Big East Statement

[buddy]

The letter is about as weak a letter as can be written. An opposite tactic needed to be taken. In the new America, one can speak out and not have to bite one's tongue any longer. Take a page from a politicians handbook. The letter should have said the committee is rigged and crooked, it is a witch hunt against the Big East, religious discrimination, driven by politics. They are even trying to screw the overall number one seed from reaching the final four. Total injustice by a corrupt NCAA. Organize protests at the tournament sites, go to the homes of committee members and protest outside their houses. Be vocal and aggressive. Make the Big East Great Again!

 

[diggerfoot]

I mean it's simple to prove it's not post hoc. They're consistent with the criteria they favor year after year. The consensus BracketMatrix got 67 of 68 teams right, only swapping Virginia and Oklahoma, whom the committee listed as literally their first team out. The committee's First Four Out were Bracket Matrix's last team in plus 3 of their 4 top receiving votes.

The committee is not some impenetrable random machine. We pretty much know exactly what they're going to do and why. There's a small amount of debate at the fringe, but generally the numbers are the numbers. But people usually just see 1 argument for a team and then try and apply that to a different team and ask why they're not in? Well the rest of their resume isn't as good in other areas.

Fair and convincing enough that the justifications are not post hoc. Still …

KenPom ranks the BE 2nd with their unbiased metrics, but the BE gets slightly more than 25% of their teams in, while other power conferences get around 50%. I am not suggesting that the way the committee or BM weights the different criteria is deliberate to disadvantage the BE, and it may be consistent, but just as the committee jiving with BM supports your position, the fact that the weighted criteria for both departs from what could be expected from an unbiased metric for the conferences suggests at least a subconscious bias in the a priori weighting of what is most important.

 

[Kolumbo]

The letter seems reasonable. The selection is over so criticizing the committee does nothing productive anyway. All the debate makes everything as crystal clear to me, as if I'm listening to the matrix dude.