(03-02-2017 12:21 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  Cinderellas get people to fill out brackets, that's for sure. It generates interest in the tournament itself.

But viewership goes down, especially in the later rounds, when P5's are not involved. The NCAA, committee, and networks know this.

Exactly my point. Calculated risk. So if you have a "middling" mid major that arguably could take down more than one P5/6, vs throwing a lower major in there and keeping the money with the majors and still having an "underdog"... by that measure they're killing two birds with one stone.

(03-02-2017 12:25 PM)CoastGuardHawk06 Wrote:  

(03-02-2017 12:21 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  Cinderellas get people to fill out brackets, that's for sure. It generates interest in the tournament itself.

But viewership goes down, especially in the later rounds, when P5's are not involved. The NCAA, committee, and networks know this.

Exactly my point. Calculated risk. So if you have a "middling" mid major that arguably could take down more than one P5/6, vs throwing a lower major in there and keeping the money with the majors and still having an "underdog"... by that measure they're killing two birds with one stone.

So many people i know that don't follow or care for that matter made it a point to watch every Mason game during their run.

Dan10, I hear you. Obviously our UNCW message board is going to be biased, but I think these stats still show us as being a legit contender for consideration. Also, I show different numbers as of today per CBSSports. Obviously some games the last few days so maybe that is the issue. Either way our only game vs. current top 50 vs MTSU was our 4th game of the season and it was basically an away game (the venue was 30 minutes from their campus).

I threw in WFU just because they are getting attention now as a bubble team. We have a better record than Wake Forest vs. the RPI top 50 and top 100. Just saying we should be seriously considered if it comes down to it.

Stats you quoted:
1. RPI: 38 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 0-1 -- UNCW
2. RPI: 48 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 4-8 -- Vanderbilt
3. RPI: 49 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 3-6 -- Seton Hall
4. RPI: 55 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 5-7 -- Providence
5. RPI: 72 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 7-6 -- Marquette

According to CBSSports
1. RPI: 37 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 0-1 -- UNCW
2. RPI: 49 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 4-7 -- Vanderbilt
3. RPI: 48 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 3-6 -- Seton Hall
4. RPI: 55 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 6-7 -- Providence
5. RPI: 58 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 6-6 -- Marquette
6. RPI: 40 | Record vs RPI Top 50 - 2-9 -- Wake Forest

[quote='Fletch 8' pid='14136434' dateline='1488477275']
We have a better record than Wake Forest vs. the RPI top 50 a Just saying we should be seriously considered if it comes down to it."
they have 2 wins, we have 0.

Woops meant top 100

(03-02-2017 02:18 PM)Fletch 8 Wrote:  Woops meant top 100

Top 100 doesn't matter much to the committee. Some teams in the Top 100 don't evem make the NIT.

(03-02-2017 02:26 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  

(03-02-2017 02:18 PM)Fletch 8 Wrote:  Woops meant top 100

Top 100 doesn't matter much to the committee. Some teams in the Top 100 don't evem make the NIT.

Exactly my point in saying top 100 wins are considered baseline and top 50 makes a team's resume. Mids get fewer chances and those few chances have an astronomical value to produce in compared to a major teams games against the top 50 due to quantity. We all know UNCW is good. But unfortunately 0 wins against the top 50 eliminates you without a lot of other things going perfectly, which having more than 1 conference loss and an ok rpi is not enough, regardless of true merit.

37 RPI is better than all current ESPN Bracketology bubble teams though. I would say that is better than ok. Dan why you hatin?

(03-02-2017 04:18 PM)Fletch 8 Wrote:  37 RPI is better than all current ESPN Bracketology bubble teams though. I would say that is better than ok. Dan why you hatin?

I don't think he's hating on UNCW, moreso the system that prevents a team like us getting an at-large bid.

While we should take some solace in knowing we'll be considered a "snub" if we don't get in, I obviously hope it never comes to that. I'm hoping to be stumbling around on Tuesday morning after a 2nd straight CAA title.

Rpi doesn't mean much if you're a mid major. Mid 20 mids have been left out before

(03-02-2017 12:21 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote:  Cinderellas get people to fill out brackets, that's for sure. It generates interest in the tournament itself.

But viewership goes down, especially in the later rounds, when P5's are not involved. The NCAA, committee, and networks know this.

You hit the nail on the head. Imagine if you will a Final 4 of UNCW, VCU, Wichita State and Gonzaga. A great story for sure, but the ratings? CBS wants UNC, Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, Michigan/Michigan St., UCLA, etc.

St. Joe's was unbeaten and got a number 1 seed about 10 years ago, and I remember the selection Sunday show. Packer and Nantz were both hammering the committee for making St. Joe's a 1. They had St. Joe's coach on live and he went after them for dissing his team. The whole system is biased towards the name schools.

(03-02-2017 04:18 PM)Fletch 8 Wrote:  37 RPI is better than all current ESPN Bracketology bubble teams though. I would say that is better than ok. Dan why you hatin?

Im not hatin'. I am realistic though. As others said mids who have inflated rpi numbers have still been treated poorly. Hell just a couple years ago Wichita State got hammered for "cheating" the system with their inflated RPI numbers. It happens. As much as it would be great for UNCW and really good for the CAA, you guy will not be an at large team if you falter.

Up to 33 with Campbell and Evansville still playing

Sent from my SM-G900V using CSNbbs mobile app

Having one mid-major in the Final Four though does not hurt ratings. Excluded 2014 onward when the Final 4 was televised on TBS (to not mix sample). The NCAA tournament is nothing without mid-majors and its what viewers want.

Early game
1. 8.7 Louisville/Witch. St. (2013 CBS)
2. 8.6 Butler/Mich. (2010 CBS)
3. 8.4 Kentucky/Louisville (2012 CBS)
4. 8.4 Ohio State/Georgetown (2007 CBS)
5. 8.3 Butler/VCU (2011 CBS)
6. 8.2 UCLA/LSU (2006 CBS)
7. 7.8 Mich. St./UConn (2009 CBS)
8. 7.2 Memphis/UCLA (2008 CBS)

Late game
1. 10.2 Syracuse/Michigan 10.2 (2013 CBS)
2. 9.6 Kansas/Ohio State (2012 CBS)
3. 9.5 UConn/Kentucky (2011 CBS)
4. 9.2 Duke/WVU (2010 CBS)
5. 9.1 Florida/George Mason (2006 CBS)
6. 8.9 Florida/UCLA (2007 CBS)
7. 8.8 Kansas/UNC (2008 CBS)
8. 8.5 UNC/Villanova (2009 CBS)

The only game that was interesting on this list was the Butler/VCU one. The other ones I guarantee the ratings were high because of Louisville, Michigan and Florida, not the Shockers, Bulldogs or Patriots

You gotta love the thrill though of seeing if Wichita can beat Louisville. Who cares if UCLA can beat Florida unless you like one of those two

(03-03-2017 04:00 PM)dan10 Wrote:  The only game that was interesting on this list was the Butler/VCU one. The other ones I guarantee the ratings were high because of Louisville, Michigan and Florida, not the Shockers, Bulldogs or Patriots

I was at that final 4 in Atlanta, I can tell you that the Shockers travel very well! They played the session before UNCW in 06 in Greensboro and had a ton of fans there too.

(03-03-2017 04:00 PM)dan10 Wrote:  The only game that was interesting on this list was the Butler/VCU one. The other ones I guarantee the ratings were high because of Louisville, Michigan and Florida, not the Shockers, Bulldogs or Patriots

That argument falls apart quickly when you realize that L'ville/WSU had better rating than L'ville/UK the year before. Louisville vs Kentucky provides two great programs and a great rivalry, but L'ville/WSU had better ratings.

(03-03-2017 04:31 PM)bricksnivy Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 04:00 PM)dan10 Wrote:  The only game that was interesting on this list was the Butler/VCU one. The other ones I guarantee the ratings were high because of Louisville, Michigan and Florida, not the Shockers, Bulldogs or Patriots

That argument falls apart quickly when you realize that L'ville/WSU had better rating than L'ville/UK the year before. Louisville vs Kentucky provides two great programs and a great rivalry, but L'ville/WSU had better ratings.

And the fact that a member of this board was there, and saw the support for the mid. People love it

it's not so much about ratings as it is the selection committee keeping the P5s happy.