If UConn doesn't make the tournament...

[CallMeBruce]

It's a must-win game for us, period.

How many times can the selection committee on the AAC before it becomes crystal clear to everyone that all tiebreakers and benefits of doubt go the detriment of the AAC?

More than once, to start.

 

[nomar]

More than once, to start.

So Louisville deserved a 4-seed, UConn deserved a 7-seed, SMU deserved to get left out, and Temple deserved to get left out. You're cool with all of those?

 

[tzznandrew]

So Louisville deserved a 4-seed, UConn deserved a 7-seed, SMU deserved to get left out, and Temple deserved to get left out. You're cool with all of those?

On the first two: they were 2 seed lines too low, but UConn was beaten twice by 25+ in the last week and Louisville had a terrible OOC. It was frustrating at the time, but hardly the sort of thing that is surprising. Happens to literally every conference at some point.

SMU and Temple deserved to get left out. No doubt about it. SMU was closer to the cut, but lost to sub-200 in the AAC. Temple wasn't that close, IMO.

 

[Jerry1714]

So Louisville deserved a 4-seed, UConn deserved a 7-seed, SMU deserved to get left out, and Temple deserved to get left out. You're cool with all of those?

100%

In two years and about 9 cases, 2 were clear mistakes, UConn and Ville. But you could argue that Cincy and Memphis were actually over seeded, funny no one ever mentions those.

 

[nomar]

On the first two: they were 2 seed lines too low, but UConn was beaten twice by 25+ in the last week and Louisville had a terrible OOC. It was frustrating at the time, but hardly the sort of thing that is surprising. Happens to literally every conference at some point.

SMU and Temple deserved to get left out. No doubt about it. SMU was closer to the cut, but lost to sub-200 in the AAC. Temple wasn't that close, IMO.

UCLA 20-13 1-7 1-1 3-2 29 48

Ole Miss 20-12 1-2 2-3 6-3 53 60

BYU 23-9 1-3 0-1 3-2 74 36

TEMPLE 23-10 1-5 1-3 5-0 60 34

The top 3 teams got in.

"No doubt about it"? No doubt?

They were the first team left out, by the way. So saying they weren't close is actually inconsistent with the selection committee's view.

Making matters worse is that the Owls were the first team out. During a conference call after the selections were announced, Scott Barnes, chairman of the Division I men's basketball committee and the athletic director at Utah State, said Wyoming's 45-43 upset of San Diego State in the Mountain West Conference championship game earned the Cowboys an automatic bid and kept Temple out.

If Wyoming had not won, would Temple be in? "Yes," Barnes said.

http://articles.philly.com/2015-03-17/news/60179476_1_ncaa-tournament-ncaa-com-rpi

So they were close. They just got passed over in favor of UCLA, Ole Miss and BYU.

 

[CallMeBruce]

So Louisville deserved a 4-seed, UConn deserved a 7-seed, SMU deserved to get left out, and Temple deserved to get left out. You're cool with all of those?

We got hosed in 2014 (which is why I said "more than once"). Temple was not a tourney team last year. It's been explained on here probably two dozen times, and you've either chosen not to acknowledge it or you don't understand it, but that's on you.

 

[tzznandrew]

UCLA 20-13 1-7 1-1 3-2 29 48

Ole Miss 20-12 1-2 2-3 6-3 53 60

BYU 23-9 1-3 0-1 3-2 74 36

TEMPLE 23-10 1-5 1-3 5-0 60 34

The top 3 teams got in.

"No doubt about it"? No doubt?

They were the first team left out, by the way. So saying they weren't close is actually inconsistent with the selection committee's view.

Making matters worse is that the Owls were the first team out. During a conference call after the selections were announced, Scott Barnes, chairman of the Division I men's basketball committee and the athletic director at Utah State, said Wyoming's 45-43 upset of San Diego State in the Mountain West Conference championship game earned the Cowboys an automatic bid and kept Temple out.

If Wyoming had not won, would Temple be in? "Yes," Barnes said.

http://articles.philly.com/2015-03-17/news/60179476_1_ncaa-tournament-ncaa-com-rpi

So they were close. They just got passed over in favor of UCLA, Ole Miss and BYU.

The RPI is not the only way to judge. Their advanced metrics sucked, and they had bad losses...a couple of them.

Their advanced metrics were all in the tank, just like this year, and they had one win to hang their hat on: Kansas. A big win, mind you, but look at the actual substance of their record and it made sense they weren't in.

They were the next team out? Fair enough. When you get that deep into the bubble all teams look pretty bad upon closer inspection. I just think people didn't look close enough at Temple to realize how precarious their situation was.

 

[Kitaman]

That SMU's team SOS was 135 and OOCSOS was 303 as well and they had 4 top 100 wins and had 2 horrendous losses, all much worse than UConn's current resume.

UConn's Kenpom is 30, the highest ranked Kenpom team to not make it last year was Florida at 46.

UConn is in a lot better position then people realize.

All good points but moot if the Committee doesn't think like you. There is a political element, and ignorance element (mainly due to lack of media attention/coverage) and a trendy element, none being basketball related.

AAC teams, including us, are at a disadvantage when competing against P5 bubble teams.

 

[nomar]

We got hosed in 2014 (which is why I said "more than once"). Temple was not a tourney team last year. It's been explained on here probably two dozen times, and you've either chosen not to acknowledge it or you don't understand it, but that's on you.

That's a little obnoxious. They were the first team out, according to the committee, and of course there is an understandable explanation for why they were left out, but by the same token, if you want to refuse to acknowledge there is an understandable explanation for how they could have been included, that's on you.

 

[gtcam]

All good points but moot if the Committee doesn't think like you. There is a political element, and ignorance element (mainly due to lack of media attention/coverage) and a trendy element, none being basketball related.

AAC teams, including us, are at a disadvantage when competing against P5 bubble teams.

Rather than ignorance I would say it is ARROGANCE

 

[nomar]

The RPI is not the only way to judge. Their advanced metrics sucked, and they had bad losses...a couple of them.

Their advanced metrics were all in the tank, just like this year, and they had one win to hang their hat on: Kansas. A big win, mind you, but look at the actual substance of their record and it made sense they weren't in.

They were the next team out? Fair enough. When you get that deep into the bubble all teams look pretty bad upon closer inspection. I just think people didn't look close enough at Temple to realize how precarious their situation was.

I'm not disagreeing with any of that. That's a fair picture of Temple last year. I think there's a pattern where AAC teams don't get the benefit of the doubt. Jerry pointed to two potential overseedings, and I can see that, but on balance if you're an AAC coach, you've got to worry you're not going to get a fair shake if it's down to you and a P5 team. Maybe that's overly paranoid. Maybe each decision involving an AAC team was arrived at fairly and objectively. I do think it's naive to think there's no crony horse-trading going on.

 

[CallMeBruce]

That's a little obnoxious. They were the first team out, according to the committee, and of course there is an understandable explanation for why they were left out, but by the same token, if you want to refuse to acknowledge there is an understandable explanation for how they could have been included, that's on you.

Except that's not what you said. You said it was an example of selection committing "sh-tting on the AAC." It's not. Going by a simple average of all available metrics, Temple did not belong in the field. You can present an argument that they could have been included, but there's nothing to support your contention that the committee was being unfair to Temple or the league.

 

[nomar]

Except that's not what you said. You said it was an example of selection committing "sh-tting on the AAC." It's not. Going by a simple average of all available metrics, Temple did not belong in the field. You can present an argument that they could have been included, but there's nothing to support your contention that the committee was being unfair to Temple or the league.

I do think there's a pattern. SMU, bad seed. UConn, bad seed. Temple, left out. SMU, left out. You can defend each of those, individually. But together they suggest a pattern that scares me as a UConn fan. Jerry pointed to two instances of potential overseeding, but there's not an instance where an AAC team slid in and people said, "well that was a gift."

Needless to say, the sample size is small. But based on what I've seen, I don't feel very optimistic that if we lose to Cincy and the "available metrics" suggest we should still get in, we'll get in.

Let's see how the AAC gets treated this year. Obviously, SMU's ban makes it harder to draw conclusions.

 

[TasteofUConn]

UConn is in a lot better position then people realize.

Perception is reality. The only people who matter are on the committee.

 

[raf46]

UConn's BPI is currently 29, assuming their BPI holds above 33, it would be the best team (based on BPI) that didn't make the tournament since 2012, which is when they started using that metric.

As far as I can tell, the current record holder for best BPI that got left out, was fellow #AmericanRising team, SMU, 33rd in 2014.

win another game or two in the AAC tourny and then we will be in.

 

[TasteofUConn]

Having this conversation, at all, sucks.
Here's my total input - I won't believe that we are in until we 1. win the AAC tourni or 2. they announce our name on Sunday.
In doing so, I am completely insulated from the devastation that some of you are going to feel if we don't get in.

 

[QDOG5]

Thanks, I've seen that list before. FWIW, the top guy says UConn is one of the last 4 in. I don't think there's a realistic chance of us getting in if we lose. Like I said, I'd love to be wrong -- of course, I'd love much more to beat Cincy and lock it down.

I do think the AAC has gotten screwed. I think Louisville's #4 seed and UConn's #7 seed were ridiculous, and I think there's something to be said for the fact that there was nobody on the committee standing up for the conference -- unlike the P5 conferences. It's not *all* about the numbers, and numbers can be easily manipulated to fit with the desired results.

Jerry, really appreciate your work! Do you have a guess on what the hierarchy i.e. SOS, RPI, BPI, wins vs. top 100, conf. affliation, etc. the selection would use on the at larges teams? I agree with you that although UConns' numbers will still be respectable even with another loss to Cincy that we will have to get the win to be in. Do you see in any possibilty of UConn going 1-1 in the AAC tourney and still being out of the Big Dance?

 

[UconnFanDC]

Carmello Anthony ended his career undefeated in 2003. I'm sure there are other freshman, but that's the only one I could think of off the top of my head.

But a four year career... that's a tall order. There has to be someone.

Anthony Davis

 

[weyuo]

If UConn doesn't make it into the NCAA tourney this year they should just shut down the school, send all the kids home and sell the land off to developers or farmers. It was a pipe dream that the state of Connecticut could ever build a state funded educational institution comparable with anything outside of it's own borders. What were those idiots thinking last century? Fairfield and New Haven Counties have Yale to send their kids to. They don't need to spend their tax dollars on some AG school out in the middle of nowhere that teaches their kids how to make ice cream.

Gulp!! I see the mob forming already:

 

[Kitaman]

Having this conversation, at all, sucks.
Here's my total input - I won't believe that we are in until we 1. win the AAC tourni or 2. they announce our name on Sunday.
In doing so, I am completely insulated from the devastation that some of you are going to feel if we don't get in.

Not sure about you being completely insulated when you participant by reading and posting in this depression titled thread. I suspect you as a huge fan will feel some level of devastation not necessarily this particular season/team but the aggregate of the last 2 years. So please reply on Sunday if we don't get in and report how your emotions are protected with a 2nd straight NIT selection. Hopefully that won't happen.

Now on the other hand, my wife will be insulated 100% and will be going about her business as if the team never existed. That's the difference in being a fan-atic and one who could care less ('completely insulated').

 

[TasteofUConn]

Not sure about you being completely insulated when you participant by reading and posting in this depression titled thread.

I've pretty much resigned myself to not getting in or to losing on the first weekend. If either of those happen, I'll be fine. If we make the second weekend, it'll be a heck of a nice March for me.

I suppose that my disappointment has already happened, by which I mean, I was very hopeful (and feeling it) right up until Ollie benched Jalen - for good reason or not is irrelevant. At that point, I felt that the mojo that had been building with the team was quenched, and since then it's been one long slog/struggle as a fan to even appreciate what I was watching.

As succinctly as I can put it:
When a team has underperformed and disappointed to the point where I'm no longer particularly excited to watch them, then the potential disappointment goes way down.

Which is good, because I can now cheer and watch and it's mostly upside.

 

[sledog]

This must be about UConn:

 

[David 76]

I think everyone is probably right about all the slights to the AAC & UConn.
But I just gotta believe that if you are a major basketball power, and you can't place yourself solidly among the top 35 + teams or win your conference, how angry can you get for not having a bid?
I hope we get in. But, if we don't, we are to blame more than any committee.

 

[champs99and04]

The RPI is not the only way to judge. Their advanced metrics sucked, and they had bad losses...a couple of them.

Their advanced metrics were all in the tank, just like this year, and they had one win to hang their hat on: Kansas. A big win, mind you, but look at the actual substance of their record and it made sense they weren't in.

They were the next team out? Fair enough. When you get that deep into the bubble all teams look pretty bad upon closer inspection. I just think people didn't look close enough at Temple to realize how precarious their situation was.

I think the narrative that the AAC is treated unfavorably the committee is overstated on this board, but the metrics you cite in this post are the same ones that weren't used the year prior, and the traditional data points that were used in 2014 were de-emphasized last season when it was time to justify the inclusion of a brand program like UCLA.

Comparing the resumes of SMU and N.C. State in 2014, it isn't outrageous to argue that the goalposts are being moved to satisfy some subjective inclinations:

SMU - 3-4 vs. RPI top 25, 4-5 vs. RPI top 50, 4-6 vs. RPI top 100, 53 RPI overall, 31 BPI

N.C. State - 1-7 vs. RPI top 25, 3-9 vs. RPI top 50, 6-12 vs. RPI top 100, 54 RPI overall, 61 BPI

By virtually all objective data, SMU was more tournament worthy than N.C. State. Did it help N.C. State that they were in a power five conference? Did it help them to have rich program history and a large, traveling fan base? Did it help them to have one of the best players in the country in T.J. Warren?

To infer that extraneous variables may contribute to the selection process does not insinuate that there is corruption. If the advanced metrics are going to be presented in opposition of last years Temple team, then it is a certainty that by the same logic there were three AAC teams shafted in 2014.

Cincinnati was seeded properly in 2014. I think Memphis was, as well. SMU and Cincinnati both got fair shakes last season, and Temple - taken by some criteria - was hardly an egregious omission. In examining all of the data, though, it's fair to wonder whether the tie actually goes to the runner if you're from this conference.

 

[jibsey]

Our goal is to win a game and get in, fine maybe it happens but let's be honest, We have seen nothing in this team that makes us think we can go on some kind of run. I root just as hard and bleed the same color blue as any, but with no rose colored glasses. But the topic here is if we lose so here goes. There will be a complete meltdown on this board at first which is expected, followed by blame and recriminations against KO and the coaching staff. What will follow is a discussion of
What players we can add to next year's excellent class to get us tournament competitive. By that time the initial hangover will be waning and time to hit antidepressants. Of course we can avoid a lot of this by winning the next 9 games.