Time to revise the selection process for the Dance

[freescooter]

Given all the brand names going down to really lesser known programs, this might be the time to rethink the analytics generated selection process. I actually have thought it was badly unbalanced for a long time largely because all the models give way to much weight to strength of schedule. There have even been a few studies that confirm this.

My ideas on this are to limit the number of bids to any conference to roughly 1/3 of the members, which would allow additional mid-majors to participate. As we have seen, many of theses teams can flat out play. And too often a top team from a mid-major league gets bounced as a result of getting upset in a league tournament. In the Big 10 or New Big East that doesn’t matter but in some lesser leagues it does mostly because the committee wants to give 6 or even 8 bids to teams that aren’t really that good And haven’t really earned anything.

the other positive is that it will make late season games in major conferences very important, almost like playoff games, If you are in 5th place in the NBE in mid-February, you darned well better win your remaining games if you want a bid.

Heres the thing, these mid major upsets are what makes March madness But won’t change the final outcome. But in the end, over the last 20 years, only one team seeded higher than a 4 has one it all, and since seeding started, the highest seed to win was Villanova as an 8 over Georgetown almost 40 years ago. So it really doesn’t matter that much who fills the 9-12 lines, which is where these 6 and 7 teams from big leagues typically go.

 

[auror]

Outside of this year, upsets are down in general because the seeding process has been improved thanks to advanced metrics. The trend is pretty clear.

This year is something of an aberration due to the bad data. But the selection committee didn't really rely overly on any metrics. They put Wichita St in. They had Syracuse outside of the first four. They gave us a 7 instead of a 5. Etc.

 

[shizzle787]

My only complaint with the tournament is that there are play-in games but other than that it is perfect. This is a solution looking for a problem.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Outside of this year, upsets are down in general because the seeding process has been improved thanks to advanced metrics. The trend is pretty clear.

This year is something of an aberration due to the bad data. But the selection committee didn't really rely overly on any metrics. They put Wichita St in. They had Syracuse outside of the first four. They gave us a 7 instead of a 5. Etc.

Yeah I don’t get this thread. We all knew there would be loads of upsets this year. There was no real out of conference play so there is no way to compare teams from different conferences.

 

[Jay-Bone]

If the mid-major was the 5 and the P5 was the 12, it wouldn't be nearly as entertaining, and no longer an upset.

 

[freescooter]

If the mid-major was the 5 and the P5 was the 12, it wouldn't be nearly as entertaining, and no longer an upset.

They won’t be. That’s the thing.The P5 teams will still be the top seeds. But really did the Big 10 deserve the bids they got?

 

[Jay-Bone]

They won’t be. That’s the thing.The P5 teams will still be the top seeds. But really did the Big 10 deserve the bids they got?

I suppose they could've left out Maryland, Gtown, us, Syracuse, etc for Wofford, Mercer, ETSU, WKU, SLU, Chattanooga, etc. Like mentioned above, tough year to figure that out. Wisconsin smoked Loyola, in one of the few barometers, so who knows. I personally hate OOC games being predominately early in the season because teams haven't clicked yet, especially with young players. Like Mobley and USC would probably dominate us now. But then again, Sanogo wasn't a thing then, so maybe not too bad.

 

[HuskyHawk]

They won’t be. That’s the thing.The P5 teams will still be the top seeds. But really did the Big 10 deserve the bids they got?

The bids? Maybe. The seeds? No. Purdue was overseeeded. But Maryland was about their last team in (aside from MSU in the play in round), so there is that. Illinois is losing to Loyola Chicago right now. But who would you have given a 1 seed over them? Gonzaga, Baylor and Michigan were the only teams that looked like 1 seeds to me.

Nothing about this season is normal or should be used to evaluate the selection approach. I have always felt that they over-emphasize some imagined strength of schedule and under value winning percentage.

 

[Rocktheworld]

Never thought I’d see Freescooter arguing for Affirmative Action for mid-major college basketball

 

[Stinger92860]

They should go to 128 teams.

 

[billybud]

and, to rub in the salt..how about Syracuse?

Cuse, as #11 beat #6 SDSU and is leading #3 WVU by 6 at half.

The basketball this season is not normal and is crazy...Illinois, Texas, Ohio State out of the dance and maybe Cuse goes to Sweet 16.

 

[Brochacho]

They gave us a 7 instead of a 5. Etc.

Lol. We had a 9 seed resume and got bumped up for our brand and metrics. 1-5 vs teams this year that didn’t need an AQ to make it. This narrative of UConn being some really good team this season needs to stop.

 

[UConn990411]

I think the analytics were especially off this year because there were so few non-conference games.

I’m not opposed to some tweaks to the selection process - for instance, I’ve always felt wins were undervalued - but these objective, advanced metrics should always be one of the major inputs.

 

[ColchVEGAS]

I do not think you can limit the amount of bids from a conference. The selection committee has to pick the best 36 teams left after conference tournaments. So yes the BIG 10 teams are probably better teams than some left out but that does not guarantee victory. You still have to play 40 minutes and make fewer mistakes than your opponent in that time.

Does Oral Roberts beat OSU 3 times or more out of 10? I do not think so.

 

[Hi-Low]

There is nothing wrong.....don't screw with (almost) perfection.

This tourney is more than fair to non P6.