NCAA Selection Criteria...

[jncuse]

Essentially what you're saying is that the two early wins offset a bunch of bad losses over the last 6-7 weeks. And that even though the two teams being compared play 18 games in the same league it doesn't matter that one is 3.5 games ahead of the other - you still think it's ok that they're 20-25 spots ahead of the team with the much better conference record?

Under the current selection criteria it makes sense. If you are going to tell me that I think the selection criteria is without faults (the false narrative game that you are playing above). I never said that.

I never said your first post did not make sense. It points out faults that are there. But I just pointed out that the committee is emphasizing elite results, when you claimed they were now emphasizing Nov/Dec over regular season games. For some it may, for other it won't. It purely depends on the distribution of games. But as a whole they are choosing one period over the other for all teams.

It's time for a March tradition.
IGNORED ... again. You weren't too bad above, and but I can picture you getting much worse or me getting more agitated with you,
Makes my time on the board much more pleasant.


EDIT FOR OTHERS - At this point I may well be in the wrong on this above discussion. But there all old wounds here, and no point bringing the board down with discussions that never go well because of prior frustrations.

 

[bpo57]

Under the current selection criteria it makes sense. If you are going to tell me that I think the selection criteria is without faults (the false narrative game that you are playing above). I never said that.

I never said your first post did not make sense. It points out faults that are there. But I just pointed out that the committee is emphasizing elite results, when you claimed they were now emphasizing Nov/Dec over regular season games. For some it may, for other it won't. It purely depends on the distribution of games. But as a whole they are choosing one period over the other for all teams.

It's time for a March tradition.
IGNORED ... again. You weren't too bad above, and but I can picture you getting much worse or me getting more agitated with you,
Makes my time on the board much more pleasant.


EDIT FOR OTHERS - At this point I may well be in the wrong on this above discussion. But there all old wounds here, and no point bringing the board down with discussions that never go well because of prior frustrations.

jncuse, seriously, you have to relax. This is not war and peace. We all have different opinions and there is no harm in exchanging those views. Isn't that what the board is for?

As to your first point, yeah I think the current selection criteria is flawed. I'm ok with the total body of work argument tho it risks the overseeding and underseeding point I made above where a team changes rather dramatically over the course of a season (good or bad).

I also think it's flawed to put major emphasis on ELITE wins while downplaying or ignoring numerous bad losses. Who knows? Maybe SJU has a shot to get to the Dance - can't have two more impressive ELITE wins than they have.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Maybe SJU has a shot to get to the Dance - can't have two more impressive ELITE wins than they have.

Obviously, it’s about total body of work. AZ State has 19 wins, an RPI of 30, is 5-3 against the top 50, and beat USC head to head two weeks ago. USC has a lower RPI, is 2-5 against the Top 50, and has a key player out, right? Maybe that has something to do with it. USC hasn’t beaten anyone, while ASU has beaten two Top 10 teams, one on the road. I mean, USC smoked KU at KU.

 

[bpo57]

Obviously, it’s about total body of work. AZ State has 19 wins, an RPI of 30, is 5-3 against the top 50, and beat USC head to head two weeks ago. USC has a lower RPI, is 2-5 against the Top 50, and has a key player out, right? Maybe that has something to do with it. USC hasn’t beaten anyone, while ASU has beaten two Top 10 teams, one on the road. I mean, USC smoked KU at KU.

That's pretty much true except you left out the fact that USC is beating teams in the Pac-12 that ASU has been losing to. To the tune of a 3.5 game lead over them. Maybe I'm out of line here but I think losses matter. If you want to ignore that then yeah ASU should be six lines ahead of USC. Do you think ASU deserves to be a six seed?

As for RPI it isn't worth much more than toilet paper. I thought that was proven a long time ago. But if you do care about the RPI then USC is pretty close to ASU at 37.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

That's pretty much true except you left out the fact that USC is beating teams in the Pac-12 that ASU has been losing to. To the tune of a 3.5 game lead over them. Maybe I'm out of line here but I think losses matter. If you want to ignore that then yeah ASU should be six lines ahead of USC. Do you think ASU deserves to be a six seed?

As for RPI it isn't worth much more than toilet paper. I thought that was proven a long time ago. But if you do care about the RPI then USC is pretty close to ASU at 37.

Probably don’t deserve to be a 6 seed, and they probably won’t be. But their resume is a lot better than USC’s, who has not beaten anyone.

 

[bpo57]

Probably don’t deserve to be a 6 seed, and they probably won’t be. But their resume is a lot better than USC’s, who has not beaten anyone.

Yeah they haven't beaten anybody except several teams that ASU can't beat.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Yeah they haven't beaten anybody except several teams that ASU can't beat.

I guess that doesn’t mean much when they lost head to head to ASU. Nobody cares. USC racked up wins against lesser teams. Have to beat someone. They haven’t.

 

[bpo57]

I guess that doesn’t mean much when they lost head to head to ASU. Nobody cares. USC racked up wins against lesser teams. Have to beat someone. They haven’t.

That's right I forgot. One head to head match-up would have far greater impact than 18 conference games. lol

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

That's right I forgot. One head to head match-up would have far greater impact than 18 conference games. lol

Well, one head to head meeting, ASU with the lower RPI, 5 Top 50 wins vs. 2, and really good wins on the road versus zero quality wins. yup. Not really close. :bat:

 

[Shark58]

probably not being caught on tape is a good idea too

 

[Marty McFly]

I really think we need to get a committee full of basketball folks who actually want the best teams in the dance. seeding usually follows rpi to some degree, but those last handful, especially in a year with little separation between teams, will I fear be like throwing darts (of course they'll use road wins, or whatever to make their argument). I would trust folks like Bilas, Raf, other former coaches who actually want to get it right (both seeding and teams) and not just mail it in, when the going gets tough and you actually have to think about teams... I chuckle a little because folks on here and elsewhere are way more qualified at this process than the actual folks doing it!

 

[Orangefan1]

I’m pretty sure the bubble watch will be pointless after the fbi info drops.

 

[Knicks411]

That's pretty much true except you left out the fact that USC is beating teams in the Pac-12 that ASU has been losing to. To the tune of a 3.5 game lead over them. Maybe I'm out of line here but I think losses matter. If you want to ignore that then yeah ASU should be six lines ahead of USC. Do you think ASU deserves to be a six seed?

As for RPI it isn't worth much more than toilet paper. I thought that was proven a long time ago. But if you do care about the RPI then USC is pretty close to ASU at 37.

I guess I'm just not sure how true this is. the schedule isn't identical. (Also, you keep mentioning 2 non conference wins, ASU has 3 non conf wins better than anything USC has, plus USC lost to Princeton, at home, which is a worse loss than anything ASU has in or out of conf)

The teams have played 10 games against the same opponent (opponent and location). Well, it's really 9, plus their head to head. Here is the breakdown of those 9

at Arizona
at Coloardo
Oregon
Oregon State
at Stanford
at Cal
Utah
Colorado
At Oregon

For what it's worth, in those 9 games, USC has outplayed ASU, they are 7-2 compared to 3-6. However, I think you should add in the head to head, so it's 7-3 for USC and 4-6 for ASU. S0, a 2 game lead. That's not nothing. Here are the 5 games ASU has played that USC hasn't

at Utah- W
at Wash- L
at Wash St-W
UCLA- W
Arizona- L

So the 5 teams ASU has played that USC hasn't have a combined record in league play of 43-34. 55.6 win%. Also includes 3 road games out of 5.

There are 6 games SC has played that ASU hasn't. They are
Wash
Wash State
at Oregon State
Stanford
Cal
@UCLA

Those 6 teams have a combined conf record of 37-54, and that includes 4 home games for USC. 41% win

Schedule has clearly favored USC. The worst team in the conference is Cal, they play USC twice. ASU once. The best team is Arizona, they play ASU twice, USC once.

 

[bpo57]

I guess I'm just not sure how true this is. the schedule isn't identical. (Also, you keep mentioning 2 non conference wins, ASU has 3 non conf wins better than anything USC has, plus USC lost to Princeton, at home, which is a worse loss than anything ASU has in or out of conf)

The teams have played 10 games against the same opponent (opponent and location). Well, it's really 9, plus their head to head. Here is the breakdown of those 9

at Arizona
at Coloardo
Oregon
Oregon State
at Stanford
at Cal
Utah
Colorado
At Oregon

For what it's worth, in those 9 games, USC has outplayed ASU, they are 7-2 compared to 3-6. However, I think you should add in the head to head, so it's 7-3 for USC and 4-6 for ASU. S0, a 2 game lead. That's not nothing. Here are the 5 games ASU has played that USC hasn't

at Utah- W
at Wash- L
at Wash St-W
UCLA- W
Arizona- L

So the 5 teams ASU has played that USC hasn't have a combined record in league play of 43-34. 55.6 win%. Also includes 3 road games out of 5.

There are 6 games SC has played that ASU hasn't. They are
Wash
Wash State
at Oregon State
Stanford
Cal
@UCLA

Those 6 teams have a combined conf record of 37-54, and that includes 4 home games for USC. 41% win

Schedule has clearly favored USC. The worst team in the conference is Cal, they play USC twice. ASU once. The best team is Arizona, they play ASU twice, USC once.

Two points (the second one has been missed over and over here):

1) How is 7-3 versus 4-6 a two game lead?

2) If you want to say at this point that ASU is more deserving than USC of a bid then that's fine. I'm not saying otherwise. But six seed lines better? And a six seed for ASU? No way.

 

[bpo57]

I’m pretty sure the bubble watch will be pointless after the fbi info drops.

Given typical NCAA investigations then that ought to really disrupt the 2021 NCAAT.

 

[Knicks411]

Two points (the second one has been missed over and over here):

1) How is 7-3 versus 4-6 a two game lead?

2) If you want to say at this point that ASU is more deserving than USC of a bid then that's fine. I'm not saying otherwise. But six seed lines better? And a six seed for ASU? No way.

1) Because I can't do math. You're right.

2) I don't know if 6 seed lines is the right number, but ASU clearly has the better resume, and the conf schedules are different enough that I don't think you can just point at the conf records as being indicative of anything

 

[bpo57]

1) Because I can't do math. You're right.

2) I don't know if 6 seed lines is the right number, but ASU clearly has the better resume, and the conf schedules are different enough that I don't think you can just point at the conf records as being indicative of anything

Fair enough.

I don't think the schedules are all that different in totality - one notable difference is with Zona and yet USC plays UCLA 2x and ASU plays them only 1x - but I would acknowledge to date that ASU has played a tougher conference schedule. Unfortunately for them they're 3.5 games behind USC and sitting in 8th place in a down Pac-12 behind a bunch of teams that won't get invited. Conference results should matter at least a little bit, no?

My beef isn't that USC is #12 but rather how on earth is ASU #6? Kind of have the same beef with Miami. How are they #8 (were recently #6) when I don't see any real difference between them and SU at #12.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Louisville not dead yet. Leading 68-63 @ VTech with 1:30 left. Would be a HUGE win even though I don’t think they are a Tourney team, regardless.

 

[bpo57]

Louisville not dead yet. Leading 68-63 @ VTech with 1:30 left. Would be a HUGE win even though I don’t think they are a Tourney team, regardless.

Yeah def would keep them in the mix.

 

[Knicks411]

This thread made me bet USC +4.5 today. just saying

 

[bpo57]

This thread made me bet USC +4.5 today. just saying

Nice. Looking good so far. Utah is just ok but that's a tough road venue. Good luck!

 

[bpo57]

This thread made me bet USC +4.5 today. just saying

Cha ching.

 

[Knicks411]

Cha ching.

Utah kept trying to make it a game until that final run. I knew I loved USC! 9 seed IMO

 

[bpo57]

Utah kept trying to make it a game until that final run. I knew I loved USC! 9 seed IMO

Haha. 12-5 in the P-12, AZ down for the count, USC is a mortal lock for the tourney.

 

[bpo57]

The ASU unraveling continues. Down 15 with eight min to play, they rally back to tie OSU only to lose by four. 7-9 in the P-12, firmly in 8th place.