The committee told us that conference record means nothing

[Cusefan0307]

We went 10-6 in the 2007 Big East and won a tournament game in NYC and still didn’t get in. Teams need to schedule in the OOC. Jim Boeheim learned this and it’s been our saving grace two out of the past 3 years.

 

[Knicks411]

I hear ya. My point, sorry to repeat, is that I understand why USC's P-12 wins are de-valued. Just struggling to understand why ASU's losses to those same teams are not penalized. You made a good point about USC beating only one tournament team yet ASU lost to seven different P-12 teams.

Essentially ASU is living off of two nights (Xavier and KU) where they shot 13-27 and 14-28 from 3. Shooting the lights out in those two games got them into the tourney and enabled them to get away with a putrid performance in their weak conference.

I think that's essentially right. Maybe you disagree, that's fine, but I think it's in line with what the committee has said they value. 2 road/neutral victories over #1 seeds; that's pretty amazing. Covers for a lot of sins. They also beat K-State on a neutral. Obviously not a win like the first 2, but a neutal site win over a 9 seed, not nothing

 

[Knicks411]

Uh I would not say never. Back in the day (ten years ago +) if you were five games behind another conference member you had no chance of getting in ahead of them.

Conf record mattered a lot more when conferences were smaller and teams played similar, if not identical, conference schedules.

 

[NKR1978]

I'm trying to get my head around the context where USC can go 14-7 in the Pac-12 and ASU goes 8-11 and yet ASU gets the nod over USC. Somehow a 20 game sample is deemed irrelevant. If SU was dinged in that scenario we'd all be barking at the moon, and rightfully so.

The committee told us that the overall record is what matters. ASU had great OOC wins.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

It is because most conferences don’t play balanced schedules.
The Big East and Big XII do
They have true round robins.
The ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12, SEC don’t play true round robins so the committee has to analyze those teams conference schedules as to who they played and where.

And non conference schedules are balanced?

 

[SoBeCuse]

Anybody thinks they wanted Trae Young in there? OSU beat them twice, beat Kansas twice. 7 wins against the field. Beat Florida St. Their NCSOS wasn’t very good and they lost a couple there to Wichita St and Arkansas but that team looked real solid to me the last few weeks of the year.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

Conf record mattered a lot more when conferences were smaller and teams played similar, if not identical, conference schedules.

This. When you play an unbalanced conference schedule, comparing conference records means little or nothing. Its also why the ACC tourney seeding is so screwed up. Not playing a home and away against every team has made conference standings meaningless.

 

[bpo57]

I think that's essentially right. Maybe you disagree, that's fine, but I think it's in line with what the committee has said they value. 2 road/neutral victories over #1 seeds; that's pretty amazing. Covers for a lot of sins. They also beat K-State on a neutral. Obviously not a win like the first 2, but a neutal site win over a 9 seed, not nothing

You're def right - the Committee played it the way they said they would. I have a beef with their criteria as I think they place too much emphasis on the OOC. But hey that's just my opinion. It ends up skewing seedings where you add teams like ASU and OU to the mix. It also hoses the mid-majors who don't have the same opportunities for quadrant one wins. There ought to be a rule that every power con team has to play one road game each year against a non power con team. But that will never happen.

 

[bpo57]

The committee told us that the overall record is what matters. ASU had great OOC wins.

And very bad conference losses.

 

[Cusefan0307]

You're def right - the Committee played it the way they said they would. I have a beef with their criteria as I think they place too much emphasis on the OOC. But hey that's just my opinion. It ends up skewing seedings where you add teams like ASU and OU to the mix. It also hoses the mid-majors who don't have the same opportunities for quadrant one wins. There ought to be a rule that every power con team has to play one road game each year against a non power con team. But that will never happen.

If you're a good mid major schedule better teams. St Mary's declined games against Power conference opponents. They dug their own grave.

Rhode Island and St. Bonaventure went out and played power teams.

 

[bpo57]

Anybody thinks they wanted Trae Young in there? OSU beat them twice, beat Kansas twice. 7 wins against the field. Beat Florida St. Their NCSOS wasn’t very good and they lost a couple there to Wichita St and Arkansas but that team looked real solid to me the last few weeks of the year.

Of course. Ya think maybe the NCAA did not want Ok State in there given that they were, like USC and L'ville, caught up in the latest scandals.

 

[Alsacs]

And non conference schedules are balanced?

You are right but power teams pretty much control their nonconference schedules.
They don’t control their conference schedules.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Uh I would not say never. Back in the day (ten years ago +) if you were five games behind another conference member you had no chance of getting in ahead of them.

Ok. I will amend my statement.

Conference record hasn’t mattered in over ten years.

 

[Rage4CUSE]

USC did something pretty impressive; they went 14-7 in Pac 12 play (including the conf tournament) and didn't win a single game in conf against a team that made the tournament.

As far as I can tell, they won a single game against a tournament team (New Mexico State).

That is actually quite amazing. Wow the Pac-12 was a dumpster fire this year.

 

[bpo57]

If you're a good mid major schedule better teams. St Mary's declined games against Power conference opponents. They dug their own grave.

Rhode Island and St. Bonaventure went out and played power teams.

No doubt - I agree with that. But then for every St. Mary's there is a Loyola Chicago. NC State was scheduled to play them at Loyola this year. NC State paid Loyola a nice chunk of change to get out of the game. St. Mary's is an outlier - good luck getting a power con to come your way if you're a mid major.

 

[Alsacs]

No doubt - I agree with that. But then for every St. Mary's there is a Loyola Chicago. NC State was scheduled to play them at Loyola this year. NC State paid Loyola a nice chunk of change to get out of the game. St. Mary's is an outlier - good luck getting a power con to come your way if you're a mid major.

Rhode Island offered St.Mary’s a home/home this year with the game at St.Mary’s.
St.Mary’s declined and Rhode Island played at Nevada instead.
Nevada got an at-large.

St. Mary’s also lost to Georgia and Washington State in Wooden Legacy.
They didn’t challenge themselves in the nonconference. They could probably get enough home/homes to get an at-large. Nevada offered them one as well.

 

[Cusefan0307]

No doubt - I agree with that. But then for every St. Mary's there is a Loyola Chicago. NC State was scheduled to play them at Loyola this year. NC State paid Loyola a nice chunk of change to get out of the game. St. Mary's is an outlier - good luck getting a power con to come your way if you're a mid major.

If you're a power team that is close to the bubble it benefits you to schedule good mid majors as well. Winning a bunch of power conference games isn't going to help those schools either. Just ask Nebraska and OKST.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Of course. Ya think maybe the NCAA did not want Ok State in there given that they were, like USC and L'ville, caught up in the latest scandals.

I forgot they were one of the teams involved in the scandals. It’s all making more sense now. A chance for these NCAA AD’s/admins to flex their muscles somewhat :bat:.

 

[bpo57]

This. When you play an unbalanced conference schedule, comparing conference records means little or nothing. Its also why the ACC tourney seeding is so screwed up. Not playing a home and away against every team has made conference standings meaningless.

That's a fair point but it doesn't apply in the USC/ASU debate. Their P-12 records (incl tournament play) were pretty much even in terms of SOS.

 

[bpo57]

I forgot they were one of the teams involved in the scandals. It’s all making more sense now. A chance for these NCAA AD’s/admins to flex their muscles somewhat :bat:.

Yup. Btw look at the roads that Mich State and Arizona have to travel. You know the NCAA wants neither one of them around near the end so they have brutal roads to get to the F4.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Yup. Btw look at the roads that Mich State and Arizona have to travel. You know the NCAA wants neither one of them around near the end so they have brutal roads to get to the F4.

Yup. UK has a great chance to win that game against Arizona. TCU or obviously Duke is a problem for MSU.

 

[Chris02M]

I'm trying to get my head around the context where USC can go 14-7 in the Pac-12 and ASU goes 8-11 and yet ASU gets the nod over USC. Somehow a 20 game sample is deemed irrelevant. If SU was dinged in that scenario we'd all be barking at the moon, and rightfully so.

they lost to a 226 rpi team in princeton at home i believe

 

[Jake]

We should all stop trying to figure out USC, Okie St and L-vile.

The FBI replaced the RPI in their cases.

The other snubs are straight criteria related.

 

[Briancuse]

You yourself essentially said that USC didn't beat anybody in their conference - I can't argue against that btw - yet ASU lost 11 games in that same weak conference. Help me out here - how does that make any sense? And how does the word overlook not apply?

Asu also beat two one seeds.

 

[Scooch]

And very bad conference losses.

Seems like that quality wins are much more highly valued than bad losses are penalized. A program is better off grabbing OOC pelts and making sure it's conference record is just not terrible.

The thing that is weird is that there is no transference at play. Beating top teams is valuable, but beating a team that beat the top teams isn't valued.