Two atrocities...

[cuseincincy]

May I point out a 3rd?

Im sure I will read all about how good they all are but...UK is St Peters, San Francisco or Murray St. Away from the Sweet 16.

 

[TinyManInside]

Virginia Tech has the resume of an 11 seed. No issues with that seeding IMmo

Your logo at first glance looks like a huge spider

LOL. This is like the 4th time someone on this board has mentioned that.

It's actually a Jacob Sheep. They are the most #metal of all sheep, complete with 4 horns. Like, Gojira level metal.

In your honor, I will change it to a different picture of a different Jacob Sheep. Don't ask me why I have 30+ pictures of Jacob Sheep on my computer.

 

[TinyManInside]

Virginia Tech has the resume of an 11 seed. No issues with that seeding IMmo

Your logo at first glance looks like a huge spider

I have changed it in your honor. Hopefully this Jacob Sheep looks as much like a giant spider as the last one.

 

[chugg21]

My wife is an Aggie and they had 0 wins against a single top 20 team prior to Friday and also had an 8 game losing streak in conference play. Their resume was crap and they are whining about it.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

I have changed it in your honor. Hopefully this Jacob Sheep looks as much like a giant spider as the last one.

This looks like Jacob Degrom when he was a hair bag

 

[Sherman20]

Rutgers should not be in.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

ACC schools got screwed. This committee obviously capped based on conference. You look at the teams that missed getting in and the teams that got in and it is easy to see what they did. They are supposed to take the 36 best at large teams. They didn't. How does the below team make it in?


Overall 24-9
Conference 10-6 (4th in a mid major and 0-4 vs top 2 in conf)
Conference Tournament 1-1 (beat 5 seed lost to 1 seed)
Record vs NCAAT teams 2-6 (W at home vs 10 seed auto and W neutral vs 12 seed auto)
Record vs NIT teams 4-1 (2-1 vs 2 seed and 2-0 vs 5 seed)
Best Road W 5 seed in NIT
Record vs non NCAA/NIT 18-2

There are probably a half dozen mid majors with better resumes.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

In my opinion, a win in mid-November should have the same exact value as a win in early March. I put zero value in who is playing best "as of late."

In general I agree, but factors like injuries, etc, should be factors as well.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

ACC schools got screwed. This committee obviously capped based on conference. You look at the teams that missed getting in and the teams that got in and it is easy to see what they did. They are supposed to take the 36 best at large teams. They didn't. How does the below team make it in?


Overall 24-9
Conference 10-6 (4th in a mid major and 0-4 vs top 2 in conf)
Conference Tournament 1-1 (beat 5 seed lost to 1 seed)
Record vs NCAAT teams 2-6 (W at home vs 10 seed auto and W neutral vs 12 seed auto)
Record vs NIT teams 4-1 (2-1 vs 2 seed and 2-0 vs 5 seed)
Best Road W 5 seed in NIT
Record vs non NCAA/NIT 18-2

There are probably a half dozen mid majors with better resumes.

Another team that makes no sense to me...

Overall 25-8
Conference 13-5 (4th place in a mid major and 2-4 vs Top 3 in conf)
Conference Tournament 1-1 (beat 5 seed lost to 1 seed)
Record vs NCAAT teams 2-5 (W at home vs 8 seed auto and OT W at home vs 6 seed at large)
Record vs NIT teams 3-0 (2-0 vs 4 seed and W neutral vs 6 seed)
Best Road W 4 seed in NIT
Record vs non NCAA/NIT 20-3

Based on the seedings they were 1-2 Top 25 teams, 1-3 vs 26-50, 2-0 vs 51-75, 1-0 vs 76-100, and had 3 losses to teams outside the Top 100. They played no one and beat no one.

These NET rankings need to go as they are way off base.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Another team that makes no sense to me...

Overall 25-8
Conference 13-5 (4th place in a mid major and 2-4 vs Top 3 in conf)
Conference Tournament 1-1 (beat 5 seed lost to 1 seed)
Record vs NCAAT teams 2-5 (W at home vs 8 seed auto and OT W at home vs 6 seed at large)
Record vs NIT teams 3-0 (2-0 vs 4 seed and W neutral vs 6 seed)
Best Road W 4 seed in NIT
Record vs non NCAA/NIT 20-3

Based on the seedings they were 1-2 Top 25 teams, 1-3 vs 26-50, 2-0 vs 51-75, 1-0 vs 76-100, and had 3 losses to teams outside the Top 100. They played no one and beat no one.

These NET rankings need to go as they are way off base.

Meanwhile A&M was 5-9 vs NCAAT teams and 3-1 vs NIT teams and gets left out.

 

[CousCuse]

Meanwhile A&M was 5-9 vs NCAAT teams and 3-1 vs NIT teams and gets left out.

Couldn't you have told us who the 2 mid-major teams are? My guess is San Fran Dons and maybe St Mary's Gaels.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Meanwhile A&M was 5-9 vs NCAAT teams and 3-1 vs NIT teams and gets left out.

The A10 got screwed too. IMO they were the best mid major this year. So they get 2 teams while the MWC, which IMO isn't even close to as good, gets 4 teams?

How are the Bonnies not worthy vs the other two teams I listed? Yet they get a 5 seed in the NIT?

Overall 20-9
Conference 12-5 (4th place in a mid major)
Conference Tournament 0-1 (lost to 5 seed)
Record vs NCAAT teams 3-4 (W neutral vs 8 seed auto, W neutral vs 9 seed at large, W vs 12 seed auto)
Record vs NIT teams 3-4 (2-1 vs a 3 seed, 1-1 vs a 3 seed, L at 1 seed, L 6 seed)
Best Road W 3 seed in NIT
Record vs non NCAA/NIT 14-1

 

[CousCuse]

The A10 got screwed too. IMO they were the best mid major this year. So they get 2 teams while the MWC, which IMO isn't even close to as good, gets 4 teams?

How are the Bonnies not worthy vs the other two teams I listed? Yet they get a 5 seed in the NIT?

Overall 20-9
Conference 12-5 (4th place in a mid major)
Conference Tournament 0-1 (lost to 5 seed)
Record vs NCAAT teams 3-4 (W neutral vs 8 seed auto, W neutral vs 9 seed at large, W vs 12 seed auto)
Record vs NIT teams 3-4 (2-1 vs a 3 seed, 1-1 vs a 3 seed, L at 1 seed, L 6 seed)
Best Road W 3 seed in NIT
Record vs non NCAA/NIT 14-1

There is no way that the WCC is a 3 bid conference.

 

[RandygoCuse]

This pushes me further towards the conference tournaments are worthless money grabs tribe

If they got rid of the conference tournaments tomorrow, I'd be fine with it. This is especially true for the 1-bid conferences.

 

[Dave]

In my opinion, a win in mid-November should have the same exact value as a win in early March. I put zero value in who is playing best "as of late."

Gotta disagree. Who is a team really? The guys working the early kinks out or the one building momentum late in the year?

 

[Marty McFly]

teams have figured out how to game the "net".

 

[Madbiker]

The trend seems the committee is discounting the conference tournament results more each year.

 

[RandygoCuse]

Gotta disagree. Who is a team really? The guys working the early kinks out or the one building momentum late in the year?

Yup, this is the logic behind weighting games more heavily in March. After you've played together longer, you more closely match who your are as a team.

 

[donniesyracuse]

Yup, this is the logic behind weighting games more heavily in March. After you've played together longer, you more closely match who your are as a team.

The committee is never clear on whether the tournament is supposed to be for the best teams or for the teams who had the best seasons. If it is the former, then March wins are more important. If it is the latter, then November and March wins are equal.

 

[NKR1978]

Syracuse went from not in the tournament to a 5 seed in 2006. Virginia Tech got jobbed

Syracuse was a bubble team and beat much better teams than what VT beat. Does anyone outside the committee think Duke is a top 8 team?

 

[longtimefan]

That helps a lot too!

It's amazing to me that an ACC team can go 15-5 in conference and yet only get 1 Q1 victory in those games.

Which reverts back to your point that games played before Jan 1 are extremely important.

Next season, we need to remember this, and root for ACC teams to do well in the early season tournaments and the B1G Challenge.

 

[RandygoCuse]

The committee is never clear on whether the tournament is supposed to be for the best teams or for the teams who had the best seasons. If it is the former, then March wins are more important. If it is the latter, then November and March wins are equal.

Good point - I guess I'm conflicted because I'm in favor of giving more weight to games later in the season (or less weight to early losses if they seem like "flukes") but I also believe the tournament should be based on successful seasons, not the most talented teams. I guess I'd rationalize my beliefs by saying that the team found a path to success.