..... Whatever number of B1G teams seem deserving to get bids - add 2 to that for the actual number thst get in.

No, the first rule is always look who’s on the committee, and make your predictions off that.

Bernadette McGlade was on the committee so even if Richmond didn’t win today, the A-10 was getting a 2nd bid with Dayton (First Team Out).

Can someone explain to me Rutgers??

Horrible computer ranking, under 20 wins?

(03-13-2022 05:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  ..... Whatever number of B1G teams seem deserving to get bids - add 2 to that for the actual number thst get in.

9 is simply damned absurd for the 3rd rated conference, especially when #1 and #2 just get 6. Just another spade of dirt on the grave of the NCAA..

Long live the B1G… j/k. I’m still a Big East guy… for now.

(03-13-2022 05:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-13-2022 05:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  ..... Whatever number of B1G teams seem deserving to get bids - add 2 to that for the actual number thst get in.

9 is simply damned absurd for the 3rd rated conference, especially when #1 and #2 just get 6. Just another spade of dirt on the grave of the NCAA..

The B1G hasn't won the national title since the Clinton administration.

I wonder how many bids they've gotten since that last title (2000)?

Probably more than any other conference. It's ridonculous.

(03-13-2022 06:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2022 05:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-13-2022 05:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  ..... Whatever number of B1G teams seem deserving to get bids - add 2 to that for the actual number thst get in.

9 is simply damned absurd for the 3rd rated conference, especially when #1 and #2 just get 6. Just another spade of dirt on the grave of the NCAA..

The B1G hasn't won the national title since the Clinton administration.

I wonder how many bids they've gotten since that last title (2000)?

Probably more than any other conference. It's ridonculous.

B1G administration (not schools per se) and the NCAA have been hand in hand for years and the bias is glaring in both bids and how opening round seeds which they face were oddly favorable as well.

(03-13-2022 06:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-13-2022 06:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-13-2022 05:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-13-2022 05:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  ..... Whatever number of B1G teams seem deserving to get bids - add 2 to that for the actual number thst get in.

9 is simply damned absurd for the 3rd rated conference, especially when #1 and #2 just get 6. Just another spade of dirt on the grave of the NCAA..

The B1G hasn't won the national title since the Clinton administration.

I wonder how many bids they've gotten since that last title (2000)?

Probably more than any other conference. It's ridonculous.

B1G administration (not schools per se) and the NCAA have been hand in hand for years and the bias is glaring in both bids and how opening round seeds which they face were oddly favorable as well.

Yes, wasn't it last year that it seemed like half the top seeds were B1G teams?

They all fizzled out, as usual.

Agree

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men...dness-1985

Top conferences’ NCAAT winning percentage since 1985:

ACC 66.3%
Big East 61.8%
Big Ten 60.6%
SEC 60.5%
Big 12 57.6%
PAC 56.0%


Other than the ACC-B1G challenge, I don’t watch much B1G basketball. This year’s challenge was 8-6 (B1G-ACC)…Wake goes 23-9 overall, 13-7 in conference, wins against the B1G, and doesn’t make the tournament; Michigan goes 17-14 overall, 11-9 in conference, loses against the ACC, and makes the tournament. The B1G does get a few gifts…Michigan, Indiana, and/or Rutgers are this year’s version.

(03-13-2022 05:42 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  No, the first rule is always look who’s on the committee, and make your predictions off that.

Bernadette McGlade was on the committee so even if Richmond didn’t win today, the A-10 was getting a 2nd bid with Dayton (First Team Out).

The A-10 deserved 4 bids. The NET was totally designed to screw over non-P5/Big East conferences.

The top six of the A-10 has a NET rating 19 spots below their RPI. By RPI the A-10 had six top 62 teams.

The Top six of the A-10 went 7-2 against the ACC, including wins over Va Tech and Miami. And also, you know, Kansas, Alabama, Marquette.


The NET includes the predictive metrics which devalues experience, and calls it "luck." The top "Luck" teams in KenPom are all very experienced teams (and Wisconsin). Providence is 5 seniors and 2 juniors in their 7-man rotation... Ken Pom calls them the luckiest team in basketball.

St. Bonaventure is Top 20 in "Luck" because they have five senior starters who usually (A-10 quarters not withstanding) pull games out late because they've played those games 60 times and are 50-10 in them.

But Bonaventure has no bench. So with a hurt PG and the SG sliding over to PG for two weeks before the Va Tech game; the hobbled PG plays vs the Hokies and both guards were terrible (1-for-10) because they hadn't practiced at those spots for 2 weeks.

Va Tech got up big early, so the Bonnies pulled both guys and used bench guys who played 150 minutes all year for the last 15 minutes. And an 18-point deficit went to 37 in garbage time.

On 79 possessions, so the efficiency based on 100 possessions was more like a 46-point loss.

Bona's efficiency numbers got absolutely destroyed. Now Bona counts as a Q2/Q3 instead of a Q1/Q2. That crushed the A-10 numbers.

You go pound for pound, and the Top six of A-10 is better and deeper than the top six of the MWC, who got four bids. (Boise St lost 7 times. Two to Bona and St. Louis). Better than the top six of the American (who had three decent teams, but after that a pile of mush), and better than ACC teams 2-7, who again, the A-10 held a 7-2 head-to-head record against, while playing almost all road/neutral.

The ACC and American got a TON of credit for beating Q3s. And the A-10 did not get the same respect.

(03-13-2022 07:40 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(03-13-2022 05:42 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  No, the first rule is always look who’s on the committee, and make your predictions off that.

Bernadette McGlade was on the committee so even if Richmond didn’t win today, the A-10 was getting a 2nd bid with Dayton (First Team Out).

The A-10 deserved 4 bids. The NET was totally designed to screw over non-P5/Big East conferences.

The top six of the A-10 has a NET rating 19 spots below their RPI. By RPI the A-10 had six top 62 teams.

The Top six of the A-10 went 7-2 against the ACC, including wins over Va Tech and Miami. And also, you know, Kansas, Alabama, Marquette.


The NET includes the predictive metrics which devalues experience, and calls it "luck." The top "Luck" teams in KenPom are all very experienced teams (and Wisconsin). Providence is 5 seniors and 2 juniors in their 7-man rotation... Ken Pom calls them the luckiest team in basketball.

St. Bonaventure is Top 20 in "Luck" because they have five senior starters who usually (A-10 quarters not withstanding) pull games out late because they've played those games 60 times and are 50-10 in them.

But Bonaventure has no bench. So with a hurt PG and the SG sliding over to PG for two weeks before the Va Tech game; the hobbled PG plays vs the Hokies and both guards were terrible (1-for-10) because they hadn't practiced at those spots for 2 weeks.

Va Tech got up big early, so the Bonnies pulled both guys and used bench guys who played 150 minutes all year for the last 15 minutes. And an 18-point deficit went to 37 in garbage time.

On 79 possessions, so the efficiency based on 100 possessions was more like a 46-point loss.

Bona's efficiency numbers got absolutely destroyed. Now Bona counts as a Q2/Q3 instead of a Q1/Q2. That crushed the A-10 numbers.

You go pound for pound, and the Top six of A-10 is better and deeper than the top six of the MWC, who got four bids. (Boise St lost 7 times. Two to Bona and St. Louis). Better than the top six of the American (who had three decent teams, but after that a pile of mush), and better than ACC teams 2-7, who again, the A-10 held a 7-2 head-to-head record against, while playing almost all road/neutral.

The ACC and American got a TON of credit for beating Q3s. And the A-10 did not get the same respect.

It’s because you keep adding schools! Next year you’ll be at what, 15 or 16? The top 6 are very good but the other 8 or 9’are destroying the conference

The committee made one inexcusable mistake — giving 17-14 Michigan a virtual home game against a 6-seed.

(03-13-2022 05:42 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  No, the first rule is always look who’s on the committee, and make your predictions off that.

Bernadette McGlade was on the committee so even if Richmond didn’t win today, the A-10 was getting a 2nd bid with Dayton (First Team Out).

Yeah, I was STUNNED Dayton was first out and is the first alternate. I knew it…just knew there was going to be more than one bid for the A10 after Richmond stole the AQ. But, had it been Davidson today, that Dayton was ready for the next spot…yikes. At least Wyoming and USF didn’t lose their spot to Davidson. But, I figured AAC was going to feel the sting. I feel like that conference has felt the wrath of the committee more than any other since the split.

Gotta say…Big Ten really made out with the regional matchups. The one that really sticks out, other than Michigan and Wisonsin, is that possible Villanova-Ohio State game in Pittsburgh. Closer to a home game for OSU than ‘Nova. And ‘Nova drew its football rival in Delaware for the first game?

Coach K didn’t get one that first weekend, either. A potential game against another NC school in SC in the round of 32. And if not Davidson, Duke gets Tom Izzo and Michigan State.

How in the world did Michigan not only get in, but wasnn't even the last four in?

There are no easy outs in B1G. The same with the Big 12 and SEC.

(03-13-2022 08:28 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  The committee made one inexcusable mistake — giving 17-14 Michigan a virtual home game against a 6-seed.

I think it’s a twofer of them getting the bid with that record and then the ridiculously favorable location/seeding. It’s not just Colorado State who who got hosed there…Tennessee deserved a more favorable advantage geographically, too. I mean, heck, Wisconsin at the same three-line plays its first weekend in Milwaukee. Purdue, the same (the next closest school to them there is Texas?), and Texas Tech, once beyond Montana State, will have the geographical edge over the ‘Bama-Rutgers/ND winner.

But 17-14 being good enough…this was about those metrics. Maybe this is where last year wasn’t such a glitch due to Covid. A team three games over .500, not matter how good some of those wins are, is still a slightly-better-than .500 team. I like things better when there was some kind of line around 5-7 games over .500. This is murky waters now.

3 seed wisconsin gets to play in Milwaukee

My Indiana fanship can be traced to 1987, and I was hoping the Hoosiers would make the field. But nine Big Ten teams? That's insane — and unfair. IU likely should not be in the tourney. Nor should Michigan.

(03-13-2022 08:44 PM)RutgersMike Wrote:  There are no easy outs in B1G. The same with the Big 12 and SEC.

Agree. But nine Big Ten teams?

(03-13-2022 05:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-13-2022 05:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  ..... Whatever number of B1G teams seem deserving to get bids - add 2 to that for the actual number thst get in.

9 is simply damned absurd for the 3rd rated conference, especially when #1 and #2 just get 6. Just another spade of dirt on the grave of the NCAA..

Big Ten was 2nd not the SEC.