Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 32

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California

    At Large: 34 Best Teams?

    During a recent Basketball and Beyond broadcast with Seth Davis, Coach K stated that the 34 NCAA Tournament at-large bids are designed to go to the 34 best teams and that the current rules are set-up in such a way that the 34 best teams may not be invited. At the outset, I concede that the NCAA has decreed that the goal of the NCAA Tournament Committee is to use at-large bids to invite the 34 best teams available:

    "The committee shall select the 34 best teams to fill the at-large berths."

    I also agree with K that the current rules may not accomplish that purpose in all cases.

    However, I reject the premise. As a basketball fan, I'm interested in the 34 most deserving teams receiving at-large bids. For example, I'd rather see an interesting and successful team from a lower conference which might have lost-out on an automatic bid by failing to win its conference tournament (perhaps Davidson) receive an at-large bid than -- say -- the eighth team from a "power" conference (perhaps Providence) irrespective of whether I think (again, for example) Davidson is better than Providence.

    Thoughts?

  2. #2
    "Most deserving" is SO open to interpretation though. It leaves the door open for teams to get in for all sorts of reasons that have nothing to do with basketball. Davidson this year, for example, hasn't proven it on the court. It seems awfully easy to go down that road and end up picking teams based on what kind of TV ratings they'll bring or how well their fans will travel.

    "Best" is of course also somewhat subjective, but for the most part we all understand what "best" means even if we may not agree on who the "best" is.

  3. #3
    Coach K also said earlier this season that the ACC was clearly the best conference and it wasn't close. He seems to have a couple statements every year that are just transparent attempts to defend the ACC.

    That's fine - I think every college coach does this - just understand that he has an agenda, and these kinds of statements should be taken with the same level of seriousness as Jim Boeheim saying the tournament needs to be expanded after Syracuse was left out for two years.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Matches View Post
    "Most deserving" is SO open to interpretation though. It leaves the door open for teams to get in for all sorts of reasons that have nothing to do with basketball. Davidson this year, for example, hasn't proven it on the court. It seems awfully easy to go down that road and end up picking teams based on what kind of TV ratings they'll bring or how well their fans will travel.

    "Best" is of course also somewhat subjective, but for the most part we all understand what "best" means even if we may not agree on who the "best" is.
    Exactly. Davidson is a nice story based on their tournament run last year and Steph Curry. But the reality is that they aren't as good as last year, when they had a very good PG (Jason Richards) and two productive senior post player (Thomas Sander and Boris Meno) to complement Curry and Lovedale.

    This year's Davidson team doesn't really stand out to me. Put Miami in that conference, and Jack McClinton is suddenly the fun, gunning, undersized SG. I think Miami is actually a better team than Davidson. With Miami's size, post play and perimeter depth, I bet they'd have gone undefeated in the SoCon. So why should Davidson get in based solely on the name of Steph Curry, when they just don't have the resume to be there?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Providence is your picture-perfect at-large team.

    They played above .500 ball in (some would argue) this year’s best conference. They have some decent wins along with some big wins against Syracuse and Pitt.

    I think Providence is a lock unless they tank their first game of the Big East tourney.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Huntington Beach, CA
    We're talking about the NCAA Championship Tournament, not children's tee ball where every kid gets a hit and gets to score. Being deserving of competing for the national championship ought to be being capable of competing for the national championship .. thus, "best."

    I'll agree, however, that it adds fun and drama when one of the best is a team from a non-premiere conference that may have stumbled in its conference tourney, but merits an at-large bid anyway and makes that magical run ... only to be stopped by Duke, of course.
    No soup for you!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Quote Originally Posted by Matches View Post
    "Most deserving" is SO open to interpretation though.
    It sure is. In practice, I'm not convinced that the current system gets the, ah-hem, best results either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matches View Post
    "Best" is of course also somewhat subjective, but for the most part we all understand what "best" means even if we may not agree on who the "best" is.
    But I'm not sure that the Committee understands.

    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    You're getting into a real gray area here. Why is Davidson necessarily more deserving than Providence?
    I grant that my view is highly subjective, but once we get past the dozen or so teams with a realistic chance to win it all (Villanova notwithstanding), I care about upsets and fun and maybe even about "broadening the base" of college hoops. Other than a Duke win, the best part of the tournament is seeing some upstart putting it to a power conference team.

    Quote Originally Posted by AtlBluRew View Post
    We're talking about the NCAA Championship Tournament, not children's tee ball where every kid gets a hit and gets to score. Being deserving of competing for the national championship ought to be being capable of competing for the national championship .. thus, "best."
    Interesting argument, except that the number of teams so qualified is much lower than 65.

    Quote Originally Posted by AtlBluRew View Post
    I'll agree, however, that it adds fun and drama when one of the best is a team from a non-premiere conference that may have stumbled in its conference tourney, but merits an at-large bid anyway and makes that magical run ... only to be stopped by Duke, of course.
    Exactly.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    But I'm not sure that the Committee understands.
    That's the same committee that would be deciding who is "most deserving". I'm not in favor of giving them *more* power by making the criteria more ambiguous.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Quote Originally Posted by feldspar View Post
    Look, I understand the natural tendency to poo-poo the Big East. And I understand the argument that the Big East is bottom-heavy with bad teams. But Providence has a good resume and the Big East, despite the bottom-heavy teams, was a strong conference this year with teams that just whalloped up on eachother. Let's give credit where credit is due.
    The so-called power conferences already have every advantage -- more money, more exposure, better name recognition and less pressure. Pressure is winning your conference going away and still having to win the tournament to go to the dance. I'm sure that Len Elmore, Tom McMillen and John Lucas can relate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matches View Post
    That's the same committee that would be deciding who is "most deserving". I'm not in favor of giving them *more* power by making the criteria more ambiguous.
    Given the way the Committee works, I don't see such a change as providing more ambiguous criteria.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    How a team travels - it's fans, not it's big man - and television draw are huge considerations, especially this year. Remember Calhoun's tift with that activist reporter? It's important that these schools make hay when the sun is shinin'.

    In a Utopian tournament, sure, the best 65 teams would get in and we'd see the best basketball. But would a number two seed out west be better for Duke and it's fans than say a number three seed in the south? No, and it wouldn't be good for ticket sales or TV revenue. But these are real issues that must be taken into account by the committee that really have nothing to do with basketball.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California
    The results are in and we have a tournament with more BCS teams than ever before. Money rules yet again. A St. Mary's team that played 18 road games, went 19-2 in games in which its best player was healthy (Patty Mills is terrific) and had a stronger RPI than several selected teams (e.g., Arizona and the Terps) gets left out while BCS teams that take few risks (e.g., Missouri played one non-conference road game) aren't punished -- there's no incentive to do so. Seven Big Ten teams are in. Seven. That's disgusting (not to mention boring). And by the way, a non-conference road game (a "guarantee" game) is exceptionally hard to win. Besides the obvious difficulties of playing on the road, such games typically get younger, less experienced referees from the home team's conference, looking to establish themselves within that conference.

    This tournament won't be nearly as fun as it could be. Pity that.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wilmington
    With out using specific teams for the purpose of the discussion, I think it's do we want the smaller conference teams in the tourney when they don't win their conference.

    I DO.. watching the mid majors that opening weekend is why we have the opening weekend and what makes it fun. The Cinderellas.. The Princton vs Georgetown games.. Valpo, Butlers..

    Do you want team XYZ Mid Major who went 26-5 and got upset in their conference tourney, or do you want team ABC from a BCS conference who went 8-8 in their conference play and couldn't beat the top of their conference.

    I know Duke, unc-ch , Kansas, U Conn etc can beat any mid major any where,, But when these mid majors try to get a game with a BCS school they are doing so with the teams 5-12,, Those BCS teams want NO part of going to Butler, or VCU, or Old Dominion. When Maryland beat NC Wilminton a couple of years ago on a last second Hail Mary, NC Wilm tried to get Md to play them again the next yr home and away,, Maryland not only said no, they said they didn't even want a 3 for 1.. So don't think for a second that UVa is going to give George Mason a home and home game. Va Tech did so with Old Dominion and that series won't be renewed.. the playing field is not level. I don't blame the BCS schools,, why maybe get beat.
    If Butler is playing unc-ch Sat,, the whole country but chapel hill, will be Butler Bulldog fans.. bad example.. W Ky vs Ill,, I'm pulling for the Hilltoppers lol..

    I love to watch this Thur to see Cinderella bust our bractets lol..

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    The results are in and we have a tournament with more BCS teams than ever before. Money rules yet again. A St. Mary's team that played 18 road games, went 19-2 in games in which its best player was healthy (Patty Mills is terrific) and had a stronger RPI than several selected teams (e.g., Arizona and the Terps) gets left out while BCS teams that take few risks (e.g., Missouri played one non-conference road game) aren't punished -- there's no incentive to do so. Seven Big Ten teams are in. Seven. That's disgusting (not to mention boring). And by the way, a non-conference road game (a "guarantee" game) is exceptionally hard to win. Besides the obvious difficulties of playing on the road, such games typically get younger, less experienced referees from the home team's conference, looking to establish themselves within that conference.

    This tournament won't be nearly as fun as it could be. Pity that.
    What part of St Mary's not being the same team with a much less than 100% Mills do you not understand? Did you watch its WCC tournament game against Gonzaga? They (and Mills) were terrible and clearly not 1 of the 34 best teams in the country. The added game against a terrible 12-18 E Washington team didn't all of a sudden make Mills better -- the opponent was just so bad that a weakened Mills could score 19 points (on a less than impressive 6-14 shooting). This argument for St Mary's is getting REALLY tiresome.

    How exactly was the Committee supposed to "punish" Missouri? They won the B12T and got the auto bid. Yes, its OOC schedule stunk, but it more than took care of business in conference. You failed to mention Auburn, South Carolina and Penn St -- all BCS schools that had horrible OOC schedules, success within their BCS conferences but did NOT make the NCAAT this year because of their horrible OOC results. If you are a BCS school and you want to play terrible OOC games, then you need to play exceptionally well in conference. Syracuse learned that last year the hard way.

    Can everyone just drop the idea that scheduling BCS teams is so difficult for Mid Majors? Davidson and Gonzaga do it every year and there are a ton of tournaments in Nov and Dec that offer neutral court games against the BCS schools (which I assume is better than road games). St Mary's made the NCAAT last year and knew it was going to have a very good team this year. Despite this, its coach chose to avoid playing any of the BCS schools and paid the price.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    What part of St Mary's not being the same team with a much less than 100% Mills do you not understand?
    Other than the top dozen or so teams, which teams do you think could play at a top level without a player the caliber of Mills?

    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    Did you watch its WCC tournament game against Gonzaga? They (and Mills) were terrible and clearly not 1 of the 34 best teams in the country.
    They were. Did you see them when Mills was healthy?

    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    The added game against a terrible 12-18 E Washington team didn't all of a sudden make Mills better -- the opponent was just so bad that a weakened Mills could score 19 points (on a less than impressive 6-14 shooting). This argument for St Mary's is getting REALLY tiresome.
    Then hit ignore. If you want the BCS schools continuing to squeeze out the little guys (football redux), you've got your wish. Congratulations.

    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    How exactly was the Committee supposed to "punish" Missouri? They won the B12T and got the auto bid.
    Are you suggesting that they wouldn't have gotten in had they lost in the tournament final?

    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    You failed to mention Auburn, South Carolina and Penn St -- all BCS schools that had horrible OOC schedules, success within their BCS conferences but did NOT make the NCAAT this year because of their horrible OOC results.
    You'll forgive me if I don't shed crocodile tears that even more BCS teams didn't get into the tournament. Penn State would have been the eighth Big T'Eleven team in...

    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    Can everyone just drop the idea that scheduling BCS teams is so difficult for Mid Majors?
    Have you ever talked to anyone who has tried to do it?

    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    St Mary's made the NCAAT last year and knew it was going to have a very good team this year. Despite this, its coach chose to avoid playing any of the BCS schools and paid the price.
    If you really think that it was St. Mary's doing the avoiding, I have some marsh land in Florida to sell you...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    Other than the top dozen or so teams, which teams do you think could play at a top level without a player the caliber of Mills?
    You COMPLETELY are missing the point. The Committee's job is to pick the best 34 teams as of March 19. Not in December. Not if they were, but aren't, healthy. Not if martians landed on earth. Are you arguing that St. Mary's was back to 100% with a clearly hurt Mills or are you arguing that St Mary's was one of the top 34 teams 4 months ago (it was) and therefore its current worse stature should ignored?

    Any bubble team that loses by far its best player right before the tournament and shows convincingly that it is a much worse team without such player is not going to get a bid. Do you think Maryland would have gotten a bid if Vasquez broke his leg 2 weeks ago?


    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    Then hit ignore. If you want the BCS schools continuing to squeeze out the little guys (football redux), you've got your wish. Congratulations.
    Where is the "squeezing" going on? Unlike football, all of the "little guys" have open invites to the NCAAT via their conference tournaments. Did E Tennessee St get squeezed out? What about Morgan St? I usually think the Committee blatantly screws up a few bids but I think that they basically got it right this year.

    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    Are you suggesting that they wouldn't have gotten in had they lost in the tournament final?
    No, but it sounded like you were. How else is someone to interpret:

    [St Mary's] gets left out while BCS teams that take few risks (e.g., Missouri played one non-conference road game) aren't punished
    What punishment would you referring to with respect to Missouri, which has the #10 RPI?


    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    You'll forgive me if I don't shed crocodile tears that even more BCS teams didn't get into the tournament. Penn State would have been the eighth Big T'Eleven team in...
    No need to shed any tears. I don't think Penn St should have gotten a bid -- it was above average in the B10 but did zero OOC. That resume properly was not extended a bid. According to your view of the world, it is teams like Penn St that get invited instead of Mid Major teams. I referenced them to show you that even the big bad BCS teams that don't follow the Committee's stated requirements don't get bids.

    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    If you really think that it was St. Mary's doing the avoiding, I have some marsh land in Florida to sell you...
    Which BCS schools refused to play St. Mary's? I haven't heard the coach mention a single one. Moreover, which early season tournament refused to let St Mary's, a returning NCAAT team from last year, play in it? Was it:

    the Great Alaska Shootout, which included Butler, Western Kentucky and Gonzaga?

    the Chicago Invitational Challenge, which included Dayton, Northern Iowa, Mercer, Texas Southern and Bethune-Cookman?

    the Coaches vs. Cancer tournament, which included So Illinois, Arkansas Monticello, Northeastern, IUPUI, Michigan Tech, Miami (Ohio), Weber State, Prairie View A&M, Georgia Southern, Houston and Presbyterian?

    the South Padre Island tournament, which included UNC Wilmington, NCCU, TAMUCC, Jackson St, Kent St and Tulsa?

    Oh yeah. I forgot, tournament organizers passed over returning a NCAAT team with a bona fide star and Olympian for the likes of NCCU, Presbyterian and Bethune-Cookman.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    Moreover, which early season tournament refused to let St Mary's, a returning NCAAT team from last year, play in it? Was it:

    the Great Alaska Shootout, which included Butler, Western Kentucky and Gonzaga?

    the Chicago Invitational Challenge, which included Dayton, Northern Iowa, Mercer, Texas Southern and Bethune-Cookman?

    the Coaches vs. Cancer tournament, which included So Illinois, Arkansas Monticello, Northeastern, IUPUI, Michigan Tech, Miami (Ohio), Weber State, Prairie View A&M, Georgia Southern, Houston and Presbyterian?

    the South Padre Island tournament, which included UNC Wilmington, NCCU, TAMUCC, Jackson St, Kent St and Tulsa?

    Oh yeah. I forgot, tournament organizers passed over returning a NCAAT team with a bona fide star and Olympian for the likes of NCCU, Presbyterian and Bethune-Cookman.
    St. Mary's actually got itself in a good early season tourney and then totally screwed the pooch, so to speak. They played in the same tourney Wake did, but lost to UTEP in the first round. Had they beaten UTEP, they would have had a second round matchup with Wake, and then a game against either Arizona State or Baylor. But they lost, and played Cal St. Fullerton and Providence instead. The UTEP game proved to be a really costly loss.

    St. Mary's was a very good basketball team with Mills healthy. But regardless of his health, their resume stank. They had as many wins against NCAA tournament teams (2 - Utah St. and Morgan St., neither of which were likely to get in without an auto-bid) as they did against non-D1 teams (Seattle U and Vanguard). They beat 1 more legit bubble team (SDSU) and one pretty good, kind-of-bubble team (Providence). They only even played one other NCAA team (Gonzaga) and went 0-3. That is not the profile of a tournament team.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deeetroit City
    I like the "body of work" approach by the selection committee. This will encourage schools to schedule more aggressively, and may lead to more events like the Big 10 / ACC challenge. That event benefited both conferences greatly (Md, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin are all 10 seeds or lower and might have missed the tourney but for the addition to the resume). If the committee were to place more of an emphasis on tough road games, maybe it would be more "fair" to the mid-majors.

    I like the idea of having tough, meaningful games in December. As it is, it feels like there is the pre-season with exhibition-like games through January, and then the conference schedule. The body of work standard makes the regular season count and will discourage schools from scheduling patsies or relying on a weak conference schedule to get 20+ wins. I would like more real games in November and December.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wilmington
    "Body of Work" was the catch phrase this year.. in the past it's been RPI, how you finish the last 12 games etc..
    When a mid major ( Drexel 2007 ) goes out and playes the schedule that the "committee " suggest,, more games against better opponents, they did. They went 23-8 with road wins at Villinova, Syracuse and Creighton in that bracket buster thingie.. their RBI was something like 35.. So they did what was asked, but Stanford at 18-12 still got the bid.

    I like body of work as long as it means the same thing every year. Maryland beat Wake UNC and Mich State,, GREAT WINS.. but here's the glitch,, they get a dozen plus chances a year to play those type games,, many right here in the ACC.. a mid major gets maybe two good shots at a BCS and zero chance of error. They can't have an off game like we did against Clempson or the talking heads will blather, they got killed by XYZ.. Maryland isn't punished for losing to Morgan St. but a mid major would be.

    Who are the Mid Majors ?? Is Dayton ? Is Gonzaga ? ( look at those two's basketball budgets and tell me how Morgan St gets to the gym lol.. ) BYU isn't from a BCS conference, but I don't think they are a mid major.. Many fans say Butler was the only mid major who didn't win their own tourney and got a bid .. Xavier a mid major ? We know Stephen Austin is,, but what makes a mid major,, any school not from a BCS conference ?
    I think we all know one when we see one

    Remember when unc-ch went up to Williamsburg to play William & Mary and lost.. all the great one liners it made.. "yeah did ya hear William and Mary beat carolina,, and William didn't even play in the second half"
    College of Charleston over Ga Tech,, and now,, Crimens coaches ,, yup, College of Charleston..

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    So RPS, do you still think that Arizona was a bad choice?

  20. #20

    I am not RPS but

    Quote Originally Posted by dukie8 View Post
    So RPS, do you still think that Arizona was a bad choice?
    I do think it was a very bad choice.

    The fact that they beat Utah and then got an easy game against a 13 seed does not change anything.

    They have good players but did not earn the spot.

    SoCal

Similar Threads

  1. AAU Teams' Rosters
    By Sandman in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-04-2008, 11:53 PM
  2. Does anyone else like Big XII teams
    By hurleyfor3 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-15-2007, 05:38 PM
  3. Four Teams That Can Win It All
    By NYC Duke Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-06-2007, 11:35 AM
  4. All-ACC Teams
    By Chris92Heel in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-06-2007, 09:59 AM
  5. Which teams are peaking right now?
    By hurleyfor3 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-27-2007, 05:06 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •