Why The Selection Committee is a Joke

[HuskyHawk]

I know you're happy to be in a conference better than the American, and better than the Big East. But since your team isn't even in, and our team is the #1 overall seed, maybe this board isn't the place to try to "rub our noses in it". Try feeling superior over on Georgetown's board.

 

[Rico444]

That said, look at the bracket. We may see FAU and Auburn (who has to get past SD St. or we see them instead), but we'll only see one of Iowa St. and Illinois if the seeds hold. And those two teams have to get past Wash St. and BYU to make it that far.

This is why I'm not worried about it. 8/9 seeds are always a little scary, but FAU probably should have been a bubble team, so to me they're not as strong as a usual 8/9. Then there's Auburn, who's good but had only one Q1 win going into the conference tournament. So I understand that KenPom and the computers love them, but they mostly racked up those numbers against mediocre competition. Iowa State is good, but every 1 and 2 seed is good. Arizona was ranked #1 in the country earlier in the year, and just last week Tennessee was called the best team outside of Uconn/Purdue/Houston.

 

[Tex-Lager93]

Iowa State lands in the East as the "number 8" team despite discussion as a #1 (the clear #5 team)...because their non-conference strength of schedule...and their distance to the region...wut. Just pick the handful of real metrics and plug it into AI. Where it lands, it lands. These yahoos don't know how to seed teams.

 

[icednct]

The Mountain West getting 5 teams?
Put those 5 against St Johns, Providence, Seton Hall, Villanova and Butler and lets see who wins... Come on!!

Big East got hosed. The teams that got snubbed all played difficult non-conference games they shouldn't be punished for that!
The likes of Butler and even DePaul had good wins out of conference which just goes to show how good the conference is.
Villanova got hosed for playing a gauntlet non conference and ran out of gas against some hungry in state teams... If they played all cupcakes they would have won all those games... Clown show this committee is.

 

[Tenspro2002]

View attachment 97823It sucks that I was right about this.

It must be awesome being Michigan State and knowing, every year, before the season even begins, that the sheer difficulty of their schedule -- regardless of how they perform in those games (14 losses!!) -- will be enough for the Committee to put them in the field.

 

[Tenspro2002]

Another big shift I noticed is that teams that makes runs are not rewarded nearly as much as in the past. 10 years ago, an Auburn or Iowa State, by winning their conference championship, would have been bumped up at least 1 line, if not 2, especially with most of the other top teams losing. Auburn and Iowa State are basically where they were before the tournaments began.

The Committee is too lazy to adjust their brackets based on results from Friday and Saturday, nevermind Sunday.

They shouldn't be doing this and should find people eager to do the work.

 

[REB1094]

There’s a reasonable case that the East region was miserably botched, and the most likely explanation is that the brackets were finalized on Thursday except for the order of the 1 seeds, and the autobids if there was an upset

There’s also a reasonable case from Auburn/Iowa St/Illinois fans that they went on a tear to unexpectedly win P5 tournaments, and their reward is to be put in the same region as the overall #1

The path is harder than it should be, but each game is essentially a home game and UConn will still be favored every single round, no matter what

Lets go Huskies.

 

[VAHuskyFan]

Wins against Top-5 Kenpom teams needed to reach Final Four (to chalk):

UConn(1) = 2
Houston(1) = 0
Purdue(1) = 0
UNC(1) = 0

Iowa State(2) = 2
Arizona(2) = 0
Tennessee(2) = 1
Marquette(2) = 1

Illinois(3) = 2
Creighton(3) = 1
Baylor(3) = 0
Kentucky(3) = 1

Auburn(4) = 2
Duke(4) = 1
Alabama(4) = 0
Kansas(4) = 1

Explain to me why, as the top overall seed, we need to beat two top 5 teams to make the Final Four, while for 11-loss Alabama (who finished 5th in the SEC), the number is zero?

There’s no defense for the bracket the committee put out. The other top-4 seeds in our bracket are also pissed - and rightly so. You can’t put 3 Top-5 Kenpom teams in the same bracket if you’re being even remotely serious.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

Some of you guys (most of you guys) follow this stuff way more closely than I do. What was this committee member droning on about with "mileage" being the determining factor as to some of these teams being slotted in the East? I've never heard that explanation before and it seems completely insane to me. (Auburn plays in Spokane this week.)

 

[UConnSwag11]

Last year, UCONN helped the Big East because they destroyed everyone OOC and their metrics were amazing. Going into conference play and losing those games boosted the Big East. Didn’t happen this year.

 

[kobe]

The Mountain West getting 5 teams?
Put those 5 against St Johns, Providence, Seton Hall, Villanova and Butler and lets see who wins... Come on!!

Big East got hosed. The teams that got snubbed all played difficult non-conference games they shouldn't be punished for that!
The likes of Butler and even DePaul had good wins out of conference which just goes to show how good the conference is.
Villanova got hosed for playing a gauntlet non conference and ran out of gas against some hungry in state teams... If they played all cupcakes they would have won all those games... Clown show this committee is.

creighton got blown out by two mountain west teams. try again friend.

 

[navery12]

Some of you guys (most of you guys) follow this stuff way more closely than I do. What was this committee member droning on about with "mileage" being the determining factor as to some of these teams being slotted in the East? I've never heard that explanation before and it seems completely insane to me. (Auburn plays in Spokane this week.)

It's a really weird way to say they put the top 4 seeds in regions based on geographic proximity. So when it came time to place Auburn the options were East or West (since Tennessee was in the Midwest as a 2 seed and Kentucky was in the South as a 3 seed already). So they got to stay closer to home with the East over Alabama one spot lower on the S curve

 

[huskyjawz]

Another big shift I noticed is that teams that makes runs are not rewarded nearly as much as in the past. 10 years ago, an Auburn or Iowa State, by winning their conference championship, would have been bumped up at least 1 line, if not 2, especially with most of the other top teams losing. Auburn and Iowa State are basically where they were before the tournaments began.

That's pure laziness by the committee and total BS. The committee rep used to come on TV and explain how they had different scenarios based on which team would win the late games on Sunday. Now they don't talk about it because they don't do it.

 

[LBird33]

It’s about football. Influencing the selection.

 

[businesslawyer]

Wins against Top-5 Kenpom teams needed to reach Final Four (to chalk):

UConn(1) = 2
Houston(1) = 0
Purdue(1) = 0
UNC(1) = 0

Iowa State(2) = 2
Arizona(2) = 0
Tennessee(2) = 1
Marquette(2) = 1

Illinois(3) = 2
Creighton(3) = 1
Baylor(3) = 0
Kentucky(3) = 1

Auburn(4) = 2
Duke(4) = 1
Alabama(4) = 0
Kansas(4) = 1

Explain to me why, as the top overall seed, we need to beat two top 5 teams to make the Final Four, while for 11-loss Alabama (who finished 5th in the SEC), the number is zero?

There’s no defense for the bracket the committee put out. The other top-4 seeds in our bracket are also pissed - and rightly so. You can’t put 3 Top-5 Kenpom teams in the same bracket if you’re being even remotely serious.

The simple answer is that you are using KenPom to represent 100% of your analysis, and the Committee considers many ratings and factors. Ken Pom cares how much you beat lousy teams by. Many don’t think that should be a factor, and resume based rankings don’t give margin of victory any weight whatsoever. Just like — I don’t know — the NBA and MLB and the NFL.

 

[Tenspro2002]

That's pure laziness by the committee and total BS. The committee rep used to come on TV and explain how they had different scenarios based on which team would win the late games on Sunday. Now they don't talk about it because they don't do it.

Forget Sunday, they didn't even make adjustments based on Saturday's results.

 

[Kolumbo]

I would like to see some video of people blasting the committee. I saw this post on the SJU site and someone claimed they never took into account injuries before. I don't know if that's true or not. Maybe I'll find Mad dog going on a rant.

 

[tzznandrew]

The simple answer is that you are using KenPom to represent 100% of your analysis, and the Committee considers many ratings and factors. Ken Pom cares how much you beat lousy teams by. Many don’t think that should be a factor, and resume based rankings don’t give margin of victory any weight whatsoever. Just like — I don’t know — the NBA and MLB and the NFL.

People are freaked out by an Auburn team that lost to Appalachian State, whose best OOC win was Indiana, and was 1-3 vs. Alabama, Tennessee, and Kentucky.

Auburn's metrics look great in part because they walloped South Carolina (a team that beat nobody OOC, though they did beat Kentucky and Tennessee), Arkansas, and other mid-to-low-tier SEC schools.

Let's worry about Auburn, Illinois, Iowa State, BYU, South Dakota, whatever, when they make it to Boston. Only a few—at most—of them are making it to Boston.

 

[Tenspro2002]

People are freaked out by an Auburn team that lost to Appalachian State, whose best OOC win was Indiana, and was 1-3 vs. Alabama, Tennessee, and Kentucky.

Auburn's metrics look great in part because they walloped South Carolina (a team that beat nobody OOC, though they did beat Kentucky and Tennessee), Arkansas, and other mid-to-low-tier SEC schools.

Let's worry about Auburn, Illinois, Iowa State, BYU, South Dakota, whatever, when they make it to Boston. Only a few—at most—of them are making it to Boston.

The concern about Auburn is that the "error bar" on their true quality is very, very large.

They may be a legitimate top 5 team (if you believe KenPom or NET) and snakebitten in close losses. On the other hand, they may be analytics frauds and not capable of holding their own against elite teams. We have no idea.

But you're right, they might not even make it to Boston, and we could end up with a SDSU rematch, though that in itself isn't great from a familiarity/revenge point of view.

 

[tzznandrew]

The concern about Auburn is that the "error bar" on their true quality is very, very large.

They may be a legitimate top 5 team (if you believe KenPom or NET) and snakebitten in close losses. On the other hand, they may be analytics frauds and not capable of holding their own against elite teams. We have no idea.

But you're right, they might not even make it to Boston, and we could end up with a SDSU rematch, though that in itself isn't great from a familiarity/revenge point of view.

They didn't lose super-close games to Tennessee or Kentucky. I think they should have been a 3 seed. But I'm not all that hot and bothered by them.

 

[Sea Goat]

I've said this before - taking March Madness away from the NCAA would kill it! There no reason why the elite college BB teams can't replicate what the football powers have done. Cut the NCAA out of March Madness and the NCAA will dry up and blow away...

 

[Rocktheworld]

There’s a reasonable case that the East region was miserably botched, and the most likely explanation is that the brackets were finalized on Thursday except for the order of the 1 seeds, and the autobids if there was an upset

There’s also a reasonable case from Auburn/Iowa St/Illinois fans that they went on a tear to unexpectedly win P5 tournaments, and their reward is to be put in the same region as the overall #1

The path is harder than it should be, but each game is essentially a home game and UConn will still be favored every single round, no matter what

Lets go Huskies.

This bracket is a perfect case for AI seeding. AI can and would do a better job.

 

[VAHuskyFan]

The simple answer is that you are using KenPom to represent 100% of your analysis, and the Committee considers many ratings and factors. Ken Pom cares how much you beat lousy teams by. Many don’t think that should be a factor, and resume based rankings don’t give margin of victory any weight whatsoever. Just like — I don’t know — the NBA and MLB and the NFL.

The simple answer is that the Committee got lazy and didn’t adjust anything based on conference tournaments.

Kenpom is just a data point. Would you prefer NET? Here’s Top-10 NET teams by region:

East: 4 / South: 2 / Midwest: 2 / West: 2

You mentioned resume-based. Fine. Here’s Top-10 BPI Resume teams by region:

East: 4 / South: 2 / Midwest: 2 / West: 2

You seem to maybe want to just count wins and losses “like the NBA.” Uh . . . OK? Here’s the number of top 4 seeds in each region with 7 or fewer losses:

East: 3 / South: 1 / Midwest:1 / West: 1

Number of conference champions among Top 4 seeds?

East: 4 / South: 0 / Midwest: 0 / West: 0

Same answer every time.

Keep in mind that as the No. 1 overall, our 2-4s should be relatively weaker than those of our regions. Not only are they not weaker, they are the strongest by just about any metric you can find.

 

[businesslawyer]

The simple answer is that the Committee got lazy and didn’t adjust anything based on conference tournaments.

Kenpom is just a data point. Would you prefer NET? Here’s Top-10 NET teams by region:

East: 4 / South: 2 / Midwest: 2 / West: 2

You mentioned resume-based. Fine. Here’s Top-10 BPI Resume teams by region:

East: 4 / South: 2 / Midwest: 2 / West: 2

You seem to maybe want to just count wins and losses “like the NBA.” Uh . . . OK I guess? Here’s the number of top 4 seeds in each region with 7 or fewer losses:

East: 3 / South: 1 / Midwest:1 / West: 1

Same answer every time.

I agree with you that little if any weight was given to conference tournaments. I don’t think that’s a just this year thing, but it certainly made the brackets look funny in more ways than it usually does this year.

 

[Kolumbo]

Solution:
If a team wins its conference tournament and steals a bid, then another team from that same conference gets bumped. This way it keeps the number of bids by conference more in-line with what they deserve. A bubble-ish team from a conference gets knocked out by its own conference member. This year there is no reason for MWC and ACC to get 6 and 5 while the Big East gets 3. It just makes no sense. If the legit players in a conference can't finish the job, that conference should be punished.

NC State steals a bid, UVA gets chopped, or Clemson gets mauled since UVA doesn't belong anyway.

Oregon steals a bid, Washington St gets washed

New Mexico steals a bid, Colorado St gets rammed

 

[tzznandrew]

Solution:
If a team wins its conference tournament and steals a bid, then another team from that same conference gets bumped.

You can't do that. There were years were Gonzaga was one of the best 10 teams in the country but the WCC was a one-bid league.

Just pick the best teams. We're upset about St. John's or Seton Hall not being in, but it isn't as if they were going to win the title. The committee just has to do a better job, not rewrite the rulebook

 

[Inyatkin]

You can't do that. There were years were Gonzaga was one of the best 10 teams in the country but the WCC was a one-bid league.

Just pick the best teams. We're upset about St. John's or Seton Hall not being in, but it isn't as if they were going to win the title. The committee just has to do a better job, not rewrite the rulebook

Alternatively, the committee could take their job remotely seriously. We're a long way from "do a better job."

 

[Kolumbo]

You can't do that. There were years were Gonzaga was one of the best 10 teams in the country but the WCC was a one-bid league.

Just pick the best teams. We're upset about St. John's or Seton Hall not being in, but it isn't as if they were going to win the title. The committee just has to do a better job, not rewrite the rulebook

I was focused on the larger conferences because sure, a conference like WCC or A-10 which are usually one bid conferences anyway would be tough to apply this to. But it can certainly be applied to the MWC and ACC where there could be a 2 bid swing. The dollars today and the financial impact to the conferences too large to allow this to happen with so many bid stealers. You can say pick the best teams but that is not happening when both UVA and NC State get selected. This would solidify at least one remedy to the bids being so skewed.

 

[tzznandrew]

Alternatively, the committee could take their job remotely seriously. We're a long way from "do a better job."

Yeah, admitting on air they were more or less done at 2 AM Sunday morning (or was it Saturday?) was not a good look.

 

[Tdaley]

this is exactly what I was saying around 6:15 when the selections were announced. The committee puts up this facade that it is objective and driven academically by data and it isn't. Like Tenspro has been saying, I think they had UConn at the #3 overall and set up their bracket that way and then when the results of late Friday and the weekend occurred they stayed with those brackets. Instead they should have been doing the hard work they were supposed to and rearranging the teams based on the conference tournament results.

These is exactly right. The committee could have gone back to the prearranged brackets after the conference tournaments had finished and made a few adjustments. They took the lazy way out did nothing which left the East Bracket with too many teams playing great basketball at the end of the year. It is disappointing.