 Temple. Maybe this goes back to the NCAA not wanting to give the A10 more bids than the SEC (whose Football is seen on CBS TV).

[D-West & PO-Z]

Butler played all of 1 road game in the non-conference season- one (1).

Butler played Purdue on a "neutral" court in Indianapolis. Butler is located in Indianapolis.

Butler had an RPI of 57 and has no business being in the NCAA Tournament ahead of St. Bonaventure (RPI 30 and Co-A10 Regular Season Champion), St. Mary's (RPI 38 and the WCC Regular Season Champion, who played Cal on the road in Berkeley. Haas Pavilion on the Cal Campus in Berkeley is not a "neutral" site), and Monmouth (RPI 52 and the MAAC Regular Season Champion, who won on the road at UCLA and Georgetown and defeated Notre Dame on a neutral floor).

As much as Butler should not be in the NCAA field, 58 Tulsa, 60 Temple, and 63 Vanderbilt should not be in the NCAA either, especially Tulsa (Haith).

Syracuse's RPI of 72 made its inclusion in this NCAA field an utter abomination, a travesty.

I guarantee there were more Purdue fans than Butler fans in Indy. Do you realize how small Butler is?

[hsmith19]

Lots of Indy people with zero Butler ties became huge Butler fans in 2010.