Digger's going to the principal's office for this one.

[calltheobvious]

On Gameday a couple of minutes ago, during a discussion of Davidson's at-large chances:

"There's 34 at-larges (sic), and they're going to pick the 34 best teams. But understand this: (Stephon Curry) is star power. And I cannot see, knowing ratings for CBS and what they want to do, Stephon Curry playing in a first-round match-up, and that's just going to be a fact. He will be in the NCAA Tournament, if they even (sic) lose the conference tournament."

The transcript is accurate. Obviously Digger screwed up his negatives, but he left things clear in the end.

[captmojo]

... but he left things clear in the end.

What? That ratings and money would be the deciding factors? Who'd a thunk it?

[wolfpackdevil]

On Gameday a couple of minutes ago, during a discussion of Davidson's at-large chances:

"There's 34 at-larges (sic), and they're going to pick the 34 best teams. But understand this: (Stephon Curry) is star power. And I cannot see, knowing ratings for CBS and what they want to do, Stephon Curry playing in a first-round match-up, and that's just going to be a fact. He will be in the NCAA Tournament, if they even (sic) lose the conference tournament."

The transcript is accurate. Obviously Digger screwed up his negatives, but he left things clear in the end.

I have to admit Digger has a point.

I would much rather see Davidson play in the first round, then a team like Kansas State or Texas A&M


It sounds bad, but it's true

[calltheobvious]

Whether he's actually right is beside my point. The NCAA is not going to be keen to have corporate partners giving public voice to this notion.

But to the other point, it is indeed an easy thing to believe that this kind of thing happens. Just as easy, in fact, as it is to believe that Duke ever got all the calls. In both cases I'm far more interested in actual evidence than in how obvious it is that this is the way it works.

[Newton_14]

I saw this as well and was surprised Digger was so blunt about it. Bilas and The General were adamant that it should be the 34 best At-Large teams, rather than "Who could win". On top of star power, the overall point they were discussing was if the committee selected teams that "could win" that first round based on how they had performed in the tourney in previous years.

Bilas and Hubert were disagreeing alot today. Imagine that, huh. They were discussing if the college game had become too physical. (That would actually be a good thread for us to discuss on DBR) Anyway, Bilas argued that the college game today had become more physical than the NBA. Hubert immediately shot him down and it was on from there.

[Virginian]

The selection committees over the years have been pretty clear that even though they want to have the best teams and to reward the teams that deserve reward and include the teams that "deserve" to be in the tournament, their overall goal is to present the best tournament possible. Presumably that includes an entertainment factor, which inevitably must include some consideration for attracting the highest audience possible throughout the regions and into the final games.

As one indication, a number of years ago there was one team (and I apologize for my lapse in memory here -- I can't recall what team it was) that had a hugely successful season due almost entirely to one mega-star player who was injured in a season-ending incident right at conference tournament team. Even though that team clearly deserved inclusion in the big tourney based on its record and performance for the year, it was clear that team -- without its star -- would not likely make it out of the first round. The team was not invited for that reason alone. Some thought that was not fair, but the committee basically said fairness was not their main criterion.

All in all it's an interesting process.

[Newton_14]

The selection committees over the years have been pretty clear that even though they want to have the best teams and to reward the teams that deserve reward and include the teams that "deserve" to be in the tournament, their overall goal is to present the best tournament possible. Presumably that includes an entertainment factor, which inevitably must include some consideration for attracting the highest audience possible throughout the regions and into the final games.

As one indication, a number of years ago there was one team (and I apologize for my lapse in memory here -- I can't recall what team it was) that had a hugely successful season due almost entirely to one mega-star player who was injured in a season-ending incident right at conference tournament team. Even though that team clearly deserved inclusion in the big tourney based on its record and performance for the year, it was clear that team -- without its star -- would not likely make it out of the first round. The team was not invited for that reason alone. Some thought that was not fair, but the committee basically said fairness was not their main criterion.

All in all it's an interesting process.

Are you possibly recalling Cincinatti and Kenyon Martin? Don't recall the year, but in that case Cincy was in line for a Number 1 seed. They had only lost one or 2 games the entire year and were ranked in the top 3 in the country. Martin broke his leg in their conference tourney championship game and was done for the year. Because Cincy would not have Martin available, they were not given a Number 1 seed. They were seeded based on how good they were without Martin rather than given the seeding they deserved based on the season they had. Not sure that was fair either.

[moonpie23]

hubert davis is starting to get on my nerves......with a blow torch...

[COYS]

Are you possibly recalling Cincinatti and Kenyon Martin? Don't recall the year, but in that case Cincy was in line for a Number 1 seed. They had only lost one or 2 games the entire year and were ranked in the top 3 in the country. Martin broke his leg in their conference tourney championship game and was done for the year. Because Cincy would not have Martin available, they were not given a Number 1 seed. They were seeded based on how good they were without Martin rather than given the seeding they deserved based on the season they had. Not sure that was fair either.

I believe that was the 2000 NCAA tourney. It was certainly a debatable move by the selection committee, as Cincy got a two seed instead of a one seed. Losing Martin was a big blow, but there was no reason that their season was necessarily over. I believe the selection committee should have been blind to the personnel and looked only at the record of the teams. Imagine the outrage if the Lakers lost the number 1 seed in the west this year in the NBA just because Kobe goes down in the final regular season game. It doesn't make sense.

[Buckeye Devil]

As a #2 seed, Cincinnati still made it to the Sweet 16 losing to Tulsa in 2000. It was still a respectable showing by Satterfield, Mickeal, Logan, etc. but the Bearcats would have undoubtedly gone farther with Martin and were not a #1without him. Like it or not, the NCAAT is not the NBA when it comes to seeding. The record is just the tip of the iceberg.

[Olympic Fan]

Digger is full of something I can't refer to on his message board. He's referring to one of the oldest and most misguided beliefs of ignorant fans -- that CBS dictates selections and matchups for th NCAA Tournament.

Certainly CBS would love to have Curry and Davidson in the field. But that's not going to happen unless Davidson wins the SC Tournament. The committee does NOT flout its selection rules to make CBS happy.

Davidson is not even close to an at large team. They are 2-4 against the top 100 ... that's right -- six games against the top 100 teams in the nation and just two wins. They're 59 in the RPI and that's going to drop because their remaining games are against lower-rated SC teams (their last three regular season games against against 324, 290 and 266. And remember, if they don't win the SC Tourney, that will mean a third loss this season to a non top 100 team.

Fortunately, winning the SC Tournament should not be a formidable task -- if Curry is healthy. But that's the only way the 'Cats get in the field.

No matter what CBS wants or that ignorant buffoon Digger Phelps says.

[moonpie23]

i wonder how long it's gonna take Bob Knight to go "Bobby Knight" on hubert davis......

since hubie DOES "illuminate his relative lack of knowledge of the game" often.

[devildeac]

I dunno. Maybe he should be going to a retirement village or Alzheimer's care unit instead of the principal's office:o.