*** Official Selection Sunday Thread ***

[mctallerton]

You don't have to have Nebraska/A&M matchup if the put a non Big 10 team on Michigan St seed line.

They are looking to sell stories outside the game. They look for different angles. In early rounds I would argue there is more value in terms of eyeballs when a 5 plays a 12 4 plays a 13 vs an 8/9 because of upset factor.


Again look at womans side. At a 3 LSU may not get a chance to play Iowa unless they go to final 4. Is it massive coincidence they end up in Iowa's side?

Not saying it's all one big set up, but they absolutely look for opportunity to have angles to stories

I am not going to speak to the Women's side because that is a completely different seeding animal. I haven't looked into it.

Do you think MSU is closer to an 8 or a 10 because you said overseeded, that would mean they moved them to the 9 line from the 10. And that would mean keeping them out of the play-in game. My argument stands that more people would watch MSU vs UVA or Colorado than the current matchups. You have three Big 10 teams in the 8/9 games, with the only one not having a Big 10 team is seeded with Purdue. Michigan State and Northwestern are both 9 seeds, should they have been moved up to the 8 line and Nebraska dropped? I thought Nebraska would be close to a 7, and I think that is evident by them getting Memphis as a site as opposed to New York or Charlotte.

You cant move either Big 10 9 seed to that line because Nebraska is the 8, and you cant move TCU there because Houston is the one seed. So now for this to work you are having to miss seed more than a dozen teams to make it work.

Looking more and more at it, it looks like this matchup is one of the only ways it would work.

To the other point, if more people are going to watch a 5/12 or a 4/13 why put that much effort into the trev alberts bowl?

 

[Klubber]

It seemed like they really used the NET tool the first year or two but now it’s just another goal post the committee can move. There are several great metric tools at their disposal and a bunch of old men go with the non con schedule.

I totally agree. All this talk about "manipulating the NET ranking" doesn't help either.

Seth Greenberg and Jay Williams on ESPN bring this up constantly and always use it as a way to slight the Big XII. But those guys are hugely biased towards the ACC.

Not a huge Bilas fan, he's fine. But he went off on the non-con metric last night with regards to Pitt not getting in. And while Pitt wouldn't be my example, I think he was spot on otherwise.

 

[Gunnerclone]

 

[fsanford]

I am not going to speak to the Women's side because that is a completely different seeding animal. I haven't looked into it.

Do you think MSU is closer to an 8 or a 10 because you said overseeded, that would mean they moved them to the 9 line from the 10. And that would mean keeping them out of the play-in game. My argument stands that more people would watch MSU vs UVA or Colorado than the current matchups. You have three Big 10 teams in the 8/9 games, with the only one not having a Big 10 team is seeded with Purdue. Michigan State and Northwestern are both 9 seeds, should they have been moved up to the 8 line and Nebraska dropped? I thought Nebraska would be close to a 7, and I think that is evident by them getting Memphis as a site as opposed to New York or Charlotte.

You cant move either Big 10 9 seed to that line because Nebraska is the 8, and you cant move TCU there because Houston is the one seed. So now for this to work you are having to miss seed more than a dozen teams to make it work.

Looking more and more at it, it looks like this matchup is one of the only ways it would work.

To the other point, if more people are going to watch a 5/12 or a 4/13 why put that much effort into the trev alberts bowl?

Again there is probably minor difference in resumes of teams 7 to 10. At least not enough to point out an egregious error

The one thing the incoming director of committee admitted every year criteria can change because different people can look at different things as people change

When he said that pretty much says we are flexible.


Woman seed very similar to men
Their feedback was because how they were seeded its the only way it could work. Which again is suspect.

We will agree to disagree. Thanks for good discussion

 

[Klubber]

All this talk of BYU and Drake means it's likely at least one of Washington State or Duquesne will win their 1st round games. Dont sleep on Morehead State either, it's likely a 3 seed is going down early, might as well be Illinois.

Yeah, that Morehead St team is legit. That's a team I'd want no part of in the Tourney. And Ill's D is terrible.

 

[Marcelason78]

ESPN talking heads are pretty much all picking Illinois to get past Iowa State;…..

Jay Williams the exception?

 

[Cyforce]

College basketball rankings: UConn takes over No. 1 in Top 25 And 1 before NCAA Tournament bracket revealed

www-cbssports-com.cdn.ampproject.org

Apparently I'm not the only one that thinks non con SOS is completely bogus.

 

[mctallerton]

Again there is probably minor difference in resumes of teams 7 to 10. At least not enough to point out an egregious error

The one thing the incoming director of committee admitted every year criteria can change because different people can look at different things as people change

When he said that pretty much says we are flexible.


Woman seed very similar to men
Their feedback was because how they were seeded its the only way it could work. Which again is suspect.

We will agree to disagree.

Agree and appreciate your responses. I do think with the focus of not protecting seeds as much and an emphasis on more potential regional matchups you are going to see Iowa State v Drake for example. I thought Nebraska was going to be a 7 seed in Omaha. That was my prediction. ISU v a 15 with Nebby and Drake as our 7/10.

 

[mctallerton]

Hey they had no bad losses, just a handful of 20 point losses

 

[ScheelhaaseRock]

If Iowa State and Illinois play, what would worry me as an Illinois fan is it doesn't sound like you have a true PG and we turn teams over. What would worry me is Illinois hitting 3s and spreading the floor.

Ultimately I hope we play as it means we survived the first weekend and I'm tired of playing BYU.

I will say as an Illini fan, the "no true PG" was our #1 worry for the entire offseason, and it's become the most annoying talking point since then... I don't think we view it as a positional issue, we're decent (~80th) in turnovers, but not really an elite ball handling team.

against the top 30 turnover teams we played (Penn State, Rutgers, and Marquette) we had issues, gave up over 15 TOs in all three games. We smashed Rutgers anyways, lost a close game to Marquette and had a generationally bad last minute bed-wetting against Penn State....

I'd expect us to have problems with you regardless.

We can shoot the three OK, same rate as you guys but we take about 5 more per game.

I think we'd want to play uptempo and keep the floor spread against you guys. There are some interesting matchups there.

 

[Gunnerclone]

Hey they had no bad losses, just a handful of 20 point losses

GAMING THE NET

 

[mctallerton]

Jay Williams the exception?

Seth seemed to say the way the game is officiated will dictate who wins that game. I think everyone thinks we play defense like WVU did, we can play physical but we also are able to jump passing lanes and generate steals. I didnt think the Baylor game was all that physical.

 

[Klubber]

This assumes the committee is actually consistent on this from year to year and not just catering to the ESPN\ACC narrative they've been pushing for a couple months now about NCSOS.

Yep. The NCSOS only became this huge thing after the ACC took a step back as the premier hoops league with the Big XII replacing it.

That and the NET not being kind to the ACC meant fewer bids to the Tourney. So now all the ACC fan boys want to rant about NCSOS.

 

[Klubber]

it is a stupid criterion. Non-con is a subset of the total. If you have a sufficiently high SOS once your conference games are included and if you secure sufficient quad 1 wins, then who gives a flying ****? The committee is stupid if it does.

And those non-cons are from Nov/Dec; months ago.

 

[Marcelason78]

anyone catch on that BYU got dropped to a 6 because they can't play sundays?

That’s really too bad. Ask, and you shall receive.

 

[Cardinal2001]

Heh, coaches poll at #4, above North Carolina

 

[exCYtable]

Just crazy how a crap team like NC State can get the ultimate reward of making the dance by winning their tournament while tournament winners like us and Auburn get no benefit of winning ours. Do the conference tournaments matter or not? The committee has set a double standard.

 

[alarson]

Heh, coaches poll at #4, above North Carolina

And in the AP

 

[ScheelhaaseRock]

Just crazy how a crap team like NC State can get the ultimate reward of making the dance by winning their tournament while tournament winners like us and Auburn get no benefit of winning ours. Do the conference tournaments matter or not? The committee has set a double standard.

my latest hot take is that the entire men's tournament needs to be pushed back 1 week... which means you can do the selection show on monday or tuesday.

you got teams (yo) playing on less than 100 hours rest between tip offs finding out their tournament opponent and travelling.... fanbases have to the same thing.

if you push the tournament back a bit you get to build some hype AND give the growing women's game exclusivity during this first weekend, which would grow that a TON.

do all that and you don't have to lock in your top 4-6 seeds so early either.

 

[Yellow Snow]

This is excellent.....