Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="willtalk, post: 3065016, member: 1220"] To begin with my post was not not directed specifically at any individual teams either making or not making the bracket except for Tenn. And even they were only an example for my claim that Creme does not use a constant criteria or standard methodology, rather he cherry picks to justify his own preconceived biases and conclusions. I am not mad about any Pac 12 team being excluded. While some of those excluded might be more worthy than others that are included, their records do not justify getting mad at any gross injustice. It appears by your response that it might be you who is actually mad. Why because I am critical of Cremes flawed lazy methodology that relies entirely too much on RPI. ? Why defend Cremes methodology -- unless perhaps it reflects yours as well. I also accuse him of cherry picking and you respond with examples of specific individual games--- cherry picking. Are you implying that if Oregon St and Arizona had beaten TA&M everything would be different? And what do UNC and FS losing to two SEC teams mean. Teams lose all the time to lesser teams. And Texas was over rated when Tenn beat them. The arguments while not even applicable to my post, could never the less be argued and rebutted with other examples until the cows come home. But they are not relevant to my post. My post was a follow response to something I posted in respect to Cremes very early Bracket the first week of Jan. It was then that I commented on what I perceived as Creme having already locked in how many spots were to be allocated to the Pac 12. At that time Tenn was not a factor. It was not even Pro Pac 12. I just used the Pac 12 as an because they were a highly rated conference and were the perfect example. Right before league play began, both the ACC and the Pac 12 were considered to be the strongest conferences in WCBB and that was upheld by the various rating services. In fact I believe the Pac 12 was rated the highest. Oregon, Stanford, Oregon St, Cal, and Arizona St were considered locks, with Utah, UCLA, USC and Arizona as possibles. Well after Arizona beat Arizona St it became the 6th and final team in the Bracket. Then the pattern began to manifest. When Utah beat both Stanford and Cal, they replaced the team previously there. I mentioned that it appeared that he had decided to limit the strongest conference to 6 teams. With basically UCLA, USC and Utah fighting for the final spot. That proved to be true. Now in respect to the strength of the SEC and Tenn. Creme held Tenn to a different standard than he would have any other team and this reflected his evaluation of the SEC. Any other team that tanked as quickly as Tenn would have long been dropped from the Bracket. But instead of down grading Tenn, he instead up graded the team that beat them. Thus he decided that it wasn't that Tenn was over rated, but that the SEC was underrated. Again, I am not referring to any specific teams rating, but a pattern that was modified to justify not diminishing Tenn to the point of eliminating them from the bracket. What I am referring to is using a double standards and rationalizations to justify predetermined objectives. It didn't start out as a system to protect Tenn, rather it evolved into one that justified it now. I mean what will it take to eliminate them? I don't feel he is pro SEC. Rather he has become pro SEC because it serves the purpose of justifying Tenn. [B]Vowelguy[/B]-------In respect to Creme eliminating Tenn for one week-- He sort of had too because of their long losing streak, but he figured they had some easy victories coming up. He needed them to win a few in row to justify putting them back in. again you have to recognize patterns to recognize agenda. I said as much at the time that he would put them back in once they had a couple of victories ( even though against bottom dwellers ) under their belt again. I would not be as harsh against an average poster. The thing is that he works for ESPN and should be held to a higher standard than just looking at polls and the RPI. Very lazy. The RPI would be valid only as statistical starting point. It is too flawed to be a real measure of a teams actual strength of schedule. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,408

Messages: 4,394,658

Members: 10,208

Latest member: jskwrite