Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
**The official NCAA Tournament thread**
Author Message
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 15,944
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 333
I Root For: Houston
Location: Near Seawall Town
Post: #151
RE: **The official NCAA Tournament thread**
I see where you're coming from but Arlington had one too many bad losses in conference. Of the NCAA Tournament caliber teams they played, they only beat St. Mary's. TSU and Mount Saint also made the Dance but would not have sniffed anything without an auto-bid. For that matter, neither would Florida Gulf Coast but they are a team that could have gotten an at-large with a few more wins. They picked a bad year to play and beat Texas FWIW.

So no, Arlington didn't deserve an invite and being blown out in their conference tournament semifinals was the nail in the coffin. At the very least they are making up for it by being a step away from the NIT semifinals.
03-21-2017 01:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,480
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 54
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #152
RE: **The official NCAA Tournament thread**
(03-21-2017 01:01 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  I see where you're coming from but Arlington had one too many bad losses in conference. Of the NCAA Tournament caliber teams they played, they only beat St. Mary's. TSU and Mount Saint also made the Dance but would not have sniffed anything without an auto-bid. For that matter, neither would Florida Gulf Coast but they are a team that could have gotten an at-large with a few more wins. They picked a bad year to play and beat Texas FWIW.

So no, Arlington didn't deserve an invite and being blown out in their conference tournament semifinals was the nail in the coffin. At the very least they are making up for it by being a step away from the NIT semifinals.

I'm in the camp of thinking no at-large deserves a bid. They're at-larges. So, we're not totally in disagreement over some of this. And, at the end, they're all kind of a big blob of mediocrity. The issue becomes, what value trumps what? I don't disagree that UTA has its flaws. But, you win your conference outright, you play nine games in the non-conference on the road (and let's be honest about that one...who is really doing that in the majors?), you beat a top 20 RPI team, you lose to two in the top 25...all three of them on the road. The RPI, the non-conference SOS and RPI all respectable...they do have more going for them than others. It's just that you can't look past the bad teams in the Sun Belt.

When it comes to the metrics, there's just no consistency to a method or formula. I know what one can have against Illinois State...it's just Wichita State and nobody else as a good win (and for a bit there, they weren't even a top 50). And Murray State and Tulsa are red flags. Not unlike UTA's slips against Texas State and Coastal. Monmouth with St. Peter's, Rider, and Siena. The quality isn't stacked, and there are bad losses. In a bad conference. From those three perspectives, you can pretty much **** anyone over from a non-major...the good teams aren't on the weekly schedule.

The non-conference schedule was...is...supposed to be the equalizer. It's a place where major conference teams are supposed to prove who they are against the rest of D1 because of the parity and other variables that kind of stain conference play and their wins. And this year, it looks like the committee just looked at every good win at face value. And it's not supposed to be like that!

Plus, bad losses or no, where good wins are hard to find, the trump card seems to always be "well, who did you beat?" You could flip those bad losses on ISU and UTA's record...does that push them in, really?
03-21-2017 02:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 26,942
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 238
I Root For: College Sports
Location:
Post: #153
RE: **The official NCAA Tournament thread**
ok they had 9 OOC road games. Of those 9, 5 were vs teams in the RPI sub 150. They are 1-3 vs top 150 teams OOC road. They were overall top 150 away from home 3-5.
03-21-2017 02:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 15,944
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 333
I Root For: Houston
Location: Near Seawall Town
Post: #154
RE: **The official NCAA Tournament thread**
Like I said, they were blown out in the conference tournament semifinals by a mediocre team, even by Sun Belt standards. If they had just 1-2 losses throughout their conference season, maybe you give them a break but looking at their entire profile, they just weren't an NCAA Tournament caliber team. They were literally the only good team in the Sun Belt, the only one with less than 12 losses and yet they didn't dominate their crap league.

I'm more peeved about Illinois State, who reached their conference tournament final and otherwise had a fine season, even if the numbers don't wholly speak to it.
03-21-2017 02:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 11,899
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 338
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #155
RE: **The official NCAA Tournament thread**
(03-21-2017 02:04 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  there are bad losses. In a bad conference. From those three perspectives, you can pretty much **** anyone over from a non-major...

No. There have been many seasons in which mid-major teams hoping for an at-large bid had high-quality non-conference wins. This is not one of those seasons.

(03-21-2017 02:04 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  And this year, it looks like the committee just looked at every good win at face value.

Apparently, they did. As they should. It would be ridiculous to say that Indiana's win over Kansas is amazing but Iowa State's win over Kansas isn't just because they are conference mates. Another way of looking at it is that perhaps the committee was trying to get around one of the many bogus aspects of RPI - giving teams credit for merely playing good opponents - by giving "extra credit" for actually beating good opponents. If that's what they did, I don't see a legitimate argument against it.
03-21-2017 03:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,480
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 54
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #156
RE: **The official NCAA Tournament thread**
Ultimately, I don't disagree. UTA isn't that strong, and we can't come to a lot of conclusions because so many of the mid-major bubble teams won their conference's AQ. This might be a totally different conversation if Rhode Island, MTSU, UNCW, Nevada, Vermont, and maybe even Princeton are not winning their respective conferences and are out there with Illinois State, UTA, and Monmouth. Or, heck, Illinois State does win the Valley's tournament and puts Wichita out there with the others.

What concerns me is the precedence you make with Vanderbilt and Kansas State while, once again, looking far past a high RPI team and leaving them behind. And it's also the combination of wins at face value when, and not to quibble, there are valid arguments/reasons to devalue the conference season (parity, familiarity, repetition, and even frequency of play). If you want to go down that road and take wins at full face value, then let's go, and along the way, scrap or shorten the non-conference, remove the protections of having conference-mates seeing each other early in the tournament, and completely disregard other accomplishments. On that last bit, and this is the only reason I press with UTA or ISU, it's that you can actually be a top 50 RPI club, other good metrics, and win your conference outright...just to be snubbed. Meanwhile, in KSU's case, basically drown in your conference, play nothing in your non-conference (and maybe the reason you're even a .500 team outright), but a few good punches, and now you're in for a national title. It's just not good.

But again, that's just the nature of at-large's. Win and you're in. For the champions of CUSA, CAA, AmEast, and the Ivy...good job. For bubble teams like Rhode Island and Wichita State, good job.

Looking at what's going on, consider the following at-large information:
2017 Tournament
highest RPI major not invited: Georgia (52)
lowest RPI major invited: Marquette (61)
highest RPI mid-major not invited: Illinois State (T-32)
lowest RPI mid-major invited: Dayton (28)
# of top 50 RPI mid-majors not invited: 3 (ISU, UTA - 44, Monmouth - 48)

2016 Tournament
highest RPI major not invited: Florida (51)
lowest RPI major invited: Syracuse (68)
highest RPI mid-major not invited: St. Bonaventure (30)
lowest RPI mid-major invited: Temple (63)
# of top 50 RPI mid-majors not invited: 5 (Bonnie, Akron - 36, St. Mary's - 40, SDSU - 42, Valpo - 49)

2015 Tournament
highest RPI major not invited: Stanford (60)
lowest RPI major invited: Indiana (58)
highest RPI mid-major not invited: Colorado State (28)
lowest RPI mid-major invited: Boise State (44)
# of top 50 RPI mid-majors not invited: 4 (CSU, Temple - 34, Old Dominion - 45, Tulsa - 47)

2014 Tournament
highest RPI major not invited: Minnesota (50)
lowest RPI major invited: Iowa (55)
highest RPI mid-major not invited: Southern Miss (T-32)
lowest RPI mid-major invited: Dayton (42)
# of top 50 RPI mid-majors not invited: 2 (USM, Toledo - 38)

2013 Tournament
highest RPI major not invited: Kentucky (56) (UConn - 49, ineligible)
lowest RPI major invited: Cal (53)
highest RPI mid-major not invited: Southern Miss (34)
lowest RPI mid-major invited: Boise State (44)
# of top 50 RPI mid-majors not invited: 1 (USM)

2012 Tournament
highest RPI major not invited: Ole Miss (58)
lowest RPI major invited: West Virginia (53)
highest RPI mid-major not invited: Marshall (43)
lowest RPI mid-major invited: BYU (49)
# of top 50 RPI mid-majors not invited: 1 (Marshall)

Before all of this consolidation within the new Big East and A10, mid-majors got their bids. It really hasn't been until 2015 when things have kind of dovetailed against them. Minnesota's the highest major snub there in 2014, but, consider they were 8-10 in conference play. Iowa, with a lower RPI, had a better conference record.
03-22-2017 10:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,108
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 228
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #157
RE: **The official NCAA Tournament thread**
So, any Sweet Sixteen upset predictions?

I could see both Gonzaga and Kansas going down tonight. Anybody else want to stick their necks out?
(This post was last modified: 03-23-2017 08:09 AM by ken d.)
03-23-2017 08:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie4Skins Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,087
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 78
I Root For: Ed O'Bannon
Location:
Post: #158
RE: **The official NCAA Tournament thread**
KU"s homecourt advantage will be tough to overcome. I like Xavier tonight.

I doubt MSG expected to be hosting Florida, Wisconsin, Baylor and South Carolina this week.
(This post was last modified: 03-23-2017 08:22 AM by Hokie4Skins.)
03-23-2017 08:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
samandrea Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 646
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 26
I Root For: UNC
Location: Northern VA
Post: #159
RE: **The official NCAA Tournament thread**
(03-23-2017 08:08 AM)ken d Wrote:  So, any Sweet Sixteen upset predictions?

I could see both Gonzaga and Kansas going down tonight. Anybody else want to stick their necks out?

Kansas, WVU, Arizona, Michigan tonight

UNC, UCLA, Florida, Baylor Friday
03-23-2017 08:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,494
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 89
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #160
RE: **The official NCAA Tournament thread**
WVU and X win tonight.
03-23-2017 09:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.