(03-15-2015 08:09 PM)mastelms Wrote:  Can someone explain why the watered down Big East gets treated like a power conference with 60% of the conference making the tournament?

I was watching something this morning about which power conference champ would go out early. The announcer said none of the power conference champs would lose first weekend and included Villanova as one of the 6 power conference champs.

(03-15-2015 09:55 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 09:16 PM)50Cent Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 08:22 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 08:09 PM)mastelms Wrote:  Can someone explain why the watered down Big East gets treated like a power conference with 60% of the conference making the tournament?

Because the Committee is made up of administrators and not basketball people. That would be why they use lame explanations like "passes the eye test."

Which begs the question if they aren't basketball people how do they give the eye test?

They are just parroting a line.
If they were really knowledgeable about D1 college basketball they would be able to list criteria used and state clearly how a particular team did or didn't measure up to that criteria and not just say "passes the eye test as the reason for letting a team in."

The committee chair said they let UCLA in "because they were coming on late in the season." Coming on? That is their criteria.

Georgetown got a 4 because they passed the eye test. WTH?

Look... UCLA is in there because their name is "UCLA." That's really it. If they were any other team, they wouldn't be in there. It's a similar situation as to why Duke is so highly seeded. Certain teams and certain conferences get a name bump.

For the record, Cincinnati is one of those teams as well.

(03-15-2015 10:06 PM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 08:09 PM)mastelms Wrote:  Can someone explain why the watered down Big East gets treated like a power conference with 60% of the conference making the tournament?

I was watching something this morning about which power conference champ would go out early. The announcer said none of the power conference champs would lose first weekend and included Villanova as one of the 6 power conference champs.

Sure... In addition to the "Power-5" football conferences, the Big East, the A-10, and the WCC are considered POWER conferences as well. And the Big East is getting Power money to back it up.

But in the new Division 1, there have to be some other conferences that get invited to sit at the table to flesh out the rest of the sports in addition to the Power-5 football conferences. (Notice, the "American" is nowhere on that list... Nor will it be.)

(03-15-2015 07:21 PM)SeniorBearcat Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 07:19 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Temple and Tulsa were close, but not good enough this year. UConn was talented enough but didn't take care of business when they needed to. The worst part of this league is that the bottom 5 are really really really really really really really bad.

And yet we managed to lose to 2 of them ECU and TULN...that is the difference in Cincinnati getting a 6-7 seed.

(03-15-2015 07:24 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  and I do not see that last part of your comment changing anytime soon, however.

and yet at the end of the day, the rest of the conference will be sitting their asses at home on thursday

(03-16-2015 01:46 AM)InspectorHound Wrote:  and yet at the end of the day, the rest of the conference will be sitting their asses at home on thursday

(There is just something about ************s from Ohio)

So did you come by to actually add to the discussion or to just be a clown who is pouting about Temple getting left out of a bowl and the tourney in the same year? Feel better now?

(03-16-2015 05:08 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  So did you come by to actually add to the discussion or to just be a clown who is pouting about Temple getting left out of a bowl and the tourney in the same year? Feel better now?

Holy crap, it followed us back here.

(03-15-2015 10:27 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 09:55 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 09:16 PM)50Cent Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 08:22 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 08:09 PM)mastelms Wrote:  Can someone explain why the watered down Big East gets treated like a power conference with 60% of the conference making the tournament?

Because the Committee is made up of administrators and not basketball people. That would be why they use lame explanations like "passes the eye test."

Which begs the question if they aren't basketball people how do they give the eye test?

They are just parroting a line.
If they were really knowledgeable about D1 college basketball they would be able to list criteria used and state clearly how a particular team did or didn't measure up to that criteria and not just say "passes the eye test as the reason for letting a team in."

The committee chair said they let UCLA in "because they were coming on late in the season." Coming on? That is their criteria.

Georgetown got a 4 because they passed the eye test. WTH?

Look... UCLA is in there because their name is "UCLA." That's really it. If they were any other team, they wouldn't be in there. It's a similar situation as to why Duke is so highly seeded. Certain teams and certain conferences get a name bump.

For the record, Cincinnati is one of those teams as well.

Duke has pretty much been granted emeritus status and tenure as the 1, 2 at worst, playing in North Carolina.

The eye test is the stupidest term ever bandied about by the committee. I get it. You can't make everyone happy. The bubble can be more a mosh pit than an orderly queue. But UCLA and Indiana are proof this year with their seeds that the committee was like a school girl fascinated with the big name. And it really gives credence to those who say these brackets and selections are manufactured for TV money.

It's really naive to think that CBS and it's billions don't prefer Los Angeles market to be included...or a marketable name like Indiana to be talked about this week.

It's unfortunate. You hope that sports, at least college sports, could be about fair play and level fields but that pipe dream left the station many many years ago.

I am fine with indiana in. they at least beat some good teams. ucla is absurd.

(03-15-2015 10:27 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 09:55 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 09:16 PM)50Cent Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 08:22 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 08:09 PM)mastelms Wrote:  Can someone explain why the watered down Big East gets treated like a power conference with 60% of the conference making the tournament?

Because the Committee is made up of administrators and not basketball people. That would be why they use lame explanations like "passes the eye test."

Which begs the question if they aren't basketball people how do they give the eye test?

They are just parroting a line.
If they were really knowledgeable about D1 college basketball they would be able to list criteria used and state clearly how a particular team did or didn't measure up to that criteria and not just say "passes the eye test as the reason for letting a team in."

The committee chair said they let UCLA in "because they were coming on late in the season." Coming on? That is their criteria.

Georgetown got a 4 because they passed the eye test. WTH?

Look... UCLA is in there because their name is "UCLA." That's really it. If they were any other team, they wouldn't be in there. It's a similar situation as to why Duke is so highly seeded. Certain teams and certain conferences get a name bump.

For the record, Cincinnati is one of those teams as well.

Duke is highly rated because they beat Louisville on the road, beat Virginia on the road, beat North Carolina on the road, beat Wisconsin on the road...took care of both AAC teams they played by double figures...need I go on?

True but Indiana also was just 4-9 against top 50. And 8-12 against top 100. Same argument for Texas and UCLA. UCLA 2-8 vs top 50 and 5-10 vs top 100. That's a joke. Yeah they beat some teams but they lost more than they won against teams that were tourney level teams. This is a tourney for the national championship and middle of the pack big conference teams already proved they can't finish in the top 1/3 of their conference...or even top half.

I really think you should have to finish in top half of your conference and at least be .500 in your conference.

Sure Indiana played gtown and Lousiville and butler OOC but the also played 4 sub 300 rpi teams. Instead of scheduling big name teams OOC schedule a Richmond home and home or a Colorado state. UCLA played several dogs from the great northwest but doesn't play top mid majors home and home. This is the problem. It's catch 22...can't play a better schedule when the big boys don't schedule you.

(03-15-2015 08:09 PM)mastelms Wrote:  Can someone explain why the watered down Big East gets treated like a power conference with 60% of the conference making the tournament?

Quite frankly, this year, the new Big East is better than the AAC from top to bottom and unless this conference gets better past the top 2, it always will.

I think it was Seth Davis (Or maybe Gottleib) that was complaining about Texas and UCLA hard and made great points about them having built in quality games into their league schedule, but they should not be rewarded for not taking care of business. So what that they lost 8 times to top 25 teams, beat some of them. Plus with everyone high in the league, it inflates everyone's RPI. I'm not saying you have to go .500 against those elite teams, but 3-12 doesn't cut it. Heck 5-10 is borderline. Some years I may not care, but when you have schools like Colorado State and Temple with arguably better resumes (And Temple playing a third of the season with a couple big guns out), it is bogus. IU probably deserved it and Texas was pretty close, so it is hard to argue against them, though I still think with so many chances and so few wins, they should not have gotten the nod.

UCLA was ludacris and had no business being in the tourney and honestly no business being a 1 seed in the NIT. Yeah they won some games late, against the dredges of the Pac-12. Not a quality win to be found in this so-called late run. Dayton being in the play-in game and the team to get bumped out of the tourney if UConn won was ridiculous as well. Dayton was at least a 10 seed. Georgetown and XU were way over-seeded, probably be a good 2 lines. The Big East is a good conference, but I think they are still riding on what the Big East used to be before five of the top teams left. SMU should have been higher as the bulk of their losses were when they were missing key guys. Not overly impressed with the S curve as there seem to be too many teams that seem over/under-seeded.

(03-16-2015 07:28 AM)50Cent Wrote:  Sure Indiana played gtown and Lousiville and butler OOC but the also played 4 sub 300 rpi teams. Instead of scheduling big name teams OOC schedule a Richmond home and home or a Colorado state. UCLA played several dogs from the great northwest but doesn't play top mid majors home and home. This is the problem. It's catch 22...can't play a better schedule when the big boys don't schedule you.

If you want to improve your schedule, take the nice money bag and don't demand big-time programs play a return game.

If you're a small or mid-major program, you'll be expected to travel. Just the way it is.

(03-16-2015 07:28 AM)50Cent Wrote:  I really think you should have to finish in top half of your conference and at least be .500 in your conference.

All conferences aren't created equal, so that's just not realistic. Most years, finishing below .500 in your conference will take you out of contention on it's own.