Selection Show

[LongLiveMilesTarver]

has a small in studio audience adding to the awfulness.

I've seen more enthusiasm when the contestants of Press Your Luck were announced.

 

[WilliamsArenaGuy]

This is so painful. I hate it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[howeda7]

has a small in studio audience adding to the awfulness.

I've seen more enthusiasm when the contestants of Press Your Luck were announced.

Sounds like it's happening a morgue. Awful.

 

[LongLiveMilesTarver]

I wish they'd put the team's records on there so I could complain about Arizona State and Alabama.

 

[LongLiveMilesTarver]

This is the worst thing I've ever seen in my life.

 

[saintpauljeff]

It not the worst, but if you had no interest in the entire college bball landscape then you were busy emailing TBS


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BarnBurner]

I wish they'd put the team's records on there so I could complain about Arizona State and Alabama.

Perhaps add Oklahoma as well.

 

[LongLiveMilesTarver]

Ranked number 20, St. Mary's did not get in.

Gotta get Syracuse and UCLA in there.

 

[LongLiveMilesTarver]

Perhaps add Oklahoma as well.

And Texas

 

[GophersInIowa]

 

[GophersInIowa]

 

[GophersInIowa]

 

[WoodburyTim]

There is a big problem in college basketball with teams like St. Mary's unable to schedule power 5 teams. Letting Syracuse and Arizona State teams in with sub .500 records doesn't really give much incentive to those teams to schedule fun games against mid- majors. Syracuse plays 1 game against a Kansas for schedule strength, gets smoked and then plays 10 Colgate's.

 

[GophersInIowa]

 

[GophersInIowa]

Teams should have to be at least .500 in conference play to get in. My opinion anyways.

 

[GophersInIowa]

 

[LongLiveMilesTarver]

I like this one.

 

[Ewert86PC]

Ernie Johnson's out of sync audio is just the crowning achievement of this show.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[row19gopher]

See where Lofton was NMSU’s leading scorer - & we couldn’t keep him in school!

 

[Face The Facts]

Teams should have to be at least .500 in conference play to get in. My opinion anyways.

That would be a horrible rule.

With unbalanced schedules, a team could have a #1 RPI Strength of Schedule, go unbeaten through it. Then go 8-10 against a top conference with all 8 of their wins coming against top 75 with their 10 losses all against top 25.

 

[WoodburyTim]

That would be a horrible rule.

With unbalanced schedules, a team could have a #1 RPI Strength of Schedule, go unbeaten through it. Then go 8-10 against a top conference with all 8 of their wins coming against top 75 with their 10 losses all against top 25.

How many times has your scenario occurred?

 

[Face The Facts]

How many times has your scenario occurred?

That exact scenario, probably never because I was pretty specific in the details.

But here are two 8-10 teams with resumes who made it and probably should despite having losing records in conference.

2012 UCONN

Losses vs RPI:
2
2
2
9
10
14
35
49
58
70
90
156
161


Wins vs RPI:
13
39
41
49
61
61
70
88
93
101
103
116
120
155
179
187
193
193
276
285


Syracuse this year:
Losses vs:
1
1
4
4
5
7
24
54
64
70
95
160
161


Wins vs:
11
25
28
38
61
74
75
95
107
116
123
160
160
165
182
188
217
217
222
248


When you play in a deep conference like the ACC or Big Ten (in a strong year) with an uneven schedule, where with a conference tournament adding into your SOS, you shouldn't be penalized because 5 or 6 of your losses came against 3 or 4 teams in the top 10 as happened in the two cases above.


Now if there is a mid major that has more top 50 wins (our Group 1 wins as they call it now), then maybe you don't belong. But that's where comparing resumes comes in.
To just have a rule that tosses those teams out from even being considered or compared is poor absolute criteria in my opinion.

 

[Cayman]

How many times has your scenario occurred?

Maybe not that particular scenario, but teams with losing conference records have made the tournament before, and probably deserved to be there. In 2013, Illinois went 8-10 in the Big Ten and got a 7 seed on the back of a neutral site win against 6 seed Butler and a road win against 1 seed Gonzaga. 10 of their 18 conference games were against NCAA tournament teams, but they get left out of the tournament because they had the misfortune of playing in a strong conference, and the fact that they beat a 1 seed on the road out of conference is not enough to save them. And then who gets in in Illinois' place? An underachieving Kentucky team that went 12-6 in a weak SEC? Southern Miss, the second place team in Conference USA? Are they more deserving?

I find myself agreeing with GII most of the time, but such a rule would penalize decent teams who play in strong conferences, and would arbitrarily lessen the importance of quality non-conference wins. You leave out 2013 Illinois (and Minnesota!) and put in another, possibly worse team, that had more patsies in their conference to beat up on.

 

[WoodburyTim]

That exact scenario, probably never because I was pretty specific in the details.

But here are two 8-10 teams with resumes who made it and probably should despite having losing records in conference.

2012 UCONN

Losses vs RPI:
2
2
2
9
10
14
35
49
58
70
90
156
161


Wins vs RPI:
13
39
41
49
61
61
70
88
93
101
103
116
120
155
179
187
193
193
276
285


Syracuse this year:
Losses vs:
1
1
4
4
5
7
24
54
64
70
95
160
161


Wins vs:
11
25
28
38
61
74
75
95
107
116
123
160
160
165
182
188
217
217
222
248


When you play in a deep conference like the ACC or Big Ten (in a strong year) with an uneven schedule, where with a conference tournament adding into your SOS, you shouldn't be penalized because 5 or 6 of your losses came against 3 or 4 teams in the top 10 as happened in the two cases above.


Now if there is a mid major that has more top 50 wins (our Group 1 wins as they call it now), then maybe you don't belong. But that's where comparing resumes comes in.
To just have a rule that tosses those teams out from even being considered or compared is poor absolute criteria in my opinion.

Fair enough. And I think you are right, there are probably examples where a sub .500 team is one of the best 68, though I think it is definitely worth discussion whether they are one of the 68 most entertaining. And the fact that we hand out auto bids and have 68 teams seems to point to this system being about entertainment, rather than a selection of only the best and capable teams of winning the championship.

But it also devalues the conference season and especially the conference tournaments. What is the point of either if everybody can make the tournament?

 

[Face The Facts]

I see a fair amount of media types saying certain teams make it due to a coach or a specific player.

This year it's about Oklahoma and Trae Young.

But Oklahoma deserves to be in and for people who are arguing otherwise, you're not really looking at their whole schedule / record.

 

[Thomasthetank]

I am a conspiracy theorist. I believe the NCAA just does whatever it wants. It sets the table for their name brands to win. It gives benefit of the doubt to the bigger money maker ( none of this really is all that shocking)

However, I have always agreed with Jay Bilas on the teams getting in. It's about who you have proven you can beat. Nebby and penn st beat absolutely no one. They don't deserve it. If nebby had beaten Kansas on the road, they are in. But otherwise, they beat cream puffs. If you what to ensure yourself a ticket, play some hard teams. And If you don't win enough of those games, then those teams aren't good enough.

 

[GophersInIowa]

That exact scenario, probably never because I was pretty specific in the details.

But here are two 8-10 teams with resumes who made it and probably should despite having losing records in conference.

2012 UCONN

Losses vs RPI:
2
2
2
9
10
14
35
49
58
70
90
156
161


Wins vs RPI:
13
39
41
49
61
61
70
88
93
101
103
116
120
155
179
187
193
193
276
285


Syracuse this year:
Losses vs:
1
1
4
4
5
7
24
54
64
70
95
160
161


Wins vs:
11
25
28
38
61
74
75
95
107
116
123
160
160
165
182
188
217
217
222
248


When you play in a deep conference like the ACC or Big Ten (in a strong year) with an uneven schedule, where with a conference tournament adding into your SOS, you shouldn't be penalized because 5 or 6 of your losses came against 3 or 4 teams in the top 10 as happened in the two cases above.


Now if there is a mid major that has more top 50 wins (our Group 1 wins as they call it now), then maybe you don't belong. But that's where comparing resumes comes in.
To just have a rule that tosses those teams out from even being considered or compared is poor absolute criteria in my opinion.

I know my opinion on this will never be reality. But in both your examples, those teams played a lot of good teams yet rarely won. They went a combined 3-13 against top 25 teams. 0-11 against top 10 teams. If you’re going to have a below .500 conference record, at the very least you should have a few top wins in there in my opinion.

 

[SM_25]

I see a fair amount of media types saying certain teams make it due to a coach or a specific player.

This year it's about Oklahoma and Trae Young.

But Oklahoma deserves to be in and for people who are arguing otherwise, you're not really looking at their whole schedule / record.

There is no denying that the start of Oklahomas season was fantastic, but the reality is they went 4-11 in their last 15 games after being ranked in the top 5. That is pretty is a pretty big fall off. Oklahoma st who got left out had basically the same resume, but here are the wins Oklahoma St. had in the last month and a half: @Kansas, @West Virginia, vsTexas Tech, Vs Kansas. On top of that, they had beaten Oklahoma twice this year. The main thing that it came down to was that Oklahoma has Trae Young and OK St. has no one of real concern. Viewers would rather watch a top 10 pick.

I think if you put Oklahoma in, Oklahoma St. has to be in as well, but if Minnesota isn't in it doesn't really matter to me I guess. I'll just sit back and watch some good basketball.

 

[Bad Gopher]

Tweet of the year so far, and it's hard to see it getting beat.

Seriously, this is the strangest year for the Field I can remember.

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Ewert86PC]

Only 4 B1G Teams in this year. Very sad.


Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk