Why The Selection Committee is a Joke

[upstater]

Little tidbit about the significance of making it to the conference tournament final or semifinal from a WashPost bracketologist:

"Every national championship-winning team since 1985 — with the exception of UCLA in 1995 and Arizona in 1997, which didn’t have a conference tournament — has lasted at least to the semifinal round in its conference tournament. So plan on avoiding teams that made an early exit, at least for your national title pick. This year, such teams include No. 3 seed Creighton, No. 4 seed Duke, No. 4 seed Kansas and three teams from the SEC: No. 2 seed Tennessee, No. 3 seed Kentucky and No. 4 seed Alabama. Kansas at least had an excuse; Kevin McCullar Jr. and Hunter Dickinson missed the Jayhawks’ loss to Cincinnati because of injuries, and Parker Braun wasn’t 100 percent.

 

[Kolumbo]

AP Poll:

1. UConn
4. Iowa St
7. Auburn
10. Illinois

I would love to know if a bracket has ever had 4 top 10 teams in it before.

and the other regions each have 2. interesting.

 

[Tenspro2002]

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.

You can even see this in how the seeding and bracketing played out.

They made Illinois a 3 seed and Wisconsin a 5 so that they could justify it no matter who won that game.

Illinois should have had a much easier path, but the Committee can say "they were still a 3 seed!"

Likewise, Wisconsin is probably overseeded as a 5, but nobody looks that closely when they lose. But if they had won and been seeded lower, there would have been uproar. So the Committee splits the difference.

The Big Ten has gamed this to their advantage for years, having their conference Tournament end minutes before the Selection Show, but the way the Committee let themselves get played has only gotten worse and expanded to even Saturday's action.

 

[Tenspro2002]

AP Poll:

1. UConn
4. Iowa St
7. Auburn
10. Illinois

I would love to know if a bracket has ever had 4 top 10 teams in it before.

Not the point here, but I'd love to know which media clown ranked Houston #1 after losing by 30. How the hell were we not unanimous #1?

 

[champs99and04]

Providence, Seton Hall, and St. John's (at least until the last couple weeks) were all mediocre teams that were left out in favor of other mediocre teams that had more political sway. Everyone brings up Virginia and MSU, but the real tell might've been Northwestern. The committee helped skate them to a 9-seed without much pushback simply for beating Purdue by four in December, only to turnaround today and downplay Seton Hall's 15 point win over UConn.

They'd have been better off just laying low, because that's the sort of thing that makes their bias obvious. Northwestern and Virginia are two of the most visible and prestigious schools in the country, and Seton Hall is a commuter school. Don't think that doesn't matter.

Mississippi State, Texas A&M, and Michigan State getting in, or Clemson getting a six, is just money talking in a different way, and further evidence of a P2 agenda. Schools that are owned or coveted by the P2 made out much better than the likes of Pitt and Wake Forest. The only exception was Oklahoma, who I'm sure can't get to the SEC fast enough.

 

[tzznandrew]

They already do this. Indirectly or directly, USF's bid was stolen by a bid stealer from its own league. Indiana State, also. This happens ALL the time with smaller conferences. It is the power conferences that get away with this injustice.

USF wasn't getting in without the autobid.

I'm not for punishing deserving NCAA teams because someone else in their conference got hot. It's different when it's single bid no matter what conferences.

 

[NickDanger]

Bubba just came on CBS Sports and said that the committee does not have a set standard of metrics to base their selections and rankings on.

Each committee member is allowed to choose their selections for their own, completely biased reasons.

He can’t answer if # of Quad 1 wins vs. bad losses matters more. He said “I wish it was that simple and easy to do.”

Wow.

So what? They use their judgment. Good for them.

 

[Glenn]

While big east fans are biased, the AP and coaches polls also say the committee's work was abysmal

 

[housekeys]

USF wasn't getting in without the autobid.

I'm not for punishing deserving NCAA teams because someone else in their conference got hot. It's different when it's single bid no matter what conferences.

So you are not for punishing deserving NCAA teams because someone else in their conference got hot? But it is OK if an ACC team gets hot and you punish someone in the BE? That is what happened.

USF was more deserving than NCST, prior to NCST getting hot.

"It's different". Yes, it is. It should not be.

 

[tzznandrew]

So you are not for punishing deserving NCAA teams because someone else in their conference got hot? But it is OK if an ACC team gets hot and you punish someone in the BE? That is what happened.

USF was more deserving than NCST, prior to NCST getting hot.

"It's different". Yes, it is. It should not be.

They didn't punish anyone. The model you suggest punishes a conference. The current model is up front in suggesting that they take the best teams regardless of conference to fill however many at large spots there were. I know people are screaming about the P2, but the Big 10 only got six bids—same as the Mountain West.

An additional BE team should have made it. It's not anyone's fault, though, other than their own. Don't lose to Rutgers or Michigan.

 

[TheChamps990411]

View attachment 97808

Yup.

 

[Greg]

They showed a graphic that had the east bracket with the easiest competition based on what THEY ranked the teams. Do they think we are idiots, they put up something that they have control over and then say we did a fair job. Bite me

The silver lining is that UCONN is the best team in the country. Best team does not always win.. If it did we would not need a tournament.

 

[Hunt for 7]

View attachment 97832

I was just letting everyone know that you strongly believe their is no biased from the ncaa and that they do not favor the big10 or SEC. As you say it’s all above board. So your right nothing to read here.

 

[housekeys]

They didn't punish anyone. The model you suggest punishes a conference. The current model is up front in suggesting that they take the best teams regardless of conference to fill however many at large spots there were. I know people are screaming about the P2, but the Big 10 only got six bids—same as the Mountain West.

An additional BE team should have made it. It's not anyone's fault, though, other than their own. Don't lose to Rutgers or Michigan.

Don't lose to Rutgers and Michigan? Well, OK. Don't lose to NCST (hello Virginia). The only thing that is up front about the current model is that they admit it is arbitrary and selective. They do not admit it is unjust, which it is.

But yea, you are right. You get the last word.

 

[Chief00]

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.

Agree.

 

[huskyjawz]

Agree.

One person with a laptop could do this. They have a whole committee, and they can't manage to make adjustments based on the weekends games. It's a shame. Doesn't have to be this way.

 

[Jimdish255]

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

Since they don't seem tobe capable of that I think this is a good solution. But then they'll just say there was another bubble team in that conference. There are unlimited excuses available. The bottom line is they are unaccountable and there is no reasonable time frame or outside party for a challenge.

 

[navery12]

I was just letting everyone know that you strongly believe their is no biased from the ncaa and that they do not favor the big10 or SEC. As you say it’s all above board. So your right nothing to read here.

No, that's not what I said. I said it's not a Midwest bias but a bias towards the P6. And that applies and is what you're saying here too

 

[Hurleyman216]

With AI now on the rise and sports betting at an all time high, I would think some combination of having AI and Vegas select a bracket would be much more fair, balanced and entertaining than what the committee put together. Let the odds makers decide the at large bids based on what the point spreads would be for each potential matchup. Instead we have teams like Dayton, Mich State and Virginia that have no business being in the field while leaving out some teams that legitimately could have won 2-3 games or more all because football is now directing how our basketball tournament is run.

 

[tzznandrew]

With AI now on the rise and sports betting at an all time high, I would think some combination of having AI and Vegas select a bracket would be much more fair, balanced and entertaining than what the committee put together. Let the odds makers decide the at large bids based on what the point spreads would be for each potential matchup. Instead we have teams like Dayton, Mich State and Virginia that have no business being in the field while leaving out some teams that legitimately could have won 2-3 games or more all because football is now directing how our basketball tournament is run.

I'd like less Vegas and less sports gambling in my life.

Same with AI.

The committee this year did a bad job. Seton Hall, St. John's, and PC left the door open for subjective people to get that wrong. I'd rather that than gamblers and machines.

 

[Kolumbo]

Since they don't seem tobe capable of that I think this is a good solution. But then they'll just say there was another bubble team in that conference. There are unlimited excuses available. The bottom line is they are unaccountable and there is no reasonable time frame or outside party for a challenge.

It is such a popular event that there are so many bracketologists, rankings, metrics, and polls trying to determine who is in and who is on the bubble. So the good news is everyone pretty much knows who is on the bubble. Last 8 in. First 8 out. When the ACC has 1 bubble team and the Big East has 3 bubble teams, and the committee picks the one from the ACC, there is going to be a problem. UConn wins as it should, UNC and dook spit the bit as expected and allow NC State to steal a bid, the ACC gains and the Big East loses. As you said, they can use any argument they want, but it costs the Big East money, and the Big East relies on basketball. The ACC does not.

 

[Orange]

I hate literally everything about our bracket. Just look at the #2-6 seeds

2. Iowa State- The best #2 seed, really was a joke that UNC got a #1 seed over them

3. Illinois- Really a #2 or possibly even #1 caliber seed now that Terrence Shannon is playing. They’re only seeded this low because they were less good when he was still suspended.

4. Auburn- Pomeroy’s overall #4 team, the equivalent of the last 1 seed. I have no idea how they only got a 4 seed

5. San Diego State-A pretty run of the mill 5 seed on paper. But they’ll be looking for revenge after UConn beat them in the national title game last year

6. BYU- They’re really the equivalent of a 4 seed. The only reason why they aren’t a 4 seed is so their bracket would comply with their no games on Sunday rule.

This is some total nightmare bracket that the NCAA seems to have made because they don’t want us to repeat as champions.

And picking that terrible Virginia team for the tournament rather than St. John’s is further rubbing salt in the Big East’s wound.

 

[Orange]

Our bracket is such an unbelievable screw job that few people even bother to mention that if we don’t play Auburn in the Sweet 16, we’ll instead get to play a San Diego team that will want revenge after we beat them in last year’s national title game.

And even fewer people mention how BYU is really a 4 seed that got demoted to a 6 seed because of their no playing on Sunday rules.

 

[VAHuskyFan]

It is such a popular event that there are so many bracketologists, rankings, metrics, and polls trying to determine who is in and who is on the bubble. So the good news is everyone pretty much knows who is on the bubble. Last 8 in. First 8 out. When the ACC has 1 bubble team and the Big East has 3 bubble teams, and the committee picks the one from the ACC, there is going to be a problem. UConn wins as it should, UNC and dook spit the bit as expected and allow NC State to steal a bid, the ACC gains and the Big East loses. As you said, they can use any argument they want, but it costs the Big East money, and the Big East relies on basketball. The ACC does not.

Last year the Big East refs seemed to understand this, and made sure we “shared” our non-conference success with the other Big East schools. So let’s be careful what we wish for.

 

[willie99]

They showed a graphic that had the east bracket with the easiest competition based on what THEY ranked the teams. Do they think we are idiots, they put up something that they have control over and then say we did a fair job. Bite me

Some posters think the committee was smart. I think they're the biggest contortionists in tournament history

And when you can't cite logic or reasoning that's consistently applied, you're covering up for your shortcomings. You proved you enabled bias

The only thing the buffoon cited was mileage

Even though metrics suggest otherwise, even though the chairman never cited metrics (because he knew he couldn't), people here are suggesting it was metrics. Too funny