2018 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament

[brian]

Buffalo got absolutely fucking hosed with its seeding. Not sure how a team with an RPI of 25 (as imperfect as RPI is) gets a 13 seed. Don't be surprised if they beat Arizona.

Surprised you say this knowing you watched Ayton this weekend. I'll be surprised if Arizona loses to anyone, especially Buffalo. Ayton is worth whatever they paid for him.

Eh, it's Arizona and Sean Miller. They're always good for taking a dump on themselves in spectacular fashion.

[brian]

I could take the CIT talk somewhere else, but if you're amped up and jones-ing for some kind of tournament game right this very second, there is a CIT game between Central Michigan and Fort Wayne tipping off at 11 a.m. Central time inexplicably on CBS Sports Network.

You mean the Hugh Durham Classic.....who is not excited for this game.

Amazed the Terps did not get a sniff at any post-season play. But kinda glad they were not running about in the CIT or CBI.

Once upon a time, they'd be a no-brainer for the NIT, but since they have to take conference champs who don't make the NCAA (which is a good thing IMO that cuts down on the power conferences getting NIT bids).

[brian]

Central is so fun to watch and so frustrating as well. They've had EIGHT different guys make a three-pointer 17 minutes into the game and they're only up 3 because they can't play a lick of defense.

[rass]

Central is so fun to watch and so frustrating as well. They've had EIGHT different guys make a three-pointer 17 minutes into the game and they're only up 3 because they can't play a lick of defense.

...
!!!

[Nonlinear FC]

Only win of note was against Gonzaga. I'm usually a St. Mary's/Gonzaga advocate, because I think the loser of the conf. tournament final tends to get screwed, but this year?

St Mary's got two games against top 25 teams, both Gonzaga, and won one. Syracuse got eight games against the top 25 and also won one. Louisville was 0-8. Seton Hall 1-5. Creighton was 1-4. Miami 1-4. Texas 2-8. Kansas St. 2-6. Arkansas 2-5. Butler 2-5. USC 0-2.

Its fine to say St. Mary's didn't prove themselves against the top teams, but you have to acknowledge (1) that isn't their fault and (2) like a dozen teams who proved themselves as unable to win against the top 25 did get in. The committee either views wins as gross versus net or gets wowed by 20+ and SoS, which is driven simply by conference affiliation.

(Or, really, its all about money and there are $$$ incentives to bring Syracuse over St. Mary's. The NCAA sucks.)

Yeah, I had a post teed up agreeing with Rex on the extremely thin margin for error. It included something along the lines that if MI had to rely primarily on Nov and Dec resume to make the tournament, they might not have made it the year after they lost in the final to Louisville. That team struggled mightily to start out, but wound up losing a squeeker to Kentucky in the Elite 8.

Shit, the last two years MI has been HORRIBLE to start, only to round into form and do damage in both conf. and NCAA tournaments.

They should certainly be in over Syracuse and a few others. I guess I'm saving my outrage for those instances where one of those teams goes 25-2 with the one loss being in season to the other and then a loss in the conf. tourney final.

[Shirley]

The flip side to the mid-major problem is that if the committee doesn't stress non-conference games, programs like Gonzaga and St. Mary's would essentially get a free pass to the tournament every year simply by playing in a shit conference. There are 11 teams in the WCC and 8 of them are ranked 120+ in kenpom. Four are above 200. Should teams be rewarded for running up their record against teams like that?

And they apply the same calculus (to a lesser degree) to major conference teams. Just ask Seth Greenberg who missed out on the bubble multiple times, mostly because he always played a crappy non-conference schedule. Boeheim finally wised up this year, which is probably the only reason his team is in.

(I just checked St. Mary's schedule on kenpom. They played exactly 7 games against top-100 teams. Two (!!) against top-fifty teams (the Gonzaga games). As a contrast, Gonzaga played 6 top-50 games just in their non-conference schedule.)

[brian]

The flip side to the mid-major problem is that if the committee doesn't stress non-conference games, programs like Gonzaga and St. Mary's would essentially get a free pass to the tournament every year simply by playing in a shit conference. There are 11 teams in the WCC and 8 of them are ranked 120+ in kenpom. Four are above 200. Should teams be rewarded for running up their record against teams like that?

And they apply the same calculus (to a lesser degree) to major conference teams. Just ask Seth Greenberg who missed out on the bubble multiple times, mostly because he always played a crappy non-conference schedule. Boeheim finally wised up this year, which is probably the only reason his team is in.

(I just checked St. Mary's schedule on kenpom. They played exactly 7 games against top-100 teams. Two (!!) against top-fifty teams (the Gonzaga games). As a contrast, Gonzaga played 6 top-50 games just in their non-conference schedule.)

That's all well and good, but it's important to remember that both teams have to agree to play. Saint Mary's can't just show up in Tucson with a basketball and demand a game against Arizona. The bigger schools continually duck the better mid-major teams.

(And before you say "but Gonzaga!" Gonzaga is not a mid-major team any more. Teams don't get punished for scheduling Gonzaga and losing like they do against teams like New Mexico State, Buffalo, etc...and even still Saint Mary's.

[mister d]

Right. I don't imagine anyone would tell you St. Mary's NCSoS is where it is by choice.

[brian]

Great Alaska Shootout AND Hugh Durham Classic champions in the same season? Is this really happening?

[Brontoburglar]

I found it a little surprising and weird that Oklahoma State was the team that the media guys all latched on to, they were barely on the radar. I thought there were 5-6 teams left out that were closer to being in than them. For them, it was a simple case of having a terrible out of conference schedule, as already mentioned.

OSU was the talking point because of OU. Had it not been OU -- say, Alabama -- then the Cowboys aren't even in the conversation.

But since OU provided a very clear example of "hey here's a team in its own conference that's clearly better for the last two months and got left out" the Cowboys got to be that team.

[Shirley]

Right. I don't imagine anyone would tell you St. Mary's NCSoS is where it is by choice.

I'm imaging it right now. I agree that it's probably harder for St. Mary's than it is for some no-name patsy, but other similar schedule better than St. Mary's did this year.

Looking at some schools in the field - Davidson played UVA and UNC. Bucknell played UNC, Maryland, and Arkansas. Nevada played TCU, Texas Tech, Rhode Island, and Davidson (playing each other!). Rhode Island played Seton Hall, UVA, Providence, Nevada, and Alabama.

It can be done.

All that said, I think St. Mary's was probably good enough to make the tournament. Looking at their record and their computer ratings, they probably should have been in. But I don't think it was some conspiracy to keep them out.

[A_B]

Getting into a decent preseason boondoggle tournament is sometimes a good way to play some people you don't usually get to, but I imagine most of those events prefer mid-level big conference teams for fanbase reasons so it doesn't always work out, so it becomes a circular argument.

[mister d]

They've played UNC the last four years and UVA twice in that span. 5 away games and a neutral.

[sancarlos]

But since OU provided a very clear example of "hey here's a team in its own conference that's clearly better for the last two months and got left out" the Cowboys got to be that team.

I think that team should be USC, vis a vis Arizona State.

[DSafetyGuy]

Well, St. Mary's had some chances to schedule non-conference opponents with heartbeats.

[mister d]

"An Atlantic 10 team offered a home-and-home and a Big East team offered non-specified terms therefore St. Mary's did this to themselves."

[brian]

Also guys I'm kinda shocked that Gary Parrish would be carrying water for the selection committee considering his very employment depends on it.

[A_B]

Maybe they thought one team with the nickname of the fucking Gaels was enough?

[mister d]

Its incredibly dishonest to even include Rhode Island on there as if they're a major conference team and not almost the platonic ideal of two mid-majors agreeing to eat themselves. There's no "good win" from a committee standpoint in that game, only a justifying loss.

[Shirley]

What are you talking about? Rhode Island was ranked most of the year in the human polls and finished in the top 20 of RPI. That would have been a good game for anyone to play. And Rhode Island is almost always good, so anyone scheduling them would know that.

[brian]

What are you talking about? Rhode Island was ranked most of the year in the human polls and finished in the top 20 of RPI. That would have been a good game for anyone to play. And Rhode Island is almost always good, so anyone scheduling them would know that.

Wait, what? Rhode Island has only been good for basically the last two seasons. If you were scheduling them two years ago for a game this year, they were basically a .500 A-10 team, which no one is going to be impressed by beating, but which will be used as a cudgel against you if you lose. Even if you scheduled them last offseason for this year you had no guarantee they were going to be as good as they were. A couple of injuries and all of the sudden you have another 51-100 RPI (or worse) anchoring your SOS.

To be a mid-major team and get an at-large berth you have to thread a needle that includes trying to get teams from the power five conferences to even schedule you in the first place, winning enough of those games (typically on the road) to not torpedo your season before it even starts and then hoping that a few teams in your own conference aren't so horrible that merely by beating them your computer ranking drops several spots.

[mister d]

This is the second time they've made the tourney since the year 2000 and that #19 RPI got them a 7 seed, so I'm not sure how you can argue predictability or committee respect.

[Nonlinear FC]

Also, prior to last year they hadn't won the conference tourney since 1999 or the regular season since 1988.

/pile on

[brian]

I'm continually mystified that there are so many people who would rather see a completely overrated, mediocre .500 team like Alabama or Syracuse over a team like Saint Mary's in the NCAA tournament.

Will never, ever, ever understand.

ETA: Or Oklahoma. Or really any one of four or five other teams that just are able to continue to fail upward into the tournament by going 8-10, but managing to pull one upset over a top 10 team from within their conference and having the selection committee go gaga over it.

[mister d]

If we agree there are 7 majors in basketball (ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC, PAC-12, American), there have been 9 total at-large bids given to "not them" over the last three EXPANDED fields. Yelling at one of them that they failed to control their own destiny is shit.

[brian]

If I'm made emperor of college basketball, the first rule change I make is that you can't get an at-large bid unless you finish .500 or above in your conference. I'll be nice and include conference tournament games as well, but if you go 9-11 or 10-11 (including the tournament) then TFB. Try to win a couple more games next time.

[A_B]

Does the NCAA prefer giving bids to teams with massive enrollments and alumni/fan networks that likely will travel better than a bid to a school with a smaller fanbase (or even a USC team that while they have a huge enrollment, likely aren't going to travel as well)? Asking for a friend.

[brian]

Does the NCAA prefer giving bids to teams with massive enrollments and alumni/fan networks that likely will travel better than a bid to a school with a smaller fanbase (or even a USC team that while they have a huge enrollment, likely aren't going to travel as well)? Asking for a friend.

I think you answered your own question. Though I suspect the TV ratings/buzz move the needle more than fanbases who travel since I don't think they have any trouble selling tickets even for the first and second round games.

ETA: And if we're REALLY going to get into the weeds on this, the selection committee is comprised mostly of representatives from the Power (Seven) conferences who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. So you have the ACC or Big Ten representatives making sure that Alabama's back gets scratched because they know they might need the SEC's help to get a mediocre Big Ten team in next year.

[Joe K]

I’m with Brian and Mister D on this one. If we’re talking about taking teams without a realistic chance to make a deep run,* I’d rather see teams like St. Mary’s or even Middle Tennessee State who had a great record in a mid-major conference get in over an 18-13 power conference mediocrity.

* On this point, I doubt that the current committee would have even taken 2006 George Mason or 2011 VCU, and those teams made the Final Four.

[mister d]

Does the NCAA prefer giving bids to teams with massive enrollments and alumni/fan networks that likely will travel better than a bid to a school with a smaller fanbase (or even a USC team that while they have a huge enrollment, likely aren't going to travel as well)? Asking for a friend.

Imagine that sarcastic justification for any other sport? Yes, Baltimore is more deserving but we're going to put the Yankees in the playoffs instead because they've got a much larger fanbase.

[A_B]

I agree, I just think we really all know what's going on - I guess I missed the part where we agreed on that before talking about who deserved to be in - my bad on that I have been scattershot today.

People who like basketball would prefer those upper echelon mid-majors who deserve a shot. People who ROLL TIDE ROLL want to see Bama.

[mister d]

What's crazy is they sell Cinderella more than any other non-gambling aspect of the tourney and then do everything they can to avoid those scenarios.

[Shirley]

Jeez, you go to some meetings and the thread blows up.

My bad on Rhode Island. Maybe I'm old, but I think of them as a solid, pretty consistent program. Looking back, it looks like they win 20+ games a lot, but mostly make the NIT. I'm probably still colored by memories of Cutino Mobley. Still, a solid program that would be a good RPI game most years.

Mister D, in your example, am I supposed to be outraged that if you exclude all teams from the 7 top conferences, that over 3 seasons there were 9 at-large bids made to other conferences? In other words, three per year. How many should there have been? Realistically, there are usually only about 10 or so bids each year that are up for any debate. Maybe fewer.

I'm not going to argue that Syracuse should have made it this year. They could just as easily not made it, and I don't think there would have been too much argument. At the same time, I think Notre Dame would be favored against St. Mary's on a neutral court. And other than St. Mary's, what other non-major conference team should have made it this year but didn't? Looking at kenpom again, after St. Mary's the next six teams to get skipped are from major conferences.

[brian]

No, we're talking about Saint Mary's. (There are a couple of others you could probably have made a tepid case for (like Middle Tennessee State) and a couple of others that would have been hosed unfairly had they lost their conference tournament like Buffalo or New Mexico State, but this wasn't a banner year for mid-major conferences.

The point remains though that Saint Mary's and other similar schools are held to a standard that no major conference school could ever hope to achieve. And worse, some years there's just as much chaff at the bottom of major conferences as there is in some mid-majors. Look at the Big Ten this year, for example. The Big Ten only got four bids and didn't really deserve more than that, but a couple of games break differently and maybe Nebraska or Penn State does get in and you have major conference apologists saying with a straight face that it's justified because they play in the Big Ten? Where 10 of the 14 schools had a 140 or worse non-conference SOS? It's maddening.

[mister d]

Can you really just say “realistically” to shrink the denominator from 138 to a few dozen? Especially given that a mid has eaten up some of those obvious at-larges?

[mister d]

Also, you probably have to have a pretty major leaning definition of “realistically” when the #23/#25 team heading into conference tourneys got skipped over.

[HaulCitgo]

Except there is very definitely a question of who has the better squad. I want to see the mid major too but not sure they have a better shot at a final four. The NBA rule has benefited mid majors so what has been the record of double digit seed mid major conference teams making final fours vs same seed major conference teams?

[mister d]

How does the rule benefit mid-majors?

[Shirley]

Can you really just say “realistically” to shrink the denominator from 138 to a few dozen? Especially given that a mid has eaten up some of those obvious at-larges?

Sorry, I have no idea what this means.

[HaulCitgo]

No mid major ever wins if big programs keep kids in school. Ever.