Do You Agree With Charlie Creme?

[JoePgh]

Those of you who are predicting Texas as the Albany #2 seed may be right, as are those who predict Baylor as the 4th #1 seed. Do you realize what that means for UConn's road to a National Championship? Texas in the Elite 8, Baylor in the National Semifinal, and probably Mississippi State in the Final. If they win an NC via that route, they will have met every test. And they will certainly become accustomed to looking up at 6-7 opposing posts.

 

[southie]

I doubt Baylor jumps to a #1 seed for beating Texas, a team they had already beaten twice, last night.

Miss. State, the SEC regular season champion, lost in the conference tournament championship game to a team they had already beaten once. SEC a much tougher conference than the Big 12.

ND is not dropping to a #2 seed. They are the #1 RPI team in the country, even with 3 losses. Their resume is so much better than Baylor's it's not even funny.

 

[SCspur]

I doubt Baylor jumps to a #1 seed for beating Texas, a team they had already beaten twice, last night.

Miss. State, the SEC regular season champion, lost in the conference tournament championship game to a team they had already beaten once. SEC a much tougher conference than the Big 12.

ND is not dropping to a #2 seed. They are the #1 RPI team in the country, even with 3 losses. Their resume is so much better than Baylor's it's not even funny.

Where do you personally see Texas? Kansas City or Albany?

 

[ME Husky Fan]

How's about a GW vs. UCONN 1st round game?

 

[Vowelguy]

How's about a GW vs. UCONN 1st round game?

GW not good enough to get an 8/9 seed. They'll be around 12 or 13.

 

[Bear11]

I doubt Baylor jumps to a #1 seed for beating Texas, a team they had already beaten twice, last night.

Miss. State, the SEC regular season champion, lost in the conference tournament championship game to a team they had already beaten once. SEC a much tougher conference than the Big 12.

ND is not dropping to a #2 seed. They are the #1 RPI team in the country, even with 3 losses. Their resume is so much better than Baylor's it's not even funny.

Notre Dame's resume is largely built around losing to 1 seeds. This does not prove that they themselves are a 1 seed. If RPI is your metric of choice, Baylor is number 4, a 1 seed. That is the lowest any metric or poll has Baylor. Basically every other ranking has us at number 2 overall. It would be a travesty to give us a 2 seed, no matter your thoughts on scheduling.

 

[Vowelguy]

Notre Dame's resume is largely built around losing to 1 seeds.

Uh, there were the wins over Fla St x2, SC, Tenn, Ore St, NC St, Duke, USF, DePaul, Marquette, Michigan

What is Baylor's resume, other than beating Texas?

 

[Bear11]

Despite Mississippi State now picking up a loss, most still consider them a lock for a 1 seed. I have no problem with this, and I think they are a top 3 team nationally. However, I don't understand how they are considered a lock for a top seed while Baylor is expected to get a 2. Mississippi State is now 5th in RPI, which is claimed to be the key metric. They have an RPI SOS of 21, basically the same as Baylor's at 25 (as a side note, I hate bringing up both RPI and RPI SOS, since RPI largely IS SOS, but that is another battle). Massey and Sagarin have Baylor with a stronger schedule, though I realize that likely won't be considered. All metrics I can find have Baylor over Mississippi State. So why is one a lock and the other consider a long shot?

I don't bring this up to argue that Mississippi State should be a 2 seed, because I think they are deserving. I just wanted to highlight some confusing logic that Creme, and perhaps the committee, tends to indulge in.

On the men's side, it has been made known that the committee is de-emphasizing the RPI, and allowing advanced metrics like Massey, Sagarin, KenPom, and ESPN's strength of record. Does anyone know if there is any equivalent movement on the women's side, or will they continue to cling to RPI like it is 1983?

 

[Vowelguy]

which is claimed to be the key metric.

Show me where the Committee's Policies & Procedures says this.

 

[Bear11]

Show me where the Committee's Policies & Procedures says this.

Well we seem to spend an awful lot of time talking about it.

 

[triaddukefan]

What is Baylor's resume, other than beating Texas?

They played UCLA close despite not having their head coach and second best player

 

[southie]

Where do you personally see Texas? Kansas City or Albany?

Well, I have no problem saying that South Carolina should be "ranked" ahead of Texas, especially with their 3 wins in the SEC tourney; heck, they could perhaps be ranked ahead of Oregon.

For Texas and South Carolina, it really depends on what the committee does with Miss. State. If they stay as the #2 seed overall, then South Carolina can't be in their bracket, but Texas can.

I think the committee will move Miss. State down one slot to #3. So, that means no conflict with South Carolina at the 2/7 matchup. And, other than Oregon being given preference for the Spokane regional, the S-curve could stay true to form. It would not surprise me if the committee bumped Texas down as far as #10 overall, if they see that any two of UCLA, Ohio State, Florida State, or Tennessee have a better body of work based in the last week of tournament play.

Surprised Crème doesn't project any movement in the bracket for the 1 and 2 seeds.

 

[Vowelguy]

They played UCLA close despite not having their head coach and second best player

Given that the OP said "all NDs resume has is losses," I'm thinking s/he would not include a loss on Bay's resume.

Look at the 64 Creme picked. Against that field, ND is about 13-3 and Baylor 6-1.

 

[southie]

Uh, there were the wins over Fla St x2, SC, Tenn, Ore St, NC St, Duke, USF, DePaul, Marquette, Michigan

What is Baylor's resume, other than beating Texas?

Most Baylor fans can't see the forest through the trees. Read their message board a couple on Sunday night. Most believe that because ND and Miss. State lost a game (one game in Miss. State's case) that Baylor should automatically move up. Most have no clue how the numbers work.

With Texas now out of the RPI Top 10, Baylor has zero wins over anyone in the RPI Top 10. Notre Dame is 5-3 against the Top 10 RPI teams. There are so many reasons why ND remains #1 in the RPI despite having 3 losses.

 

[Bear11]

Most Baylor fans can't se the forest through the trees.

With Texas now out of the RPI Top 10, Baylor has zero wins over anyone in the RPI Top 10. Notre Dame is 5-3 against the Top 10 RPI teams. There are so many reasons why ND remains #1 in the RPI despite having 3 losses.

Well Vowelguy just said that RPI isn't the important metric. And even if it is, Baylor is still a 1 seed by RPI and EVERY other metric except Charlie Creme.

 

[cbraarj]

Notre Dame's resume is largely built around losing to 1 seeds. This does not prove that they themselves are a 1 seed. If RPI is your metric of choice, Baylor is number 4, a 1 seed. That is the lowest any metric or poll has Baylor. Basically every other ranking has us at number 2 overall. It would be a travesty to give us a 2 seed, no matter your thoughts on scheduling.

Baylors resume would be largely built to losing to 1 seeds. If they had the guts to schedule them!

 

[cbraarj]

Despite Mississippi State now picking up a loss, most still consider them a lock for a 1 seed. I have no problem with this, and I think they are a top 3 team nationally. However, I don't understand how they are considered a lock for a top seed while Baylor is expected to get a 2. Mississippi State is now 5th in RPI, which is claimed to be the key metric. They have an RPI SOS of 21, basically the same as Baylor's at 25 (as a side note, I hate bringing up both RPI and RPI SOS, since RPI largely IS SOS, but that is another battle). Massey and Sagarin have Baylor with a stronger schedule, though I realize that likely won't be considered. All metrics I can find have Baylor over Mississippi State. So why is one a lock and the other consider a long shot?

I don't bring this up to argue that Mississippi State should be a 2 seed, because I think they are deserving. I just wanted to highlight some confusing logic that Creme, and perhaps the committee, tends to indulge in.

On the men's side, it has been made known that the committee is de-emphasizing the RPI, and allowing advanced metrics like Massey, Sagarin, KenPom, and ESPN's strength of record. Does anyone know if there is any equivalent movement on the women's side, or will they continue to cling to RPI like it is 1983?

Men and women games are different.

 

[southie]

Well Vowelguy just said that RPI isn't the important metric. And even if it is, Baylor is still a 1 seed by RPI and EVERY other metric except Charlie Creme.

You are good at spinning things to suit your argument. Regardless of what anyone says, including Creme, it's up to the committee. But, it's fun for the rest of us to discuss, speculate, and predict the outcomes.

The only thing Baylor has in its favor above Notre Dame and Louisville is that they only have one loss on the season; that's it. Baylor can't use that argument over Miss. State, though.

If Notre Dame isn't given a #1 seed based on their body of work (versus Baylor's), it would be a travesty and sends the wrong message. Forget that they are still the #1 RPI team if you don't like RPI rankings. Their resume dwarfs Baylor's plain as day.

 

[Bear11]

You are good at spinning things to suit your argument. Regardless of what anyone says, including Creme, it's up to the committee. But, it's fun for the rest of us to discuss, speculate, and predict the outcomes.

The only thing Baylor has in its favor above Notre Dame and Louisville is that they only have one loss on the season; that's it. Baylor can't use that argument over Miss. State, though.

If Notre Dame isn't given a #1 seed based on their body of work (versus Baylor's), it would be a travesty and sends the wrong message. Forget that they are still the #1 RPI team if you don't like RPI rankings. Their resume dwarfs Baylor's plain as day.

I'm not spinning things, I'm stating facts. And having fewer losses than other teams is actually a very good argument for being a better team. Once again, EVERY metric and poll has Baylor as a one seed. If the committee ignores all those metrics, then they are admitting that the whole process is entirely arbitrary. Notre Dame would have an undeniable resume if they had a win over Louisville or UConn. They do not. They do have wins over a lot of good teams. Baylor does too, unless you are willing to admit that 3 wins over Texas and sweeping the Big 12 and Stanford are not good wins.

I find it interesting that last year, Baylor was 7th in RPI and had a worse RPI SOS (despite playing a tougher nonconference schedule than this year, I don't really get this), yet there was little debate about getting a 1 seed. It seems like the committee is moving the goalposts a bit.

 

[southie]

I'm not spinning things, I'm stating facts. And having fewer losses than other teams is actually a very good argument for being a better team. Once again, EVERY metric and poll has Baylor as a one seed. If the committee ignores all those metrics, then they are admitting that the whole process is entirely arbitrary. Notre Dame would have an undeniable resume if they had a win over Louisville or UConn. They do not. They do have wins over a lot of good teams. Baylor does too, unless you are willing to admit that 3 wins over Texas and sweeping the Big 12 and Stanford are not good wins.

No, Baylor does not have close to the number of quality wins that Notre Dame has. Since you follow Massey and the other metrics aside from RPI, perhaps you will share the W/L records of the two teams against Top 10 and/or Top 25 teams based on their rankings in those other metrics.

 

[LoTrader]

I sure hope the selection committee ignores Charlie Creme. Just get this week over and on to the Monday Selection Show already.

 

[Orangutan]

Here's a visual on the ND vs. Baylor argument.

Screenshot of ND's games against RPI top 50:

9-3 vs. Top 25. 6-0 vs. 26-50. 15-3 overall against top 50.

 

[Orangutan]

Screenshot of Baylor's games against top 50:

4-1 against top 25. 2-0 against 26-50. 6-1 overall against top 50.

 

[Orangutan]

Notre Dame's resume is largely built around losing to 1 seeds.

ND has three RPI wins against teams higher ranked than anyone Baylor has played.

ND has 5 more top 25 wins and 9 more top 50 wins.

 

[Bear11]

No, Baylor does not have close to the number of quality wins that Notre Dame has. Since you follow Massey and the other metrics aside from RPI, perhaps you will share the W/L records of the two teams against Top 10 and/or Top 25 teams based on their rankings in those other metrics.

According to Sagarin, Baylor is 8-1 against top 25, Notre Dame 10-3. That's not a big gap. He also has Baylor rated much higher.

Citing records against Top X teams is the kind of arbitrary nonsense that metrics like Sagarin and RPI are supposed to avoid. Who cares who has if one team has more wins against teams in the top 37, if the rating clearly has one team ranked higher anyway? Baylor is 20-1 against RPI top 100 teams, Notre Dame is 21-3. There's a number for anything if you choose the right cutoff. If RPI is the metric, then make Notre Dame a 1 seed, but give the same to Baylor. If it is not, and it is based on other metrics or "eye test", then give it to Baylor, because all agree Baylor is the better team.