Louisville Shows AAC Snubs by Committee

[UConnRock]

2013-14 in AAC- louisville is reigning NCAA champion, goes 29-5 w/ losses to Memphis (2), Cincy, Kentucky, and UNC. All were ranked when the beat Louisville. Louisville also wins AAC tourney and are ranked #5 in the country. They are a #4 seed in the tourney.

2014-2015 in ACC - Louisville goes 24-8 - losses to UNC (2), ND, UVA, Kentucky, Duke, NC State, Syracuse. 2 losses to unranked teams. Knocked out in quarter finals in ACC tourney. They are ranked #18 in final rankings. They get the same #4 seed.

 

[upstater]

It's been well established that the committee has been knocking the AAC teams.

And no matter what anyone says about the AAC's weakness, there is actually little defense for it.

UConn was 21 for SOS and also low 20s for RPI last year, national ranking was somewhere between 15-20 in the polls. We were thinking a 4 or 5 seed would have been fair. UConn got a 7 seed and won the national championship.

And here you have national commentators constantly repeating, "WOW, a 7th seed won the national championship!!!"

But it was a 7 seed that should have been a 5.

So, I know some posters here have been talking about weak SOS, very weak RPI, etc., but it actually doesn't matter at all.

The last 2 years have shown a very clear bias against the AAC. Because even when the SOS is solid and strong, even when the RPI is high and the team is ranked in the top 20 of the polls, it just doesn't matter to the tourney committee when it comes to the AAC.

 

[lange10]

Unless someone runs the table in the AAC, no one is getting higher than a 4 seed anytime soon.

 

[tzznandrew]

Unless someone runs the table in the AAC, no one is getting higher than a 4 seed anytime soon.

I just don't agree with this. Our Conference RPI was terrible. When you are the 8th best conference, you aren't going to get a lot of leeway.

Same thing happened last year. They say they don't factor in conferences, and maybe they don't. But they do factor in how many sub-150 or sub-200 wins you have. And Louisville had a ton. Last year their SOS wasn't particularly good. Hence their seed.

I think they mis-seeded them and UConn. But Memphis and Cincy were probably seeded properly. And if you can go back and look at SMU's resume from last year, it isn't particularly impressive.

Our bottom teams need to win their non-conference "gimme" games. No more losses to Florida Atlantic (our conference had two!), and suddenly a team like Tulane goes from 210 in the RPI to 143. And if USF, Houston, and USF also take care of business, that 143 is probably borderline Top 100.

Show against the best teams. Beat the worst. Don't schedule sub-250 games. If our conference RPI was 4 or 5 (which it probably would have been had we just not gotten killed from the bottom), Temple is in, Tulsa is likely in (especially if they get wins against ORAL ROBERTS and a DII school), and suddenly UConn and Memphis are strangely bubble teams since their RPI will be 10 spots higher.

 

[upstater]

Show against the best teams. Beat the worst. Don't schedule sub-250 games. If our conference RPI was 4 or 5 (which it probably would have been had we just not gotten killed from the bottom), Temple is in, Tulsa is likely in (especially if they get wins against ORAL ROBERTS and a DII school), and suddenly UConn and Memphis are strangely bubble teams since their RPI will be 10 spots higher.

But shouldn't conference RPI also impact individual RPI? That's the key right there. I mean, UConn's SOS was pretty high last year.

 

[Jerry1714]

But shouldn't conference RPI also impact individual RPI? That's the key right there. I mean, UConn's SOS was pretty high last year.

It was 34 and NCSOS was 82 and our RPI was 23

Mich State is a 7 seed with an RPI of 22, SOS of 7 and NCSOS of 42.

But yes lets hear the same old tired arugment.

Follow the seeding outside of UConn and the AAC and you find the world is not out to get UConn and the AAC.

Do non-P5s lack the benefit of the doubt? Yes. They always have and always will. It is not an AAC thing.

 

[TXHuskyFan]

All the talking heads yesterday kept referring to Temple and Tulsa as being a mid-major, and mid-major conferences are not getting the benefit of the doubt. I doubt we would get the same disrespect, but face it folks, the AAC is a mid-major conference, and we are stuck here.

 

[TXHuskyFan]

Unless someone runs the table in the AAC, no one is getting higher than a 4 seed anytime soon.

I do agree with this. Case in point....Gonzaga. They schedule as tough as they can out of conference, but unless they run the table in the regular season and win the conference tournament, look where they end up year after year. We are basically the east coast Gonzaga, playing conference games halfway across the damn country every week.

 

[upstater]

It was 34 and NCSOS was 82 and our RPI was 23

Mich State is a 7 seed with an RPI of 22, SOS of 7 and NCSOS of 42.

But yes lets hear the same old tired arugment.

Follow the seeding outside of UConn and the AAC and you find the world is not out to get UConn and the AAC.

Do non-P5s lack the benefit of the doubt? Yes. They always have and always will. It is not an AAC thing.

Show me what link you're using. Everyone I've checked so far had UConn much higher than 32, from 5-26.

And they are not unknown names, but Sagarin, Palm, Pomeroy,

Here are the links:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaab/sagarin/2014/team/
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2014/sos
http://kenpom.com/index.php?y=2014&s=RankSOSPythag
http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-ba...th-of-schedule-by-team?rating_date=2014-04-08
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/sos/2013-14

 

[Jerry1714]

Show me what link you're using. Everyone I've checked so far had UConn much higher than 32, from 5-26.

And they are not unknown names, but Sagarin, Palm, Pomeroy,

Here are the links:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaab/sagarin/2014/team/
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2014/sos
http://kenpom.com/index.php?y=2014&s=RankSOSPythag
http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-ba...th-of-schedule-by-team?rating_date=2014-04-08
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/sos/2013-14

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rpi/_/year/2014/sort/RPI/groupId/62
or
http://realtimerpi.com/2013-2014/rpi_155_Men.html

34, 32, same difference.

Some of these you cited like Sargain, KenPom, are AFTER the NCAA tournament, which I suspect you realize is not how it works.

I did not take the time to look at the rest, but anything lower than 30th is most likely post tournament as well.

 

[Jerry1714]

Show me what link you're using. Everyone I've checked so far had UConn much higher than 32, from 5-26.

And they are not unknown names, but Sagarin, Palm, Pomeroy,

Here are the links:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaab/sagarin/2014/team/
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2014/sos
http://kenpom.com/index.php?y=2014&s=RankSOSPythag
http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-ba...th-of-schedule-by-team?rating_date=2014-04-08
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/sos/2013-14

Yea basically everything you cited is post NCAA tournament, come on

 

[lange10]

I just don't agree with this. Our Conference RPI was terrible. When you are the 8th best conference, you aren't going to get a lot of leeway.

Same thing happened last year. They say they don't factor in conferences, and maybe they don't. But they do factor in how many sub-150 or sub-200 wins you have. And Louisville had a ton. Last year their SOS wasn't particularly good. Hence their seed.

I think they mis-seeded them and UConn. But Memphis and Cincy were probably seeded properly. And if you can go back and look at SMU's resume from last year, it isn't particularly impressive.

Our bottom teams need to win their non-conference "gimme" games. No more losses to Florida Atlantic (our conference had two!), and suddenly a team like Tulane goes from 210 in the RPI to 143. And if USF, Houston, and USF also take care of business, that 143 is probably borderline Top 100.

Show against the best teams. Beat the worst. Don't schedule sub-250 games. If our conference RPI was 4 or 5 (which it probably would have been had we just not gotten killed from the bottom), Temple is in, Tulsa is likely in (especially if they get wins against ORAL ROBERTS and a DII school), and suddenly UConn and Memphis are strangely bubble teams since their RPI will be 10 spots higher.

So basically you don't agree with me because you have faith in our bottom feeder teams getting better in the near future is what you're saying. Because if those teams don't improve (I don't see them improving drastically with the exception of USF in a few years bc of Antigua), then those losses you mentioned will still happen and our conference RPI will continue to be very low.

 

[whaler11]

Wouldn't it be nice if they threw out RPI and used the Pomeroys? That seems like an obvious first step.

 

[upstater]

Yea basically everything you cited is post NCAA tournament, come on

March 16th is post tournament?

 

[Jerry1714]

March 16th is post tournament?

I said basically, jeez you are slow or obtuse.

Sargain, Kenpom, Nolan, and teamrankings cites ALL post tournament.

The one from the 16th, has a SOS of 30. Which let me help you out here, is very close to what I said and cited of 34 and 32.

Come on, just try to keep up a little.

 

[itgoeslike]

When Committee Chair and Utah State Athletic Director says "UCLA didn't look good on paper but passed the 'Eye Test'" what he really means is "If any AD positions open in the PAC, I'd sure like to be considered". . .

 

[upstater]

I said basically, jeez you are slow or obtuse.

Sargain, Kenpom, Nolan, and teamrankings cites ALL post tournament.

The one from the 16th, has a SOS of 30. Which let me help you out here, is very close to what I said and cited of 34 and 32.

Come on, just try to keep up a little.

Here is what you absolutely refuse to look at (and as far as obtuseness goes, your reputation is well estalished in the Syraucse thread with your lack of imagination about how APR relates to academic fraud):

St Louis with its 26 RPI and 68th SOS ... and UMass with its 48 SOS and 21 RPI... both had higher seeds than UConn, with its 32 and 22.

So the RPIs are the same, but UConn plays a much tougher schedule.

Given what then happened in the postseason, where the AAC outperformed both the BE and the A10, it is pretty clear that the committee failed both the eye test AND the numbers test, because both were in UConn's favor.

 

[tzznandrew]

So basically you don't agree with me because you have faith in our bottom feeder teams getting better in the near future is what you're saying. Because if those teams don't improve (I don't see them improving drastically with the exception of USF in a few years bc of Antigua), then those losses you mentioned will still happen and our conference RPI will continue to be very low.

Perhaps I was misreading you--if their SOS is as bad, or they continue to do as poorly OOC (STOP LOSING TO ARKANSAS-PINE BLUFF) then you are right.

But I thought you were coming from the conspiracy crowd, that was suggesting there was some inherent bias against this conference.

 

[Jerry1714]

Here is what you absolutely refuse to look at (and as far as obtuseness goes, your reputation is well estalished in the Syraucse thread with your lack of imagination about how APR relates to academic fraud):

St Louis with its 26 RPI and 68th SOS ... and UMass with its 48 SOS and 21 RPI... both had higher seeds than UConn, with its 32 and 22.

So the RPIs are the same, but UConn plays a much tougher schedule.

Given what then happened in the postseason, where the AAC outperformed both the BE and the A10, it is pretty clear that the committee failed both the eye test AND the numbers test, because both were in UConn's favor.

Jeez I am glad you finally got over that hump with the SOS dates, seemed very difficult for you, congrats.

Lets try to walk you through the others because things are clearly difficult for you (more time reading books or going to class and not posting 18k times on a message board would help with these things, and talking about reputation, look at your posts to like ratio, ooof, not really providing much to the people).

UMass was a seed line higher, that could be simply 1 team, and they had a better RPI, better NCSOS, and more top 100 wins, but you are upset they got a 6 and we got a 7?

A10 was a higher rated conference in the RPI than the AAC (6 compared 8).

Always mistakes with seedings, IU as a 10 this year, St. Louis as a 5 last year, but that does not mean they are out to get the AAC or UConn.

 

[lange10]

Perhaps I was misreading you--if their SOS is as bad, or they continue to do as poorly OOC (STOP LOSING TO ARKANSAS-PINE BLUFF) then you are right.

But I thought you were coming from the conspiracy crowd, that was suggesting there was some inherent bias against this conference.

Oh no, our conference stinks plain and simple. We got the seeds we deserved. SMU deserved a 5/6 and got a 6. Cincy was fairly seeded. I do believe Temple was worthy of getting in, but there's always 1-2 teams each year that gets snubbed. Tulsa didn't deserve to be in.

 

[upstater]

Jeez I am glad you finally got over that hump with the SOS dates, seemed very difficult for you, congrats.

Lets try to walk you through the others because things are clearly difficult for you (more time reading books or going to class and not posting 18k times on a message board would help with these things, and talking about reputation, look at your posts to like ratio, ooof, not really providing much to the people).

UMass was a seed line higher, that could be simply 1 team, and they had a better RPI, better NCSOS, and more top 100 wins, but you are upset they got a 6 and we got a 7?

A10 was a higher rated conference in the RPI than the AAC (6 compared 8).

Always mistakes with seedings, IU as a 10 this year, St. Louis as a 5 last year, but that does not mean they are out to get the AAC or UConn.

Sheesh you are thick in the head.

Clearly they had the A10 and BE higher than the AAC last year--when they shouldn't have.

Just admit it an moved on.

 

[Jerry1714]

Sheesh you are thick in the head.

Clearly they had the A10 and BE higher than the AAC last year--when they shouldn't have.

Just admit it an moved on.

I know facts suck, they are hard to deal with sometime, sorry man.

 

[HooperScooper]

Below is what Geno said this morning about the NCAA and the P5 conferences. He's so frank and direct because he doesn't care what the NCAA thinks. His team is so good every year that what are they going to do to UConn in women's basketball?

"They do a very good job of trying to screw anybody who's not in those Power Five conferences," Auriemma said. "They're really good at it. And they're very successful at it because that's one way to make yourself look even better than you are, is make everybody else look like they suck — and they are very, very good at that."

"We stopped playing for conference championships 10 years ago. I say I have so many conference championship trophies, I don't know where they are, but I know where our nine [national] championship trophies are. They're right in my office. You want to see them?"

 

[upstater]

I know facts suck, they are hard to deal with sometime, sorry man.

And the facts are, much much worse SOS and even RPI = higher seeds for A10 teams, who lose quickly.

Go on twisting the facts.