Comments on: How the NCAA Screwed Up the Men’s Basketball Tournament … Again http://www.bloggernews.net/15186 High-quality English language analysis and editorial writing on the news. Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:59:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Dean http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-270682 Dean Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:05:23 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-270682 Oops, My mistake, I thought that this was 2008. Oops,
My mistake, I thought that this was 2008.

]]> By: Dean http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-270681 Dean Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:03:51 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-270681 Of course this is not accurate, because Minnesota, not Illinois, upset Indiana in the Big Ten tournament. Of course this is not accurate, because Minnesota, not Illinois, upset Indiana in the Big Ten tournament.

]]> By: peter http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-3154 peter Tue, 13 Mar 2007 19:29:25 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-3154 I was shocked at the inclusion of purdue, illinois, stanford, arkansas, Georgia tech, and others. overall, I think the committee decided to kiss butt to the bcs once again. I thought the rpi rankings were created to aid in selection, but now the ncaa has decided to throw that system out the window. Last year Missouri State was snubbed despite having an RPI of 21. Once again this year they are dubiously ommitted. And non-bcs teams must play it out so that bcs conferences can have more teams advance. pathetic. I think if a team is in the rpi top 40 they should automatically be in. That still leaves room for about ten or so "at-large" bids. if we look at the RPI top 40 for the last 7 years, this has mostly held true. in 2001, mississppi state (rpi-40) was left out. in 2003 unlv(40) was out. Also in 2004 LSU(38) was passed over. '02 and '05 saw all top 40 teams get in. Now to '06. The Missouri Valley had six teams in the top 40 (wow) so MO State (21) and Creighton (39) got snubbed. Also getting axed were Hofstra (30) and Cincinnati (40). Now this year, MO State (36) and Bradley(38) are again snubbed; as well as Air Force (30). All this while "power" conferences barrells are once again scraped for crap like purdue and stanford. 7 ACC teams? wtf!!! 4 big 12!?!? There is no way to explain why a conference like the MVC which has good teams top to bottom (all posted winning non-conf records, usually pretty good ones at that) and then tests its teams with a grueling conf sched (all teams play each other at least twice). That is why the Valley's RPI is better than the Big12 and barely below the Big East's. And yet BE gets 6 teams and the B12 gets 4 and still Syracuse(rpi 50) & Kansas State(56) are whined about. MVC got a lousy 2 teams in. yep, it sucks. I was shocked at the inclusion of purdue, illinois, stanford, arkansas, Georgia tech, and others. overall, I think the committee decided to kiss butt to the bcs once again. I thought the rpi rankings were created to aid in selection, but now the ncaa has decided to throw that system out the window. Last year Missouri State was snubbed despite having an RPI of 21. Once again this year they are dubiously ommitted. And non-bcs teams must play it out so that bcs conferences can have more teams advance. pathetic.

I think if a team is in the rpi top 40 they should automatically be in. That still leaves room for about ten or so “at-large” bids. if we look at the RPI top 40 for the last 7 years, this has mostly held true. in 2001, mississppi state (rpi-40) was left out. in 2003 unlv(40) was out. Also in 2004 LSU(38) was passed over. ‘02 and ‘05 saw all top 40 teams get in. Now to ‘06. The Missouri Valley had six teams in the top 40 (wow) so MO State (21) and Creighton (39) got snubbed. Also getting axed were Hofstra (30) and Cincinnati (40). Now this year, MO State (36) and Bradley(38) are again snubbed; as well as Air Force (30).

All this while “power” conferences barrells are once again scraped for crap like purdue and stanford. 7 ACC teams? wtf!!! 4 big 12!?!? There is no way to explain why a conference like the MVC which has good teams top to bottom (all posted winning non-conf records, usually pretty good ones at that) and then tests its teams with a grueling conf sched (all teams play each other at least twice). That is why the Valley’s RPI is better than the Big12 and barely below the Big East’s. And yet BE gets 6 teams and the B12 gets 4 and still Syracuse(rpi 50) & Kansas State(56) are whined about. MVC got a lousy 2 teams in.

yep, it sucks.

]]> By: Reo http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-3064 Reo Tue, 13 Mar 2007 14:01:02 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-3064 gkunk and dflake: The way Air Force played the last couple of weeks, there are 100 teams in DI that could have won at Air Force. You basically are trying to say that two victories over a team that is in the NIT and a 13-point loss to UCLA makes BYU worthy of the NCAA. If one uses that logic, the case for about a dozen other teams that didn't make the NCAA tournament is strengthened. Additionally, there are quite a few regular season conference champions not in the NCAA tournament -- some with better conference records than BYU. That's not much of an argumet, either. As far as the Top 25 goes, you must remember those polls are not based on anything like the RPI or other ratings mechanisms. They are personal opinions of sports writers and broadcasters or coaches and, as such, are not even considered when the selection committee makes its picks. gkunk and dflake:

The way Air Force played the last couple of weeks, there are 100 teams in DI that could have won at Air Force. You basically are trying to say that two victories over a team that is in the NIT and a 13-point loss to UCLA makes BYU worthy of the NCAA. If one uses that logic, the case for about a dozen other teams that didn’t make the NCAA tournament is strengthened. Additionally, there are quite a few regular season conference champions not in the NCAA tournament — some with better conference records than BYU. That’s not much of an argumet, either. As far as the Top 25 goes, you must remember those polls are not based on anything like the RPI or other ratings mechanisms. They are personal opinions of sports writers and broadcasters or coaches and, as such, are not even considered when the selection committee makes its picks.

]]> By: Ken http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-2900 Ken Tue, 13 Mar 2007 03:17:16 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-2900 What an ill-disguised backlash against the mid-majors, particularly the Missouri Valley Conference, which seems to be being punished for making Billy Packer look like a horse's ass last year. Particularly perceptive in noticing the first-round pairings designed to get rid of as many mid-majors as possible. Why not give Creighton and Nevada the opportunity to advance against another sad sack sixth-place BCS team. You use Purdue and Illinois as your prime examples, I would say Arkansas and Stanford did little to deserve their bids. Arkansas was about to fire its coach in February, but maybe that's not a good example because Hog fans also want to fire their football coach, who won 10 games last year. What an ill-disguised backlash against the mid-majors, particularly the Missouri Valley Conference, which seems to be being punished for making Billy Packer look like a horse’s ass last year. Particularly perceptive in noticing the first-round pairings designed to get rid of as many mid-majors as possible. Why not give Creighton and Nevada the opportunity to advance against another sad sack sixth-place BCS team. You use Purdue and Illinois as your prime examples, I would say Arkansas and Stanford did little to deserve their bids. Arkansas was about to fire its coach in February, but maybe that’s not a good example because Hog fans also want to fire their football coach, who won 10 games last year.

]]> By: dflake http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-2814 dflake Mon, 12 Mar 2007 23:51:17 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-2814 gkunk got it right with the koolaid comment. I think anyone in the top 25 deserves a bid. BYU had the 15th toughest schedule in the nation. That is an assessment by the commentators. BYU was the closest loss to UCLA outside the pac-10. No other non pac ten team came as close to UCLA without winning than BYU. You say drexel should get in they were 23-8 overall and 13-5 in confernce. BYU had two less conference losses and BYU won two more games than Drexel. Drexel in it over BYU! YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME!!!!!!! Don't get me started on Missouri State who went overall a big FAT 22-10. Come back when you want to make a REAL argument. psh! Missouri St. Judas Priest!!!!!!! gkunk got it right with the koolaid comment. I think anyone in the top 25 deserves a bid. BYU had the 15th toughest schedule in the nation. That is an assessment by the commentators. BYU was the closest loss to UCLA outside the pac-10. No other non pac ten team came as close to UCLA without winning than BYU. You say drexel should get in they were 23-8 overall and 13-5 in confernce. BYU had two less conference losses and BYU won two more games than Drexel. Drexel in it over BYU! YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME!!!!!!! Don’t get me started on Missouri State who went overall a big FAT 22-10. Come back when you want to make a REAL argument. psh! Missouri St. Judas Priest!!!!!!!

]]> By: Gkunk http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-2783 Gkunk Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:09:55 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-2783 So, why doesn't a team that goes 25 - 8, beats AFA twice (even on their home court) is MWC regular season champions deserve a bid? Winning 25 games in any conference during any season is a note worthy accomplishment. You said, "There are no quality victories anywhere. No road wins of note." What about the two wins agains AFA (which killed Stanford and Standford gets a bid with its lame record). Don't forget one of BYU's wins against AFA was on the road, breaking the nation's longest home court winning streak. That seems rather note worthy, wouldn't you think? The win was enough to bump them up into the top 25. So you are telling me a team that finishes their regular season ranked in the top 25 doesn't deserve a bid? Sounds like you're drinking the same Koolaid the selection committee is. So, why doesn’t a team that goes 25 - 8, beats AFA twice (even on their home court) is MWC regular season champions deserve a bid? Winning 25 games in any conference during any season is a note worthy accomplishment. You said, “There are no quality victories anywhere. No road wins of note.” What about the two wins agains AFA (which killed Stanford and Standford gets a bid with its lame record). Don’t forget one of BYU’s wins against AFA was on the road, breaking the nation’s longest home court winning streak. That seems rather note worthy, wouldn’t you think? The win was enough to bump them up into the top 25. So you are telling me a team that finishes their regular season ranked in the top 25 doesn’t deserve a bid? Sounds like you’re drinking the same Koolaid the selection committee is.

]]> By: Mike http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-2758 Mike Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:27:44 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-2758 Good article and you could have gone even further. It's time for the NCAA to recognize a gain of approximatley 50 1-A Basketball programs over the past 10 years and reorganize the tournament. Expanding to 68 or 72 teams, with 4 or 8 play-in games, would certainly get some of the "bubble" teams in. Of course, you could expand to 256 teams and someone would always have a gripe! Good article and you could have gone even further. It’s time for the NCAA to recognize a gain of approximatley 50 1-A Basketball programs over the past 10 years and reorganize the tournament. Expanding to 68 or 72 teams, with 4 or 8 play-in games, would certainly get some of the “bubble” teams in. Of course, you could expand to 256 teams and someone would always have a gripe!

]]> By: lyndon http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-2738 lyndon Mon, 12 Mar 2007 19:29:18 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/15186#comment-2738 Good article. You pretty well nailed it. Clearly the selection committee was flat out threatened to not let good mid-majors in because of what they did last year. The midmajor matchups prove that as you have pointed out and it is so blatant and obvious as to the Selection commiittee's intent to get rid of as many mid majors and save as many majors from defeat as possible. and Arkansas, and Vanderbilt, and stanford. Thanks for writing about the obvious. Good article. You pretty well nailed it. Clearly the selection committee was flat out threatened to not let good mid-majors in because of what they did last year. The midmajor matchups prove that as you have pointed out and it is so blatant and obvious as to the Selection commiittee’s intent to get rid of as many mid majors and save as many majors from defeat as possible. and Arkansas, and Vanderbilt, and stanford. Thanks for writing about the obvious.

]]>