CBS sports chairman rooting for Kentucky

[MattMang23]

FSU and Cuse played well enough in the tourney to justify that decision, I think..IMHO

Mutually exclusive.

No one said they couldn't win games in the tournament. Going .500 in the ACC proves they can beat tournament teams. But their resumes, Cuse's in particular, did not warrant inclusion.

 

[whaler11]

Depends on how much of Chicago market tunes in. And who Loyola is playing.

Granted this is cherry-picked and probably meaningless, but I found it interesting nonetheless. Over the past 20 years, if you look at average NC ratings for teams that have made multiple NC appearances (in parens), the list looks like this:

Duke 15.75 (4)
UK 13.325 (4)
UConn 13.075 (4)
Butler 12.95 (2)
Florida 12.5 (3)
MSU 12.45 (2)
UNC 12.4 (4)
Kansas 12.333 (3)

Not counting the Villanova/UNC championship game that wasn't broadcast on CBS, the lowest ratings since 1998 were for UNC/MSU in 2008. Bluebloods don't necessarily bring viewers.

It's not simple to analyze because of falling overall ratings, the move of some of the games to cable and seemingly random outliers.

The 2009 number for UNC/Michigan State was only 17.7 million. The semifinal numbers stunk too. Anecdotally, if MSU is in the game it gets a bad number.

The desire to have Duke and Kentucky seems obvious though.

In 2015 Kentucky Wisconsin got 22.2 million on cable and Duke Wisconsin got 28.2 on CBS. UConn's numbers against Duke or Kentucky? Pretty good, against anyone else - not too great.

Loyola probably doesn't look bad in comparison to Kansas St, but they want Duke, Kentucky, Carolina and their usual suspects. I'm sure they are quite excited for Duke/Kansas today.

 

[buddy]

It's always a great day when FSU loses.

 

[billybud]

Mutually exclusive.

No one said they couldn't win games in the tournament. Going .500 in the ACC proves they can beat tournament teams. But their resumes, Cuse's in particular, did not warrant inclusion.

Well...I don't know about how you compare resumes between a reasonably good team from the ACC-Big 10-Big 12 and a good mid major. Sure, there is RPI, wins in groups, SOS, etc...but still not any real method that is totally objective.

That has always been a problem...Trying to compare group members from disparate groups.

It is also why we went, in the 80's, to norming in promotional exams and college entrance tests.

Blacks and Hispanics were compared to only those in their group...so a 90% ranking in one group may be a lesser ranking in the total conglomerate group.

The tops of each group were reported as being equal.

The courts have weighed back and forth on "banding".

But weighing two resumes from disparate groups is still somewhat fraught with difficulty.

 

[uconnfan68]

Maybe people weren't hallucinating when they complained that almost every referee call favored the Jordan-led Bulls?

Never bet on anything that talks.

 

[the Q]

There’s no questions teams like duke and unc and MSU receive preferential treatment by the officials.

You can see it even today.

You saw it when Higgins was rewarded for embarrassing basketball with his work in U.K./unc last year. It’s brutal.