I actually usually defend the committee b/c I feel that (1) they are often being asked to split hairs with very similar team resumes, (2) very often complainers only gripe about their team's omission, w/o saying at the same time who should have simultaneously been left out - it is, after all, a zero-sum-gain - and (3) it really doesn't matter much to the overall tournament outcome if they get the 68th or 69th teams rightly allocated. But I have to say that they really seem to have done a piss-poor job this year, with at least a couple pretty undeserving teams getting in (and even getting surprising seedings) while a couple teams that virtually everybody had in, such as Va Tech, were omitted. I also have issues with several hard-to-justify seedings.... Arrrgh.
Anybody know if there were ANY ACC representatives on the committee this year? I know that the chairman was from OSU - the AD, I think.
When questionable (read, ludicrous) choices are made like VCU and UAB over Colorado and VT (sorry, but I believe VT should have been selected this year) the TSC chairman needs to defend them with something more than the load of weak sauce that was dribbled out onto the airwaves this past Sunday.
If the questioning of Gene Smith had been sufficiently brisk, maybe it would have served to encourage future TSCs to think about sticking to the stated selection guidelines. It might even have done something to push the NCAA to think about trying to make the selection process a bit more consistent.
If, as Jay Bilas said at one point during Bracketology, the TSC was making its choices with the idea that a school the size of Colorado was doing what it should be doing with the record it had, while a mid major with a challenging out of conference schedule was doing heavier lifting, okay. But that is not what happened.
Who did VCU beat? UCLA at a neutral site. ODU at ODU (who VCU lost to in the CAA tournament). And George Mason in the CAA tournament. UAB did not even finish second in its conference and beat nobody in the RPI top 50. Odd. Very, very odd.
Ouch. No NIT soup for md either. Their bowl is empty.
Just seeing this thread. No at large will ever be worse than Air Force. That said...
- VCU is unconsionable. Just a horrible selection.
- Georgia over Alabama is close to the height of stupidity
- UAB and USC over Virginia Tech and Colorado is pretty bad too.
Greenberg had a bit more to say before cutting short his presser and leaving. I get that they got snubbed, probably unfairly, but his whole conspiracy theory angle is nonsense. Colorado had a much stronger argument for getting hosed and their coach went on ESPN and while disappointed, didn't resort to any "everyone is out to get us" rhetoric. I thought, unlike Seth, he handled himself with class, but let's be honest here, a lot of the problems we have here with Va Tech's players attitudes start with their coach. No doubt does Va Tech have an argument, but if you're trying to be a leader and a teacher, you're sending the wrong message to your kids when you blame your own failings on conspiracies and on others. The fact is that if Va Tech doesn't drop two home games after beating us then I'm sure they're in, so at the end of the day, they put themselves in the position to possibly not get in by failing to take care of their own business. That's a tough pill to swallow, but sometimes the best lesson you can teach others is how to handle disappointment with class. This was an opportunity for Seth to teach just that, but instead, he chose to point fingers at everyone except for himself.“Just disappointed. You almost wonder if someone in that room has their own agenda and that agenda doesn’t include Virginia Tech. Just plain and simple. I totally wonder it, if someone in that room has an agenda. The explanation was so inconsistent with the result that it was almost mind-boggling. I guess they even brought up our non-conference schedule. Kansas State, Purdue, Oklahoma State, UNLV, Penn State, St. Bonaventure that was supposed to be big and Mississippi State that was projected to win the SEC. I’d say that’s a pretty significant slate and challenge. So they must not have looked at it very closely. But I guess they did. I feel for these kids. Doesn’t take away from what we accomplished this year ... but it’s extremely disheartening. You would hate to think that politics would be involved, but it makes you wonder.”
Cliche', but it works for them... I guess.
Could they have been in? Sure. But honestly, only the win over Duke really gave any credence to their year. They didn't beat anyone of significance out of conference. And they lost to some pretty bad teams.
Lost to UVA twice
Lost to BC twice
Lost to GT
Then they lost to the following NCAA teams:
The only tournament bound teams they beat were Duke, FSU (2x) and Penn St
The resume was spotty at best... and definitely not better than Colorado's.
What Seth needs to realize is, if you don't want to be on the bubble, win games. They were in games against Purdue and UNC. Win one or both of those, they're in. And the losses to the bottom dwellers in the ACC were what killed them. Win both against UVA and split against BC, they're in.
Oh, and throw in the thuggery they always play with and the constant whining and prodding of the committee (yea, smart move there, Seth) and they will never get the benefit of the doubt when the call is that close.
I wanted to hear more discussion of the tournament not the teams not in the tournament or who should not be in the tournament.
The Committee made some mistakes. Play On.
I have a problem with PSU getting in, especially as a 10 seed.
Their only quality wins came in conference.
- A slumping Mich State at PSU
- Illinois at PSU
- Wisconsin twice... one of those wins setting college bball back 50 years
They lost to VT and Maryland, who we all know were either bubble teams or out entirely... and both not in the tourny.
Their final record was 19-14..... Their RPI was 39, but that's mostly due to the Big 10 being overrated outside of OSU IMO. (#2 strength of schedule? please)
I think them being in is more egregious than VCU being in.
Perhaps the ACC's recent horrible Tourney performances - outside Duke and UNC - had something to do with the Committee's decisions.
Let's hope FSU and Clemson can hold their own this year.
VT lost to UVa twice. And they lost to Georgia Tech. They nearly lost to Florida State in the ACC. Plus, didn't they have a weak schedule out of conference?
Maybe we should question why the Big East gets 11 teams in. 11! And I agree with Penn State - scoring 36 points in a win seems pretty ugly to me.
While I get everyone's disdain for Seth Greenberg and VT, I think it's pretty forgivable that he would voice his displeasure loudly this year. The analogy to Colorado and their coach's reaction doesn't wash for me - let's see what Colorado's coach says in a presser three years from now when his team is one of the first 3 teams left out of 4 consecutive tourneys. Whatever the criteria at the bottom of the selection pool is, and it seems to generally change every year, it never seems to line up with the relative strengths on Virginia Tech's resume compared to the other teams in similar position each year. My recollection is hazy, but I'm pretty sure that's 2 of the last 4 years where Hokie fans justifiably feel screwed, and in the other 2 they're justifiably disappointed that a bubble that could have gone either way burst in their face. That's got to be really frustrating.
That said, it's probably doubly frustrating this year since it was supposed to be the case that they were going to push up against the big boys in the conference this year and cruise into a 4-6 seed in the big dance. So, the disappointment of getting hosed off the bubble combined with the disappointment that this team was supposed to be so much better than it was has to lead to some recriminations against Greenberg. He may have crescendoed in Blacksburg.
How does USC get ranked ahead of Clemson and VA Tech?
In non-conference they beat Texas and Tennessee (very impressive) but lost to Rider, Bradley and Texas Christian (who went 2-16 in the Mountain West). They also lost to Kansas by 2 which I guess is impressive but still, it's a loss.
They went 10-8 in a Pac-10 that isn't really all that good. They split with Arizona, Washington and UCLA. But they also lost to Oregon (twice), Oregon St. and Washington St.
Is that really better than VA Tech? Who's worst loss is Virginia or GA Tech. They have no stinkers like the 3 awful non-conference losses put up by USC. And if you want to count close losses.... they lost to Purdue in OT and UNC by 3 at UNC.