Selection Sunday (NCAA Tournament) Thoughts

[Vince]

Duke, St. Joe's, Stanford and Kentucky are the #1 seeds. Gonzaga got the #2 seed...most people had them pegged as a #3, as far as I could tell, while a few people thought they deserved a #1.

I'm excited about watching a potential Georgia Tech-Gonzaga matchup in the second round...but not very happy about having to pick a winner there.

[Craptacular]

How the hell is Wisconsin a #6 seed?!?!?! :mad:

[hoopsguy]

Wisky got the low seed, but they also get to play in Milwaukee. That is a dreadful pull for Pittsburgh.

How the hell is Florida a #5?

[SunDancer]

How the hell is Wisconsin a #6 seed?!?!?! :mad:

Thats what I was wondering. Wisconsin, Pitt, Oklahoma State, St. Joes, tough bracket.

[hoopsguy]

Dola ... GT/Gonzaga would be 3rd round. Gonzaga has games in Seattle for first two rounds, which is bad news for MSU upset chances (assuming they get past Nevada).

[Mustang]

How the hell is Wisconsin a #6 seed?!?!?! :mad:

I don't know whether to be upset that they are a #6 seed or happy that they are in Milwaukee...

[Pumpy Tudors]

Wisconsin is usually such a weak tournament team, if memory serves correctly. I thought a #6 seed was generous.

[korme]

cincinnati got hosed, #4 in the hardest section of the bracket, good god this bracket is hell

[Mustang]

Wisconsin is usually such a weak tournament team, if memory serves correctly. I thought a #6 seed was generous.

Guess your memory isn't that good.


2003 - Sweet 16 (out vs Kentucky)
2002 - 2nd round (out vs Champ Maryland)
2001 - 1st round (out vs Ga. State)
2000 - Final 4.

[Radii]

grats jeeberd

[hoopsguy]

Cincy gets first two games in Columbus, so I don't think they got hosed.

I'm not fired up about my Illini having to play them in 2nd round at that venue.

How the hell is Maryland a #4?

[Radii]

If Wake Forest gets even moderately hot, they could seriously roll through their bracket... Florida is such a weak #5, St Joes is good but very vulnerable.

UNC-Texas 2nd round matchup... I guess I'd rather be playing Texas than Pitt or ... well the other #3s are NC State and Ga Tech. I'd rather play texas than any others.

GO ACC(except Duke... go to hell Duke)

[korme]

What do you open pdf files with?

[Vince]

Acrobat Reader

[ScottVib]

Utah State a #21 in the Polls. 25-3 overall.

Not in the tournament....

[JeeberD]

grats jeeberd

Thanks!

Hmmm, is terkristen the only Maryland fan around here? I need someone to talk some trash to! ;)

[Pumpy Tudors]

Guess your memory isn't that good.


2003 - Sweet 16 (out vs Kentucky)
2002 - 2nd round (out vs Champ Maryland)
2001 - 1st round (out vs Ga. State)
2000 - Final 4.

For a team that's supposed to be considered elite and getting people all up in a wad over their #6 seed, the last three seasons really aren't all that impressive. When I say they're weak, I don't mean that they're on the level of Drexel, for instance. I'm saying that they rarely live up to the hype. In my opinion, Wisconsin is not getting hosed. They're the second-best team in a weak conference, the same of which can be said for a team like Kent State. I'm not saying that the Badgers shouldn't be in the tournament this year. When DePaul gets a #7, though, as the regular season champ of a great conference, I don't see why Wisconsin gets a #6 as the #2 in a mediocre conference.

[vtbub]

UConn, woohoo:)

[Vince]

Utah State a #21 in the Polls. 25-3 overall.

Not in the tournament....
That's amazing to me. Though I really don't think that the Big West deserves two bids, Utah State really should have made it.

[hoopsguy]

Conference USA a great conference? GMAFB ... just because there is parity at the top of a conference doesn't make it a great conference.

I expect Wisconsin will go further than any two C-USA teams you feel like backing.

[Craptacular]

For a team that's supposed to be considered elite and getting people all up in a wad over their #6 seed, the last three seasons really aren't all that impressive.

2001 sucked. Agreed. Losing in the second round to the eventual champion two years ago, and losing a down-to-the-wire game against #1 overall team Kentucky in the Sweet 16 last year is not "weak".

[Buccaneer]

Utah State a #21 in the Polls. 25-3 overall.

Not in the tournament....
Anyone else like this?

Very happy AF got in. SU at the #5 seed is a tough place to be.

[LloydLungs]

Utah State a #21 in the Polls. 25-3 overall.

Not in the tournament....

A shame, Utah State just got jobbed by the committee. Not only 25-3, but it must suck watching a state rival like BYU get an at-large ahead of them after they beat BYU head-to-head.

[SunDancer]

How did Alabama get in over Colorado, Utah State, Florida State? I think that conference tournaments should be done by Saturday.

[DeToxRox]

I honestly think Texas Tech is going to beat St. Joes in the second round.

Call me crazy, but its the General, and I just have this gut feeling he'll pull out the W.

[sooner333]

I have a problem with Air Force in the tournament. That's really my only gripe. UTEP to a lot lesser of an extent. I said that Air Force should not be in over Missouri, Colorado, UTEP, OU, and maybe even Notre Dame. UTEP got in and Utah State didn't, like I had thought would happen.

Michigan State is lucky to get in, they really weren't very good.

Arizona could have even been a 10 seed.

NIT should be solid this year.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Can I get some comments about Wisconsin from people who are NOT in the Wisconsin area? I just don't see that Wisconsin is worth all of the hype that they get every year. I don't hate the Badgers. I feel rather indifferent about them. I don't have any particular love for Conference USA either, although I am a Memphis fan. I was just making a comparison, and everyone's free to disagree with me. Really, the games will have to speak for themselves. Big yay to Wisconsin if they go all the way. I'm just saying that I don't expect it.

[DeToxRox]

Michigan State playing the Zags in Seattle.. Oh man.

They couldn't handle their tough OOC schedule and they owned the Big 10. Their gonna' be back to reality in the second round.

[sooner333]

Wisconsin deserves to be a 3 or a 4 seed. Enough Said.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Now that I've dug myself into a deep badger hole, apparently, I'll say something completely unrelated to Wisconsin.

Usually, my alma mater, New Orleans, has no shot at making the tournament. This year, they lost in the conference tournament final, and it was pretty heartbreaking to me. I just don't feel as excited about the tournament this year as I usually am. I think I'd rather that UNO be completely uncompetitive, and then I don't have to worry about them, as opposed to getting thisclose and then losing it. Now all I can think about is where they might've been and who they might've played.

I hope the excitement will return to me before Thursday, but I'm just not feeling too hot about this whole tournament yet this year. :(

[FishFan]

If Wisconsin gets past giant-killer Richmond, I have them losing to Pittsburgh in the second round. Tough spot for them with the #6 seed, but I don't see many teams they could bump ahead of. At best, they may have deserved a #5 seed.

[hoopsguy]

I'm not a Wisconsin fan, but I have gotten to see them plenty this year in Big Ten play. I was initially under the impression that they are just Harris and a splash of Wilkinson, but their role players have contributed in a number of their wins. Their man-to-man defense is really consistent and they don't turn the ball over. You have to take the win from them, they will not give it away.

I would pick Pittsburgh over them on a neutral court, but not in Milwaukee.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Wisconsin deserves to be a 3 or a 4 seed. Enough Said.

I can only go based on your profile which says that you're in Evanston, but didn't I ask for comments on the Badgers from people who are NOT in the Wisconsin area? :D

I'm kidding. Opinion appreciated. I don't mind being the odd man out, as I usually fill that role anyway.

[SunDancer]

I'm in New York. Is that the Wisconsin area? :) Still, you can base the team on past years. You can, and must, only judge them on this year.

[LloydLungs]

I actually think Wisconsin's a pretty good team but don't understand all the hand-wringing about the seed. They were seeded a little low but get to play in Milwaukee. Fair trade off. Pitt has more of a beef than they do.

Pumpy, hang in there, UNO may have something to celebrate one year from now during the next selection show. They had the classic "program just about to turn the corner" look this year.

[JeeberD]

Michigan State playing the Zags in Seattle.. Oh man.

Nah, Michigan State isn't getting past Nevada. The Wolf Pack is tough...

[Pumpy Tudors]

I actually think Wisconsin's a pretty good team but don't understand all the hand-wringing about the seed. They were seeded a little low but get to play in Milwaukee. Fair trade off. Pitt has more of a beef than they do.

Pumpy, hang in there, UNO may have something to celebrate one year from now during the next selection show. They had the classic "program just about to turn the corner" look this year.

Agreed on all counts.

As far as UNO is concerned, McCalebb and Elias still have three more years on the Lakefront, and if they build the team about McCalebb and work on Elias' technique, yes, I think the Privateers may very well be dancing next year. I can't wait!

[sterlingice]

What do you open pdf files with?
Go print the cbs bracket.

SI

[Pumpy Tudors]

I'm in New York. Is that the Wisconsin area? :) Still, you can (sic) base the team on past years. You can, and must, only judge them on this year.

I see what you're saying, and I agree that it should be that way in an ideal world. As hard as the members of the committee might try to avoid it, though, I would think that past years' performances do creep into some of their decisions. Based on this year, I think Wisconsin is seeded about right.

[Neuqua]

Honestly, I think the Big Ten got a huge shaft this year. To say that Conference USA is a great conference, and that the Big Ten isn't doesn't hold with me. Illinois, Wisconsin, and MSU could each finish atop Conference USA if they were in there. And I have no hatred for Conference USA, I'm actually also a follower of DePaul basketball but if the two were matched up against eachother (Depaul v. Illinois), Illinois would win 8 out of 10 games.

I'm having trouble fathoming how Maryland gets a #4 when last week they were on the bubble, and then a team like Illinois (who was arguably the hottest team in the country before today) gets a #5 seed in the toughest bracket.

There's only one way to shut the critics up about the Big Ten, and that is by having a strong showing next weekend. Time to put up or shut up.

[Craptacular]

RPI updated tonight, ESPN coaches poll updated tonight


Team Record RPI ESPN Seed last game
Duke 27-5 1 6 1 L ACC champ
Kent 26-4 2 4 1 W SEC champ
St Joes 27-1 3 5 1 L A10 quarters
Miss St 25-3 4 9 2 L SEC quarters
UConn 27-6 5 7 2 W Big East champ
Ok St 26-3 6 3 2 W Big 12 champ
Stan 29-1 7 1 1 W Pac 10 champ
Pitt 28-4 8 8 3 L Big East champ
Gonzaga 27-2 9 2 2 W WCC champ
Texas 23-7 10 11 3 L Big 12 champ
Cinn 24-6 11 12 4 W CUSA champ
Wisc 24-6 12 10 6 W Big 10 champ
Flor 20-10 13 NR 5 L SEC champ
Syr 21-7 14 24 5 L Big East quarters
Kansas 20-8 15 14 4 L Big 12 semis
Ga Tech 23-9 16 15 3 L ACC semis
NC St 20-9 17 17 3 L ACC semis
Mary 19-11 18 21 4 W ACC champ
UNC 18-10 19 20 6 L ACC quarters
Wake 19-9 20 16 4 L ACC quarters
Prov 20-8 21 19 5 L Big East quarters
BC 23-9 22 NR 6 L Big East semis
Illi 24-6 23 13 5 L Big 10 champ
Louis 20-9 24 NR 10 L CUSA quarters
So Ill 25-4 25 23 9 L MVC semis


I just don't understand how Wisconsin is seeded below NINE teams that they have a better record than (identical record with Illinois), are ranked higher in the final RPI than, and are ranked higher in the polls than, especially after winning the Big 10 tourney.

edited to reflect latest coaches' poll

[CamEdwards]

I was really hoping Oklahoma State wasn't going to end up in the East... and that's exactly what happened. On the bright side, I too think Texas Tech will beat St. Joe's so, if OSU can get past Memphis and Pitt I think we've got a great shot at beating Tech for a trip to the Final Four.

[sterlingice]

RPI updated tonight, ESPN poll from last week

I just don't understand how Wisconsin is seeded below NINE teams that they have a better record than, are ranked higher in the final RPI than, and were ranked higher in last week's polls than, especially after winning the Big 10 tourney.
Maryland stole Wisconsin's seed, plain and simple. I don't get why it happened or how it happened, but it happened.

SI

[JeeberD]

Dayum! I was thinking about skipping out on work at the end of the week and going to Denver to see UTEP play Maryland, but I just found out that tickets are $169...

How are we poor college students supposed to afford that???

[vtbub]

How does Louisville have an RPI of 24 and be a 10 seed?

[LloydLungs]

Louisville was slipping badly at the end of the year. Teams are not seeded based on RPI alone. That said, they're one hell of a good 10 seed and despite the fact that Xavier is red hot and UL is slumping, I like the Cards in that game.

[JonInMiddleGA]

How are we poor college students supposed to afford that???
Umm ... you aren't?

{Not ragging on you, just pointing out that host cities really prefer alums with disposable income, since they'll presumably leave more money behind than "poor college students"}

[TargetPractice6]

How does Louisville have an RPI of 24 and be a 10 seed?
They've lost 8 of their last 12.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Just wondering if anyone else had looked at this
http://tcmen.espn.go.com/tcmen/html/nationalBracket

It's basically a composite of the ESPN contest entries so far.
Only thing that bugs me a little bit is how similar it looks to my own first try at a bracket. Right now, the same Final Four (different champ), although different Elite 8 losers in each regional.

Either everybody else playing so far is as smart as I am or I'm just as dumb as the rest.

[Easy Mac]

Dayum! I was thinking about skipping out on work at the end of the week and going to Denver to see UTEP play Maryland, but I just found out that tickets are $169...

How are we poor college students supposed to afford that???
Jeeb, I know that when the NCAA's were in G-ville like last year (or the year before maybe, I forget), they had like 20 tickets to every game they were raffling off for $20. I didn't win any, but I know people who got to go. Granted you're not in Denver, but if you can get to know people who go to school in the area who could score cheap tix...

[kingnebwsu]

My first draft bracket is pretty boring. Ya know, I'm glad reality is more exciting than all the "experts" "projected brackets." That'd be a boring tourney. Here's to Manhattan and ETSU in the Sweet 16! GO MID-MAJORS!!!

[Marmel]

I got Manhattan in the Sweet 16 as well. :)

[sooner333]

I'm going to the Kansas City regional for fun, but that's basically our spring break trip. No Mexico, no Tropical location...Kansas City for basketball games. And no, I don't plan on leaving too much money behind other than the tickets.

[OldGiants]

I live in the Richmond area, and have followed the Spiders for almost 20 years, so bear that in mind.

In favor of Richmond is that they are likely the greatest first round upset team in the history of the NCAA tournament. First #15 to upset a #2, Bouncing Auburn and Charles Barkely and Bobby Knight's Indiana in the same season.

Against that is that its long ago history.

In favor of Richmond is that they were unbeaten on the road versus the Big Twelve this season.

In favor is they are sky high since they expected to be snubbed, likely in favor of Colorado, whom they beat in Boulder.

Richmond has an excellent shot at taking down Wisconsin. They will be pumped, while I think the Badgers will be a little less than ready.

BTW, I think the Committee sent a clear message that strength of schedule was the key evaluation criteria this season, although how that could get torpid Washington in, is unclear to me.

The PAC10 has clearly slipped to low mid-major status and really should have recieved only one bid this season. Utah State instead of Washington would have been a solid, admiralbe slelection.

Both Arizona and Maryland benefited by being recent national champs, lending name recognition and fan interest. But those are likely the only other two big school acts of favoritism, along with Washington being in at all.

[Samdari]

I expect Wisconsin will go further than any two C-USA teams you feel like backing.

Nope. Out in first round. The Big 10 was awful this year. Not winning that shoddy conference by two full games means you are simply not very good. Even if they do beat Richmond, they have no shot against Pitt, even at home.

Washington an 8?????? They did not deserve to be in. They are the team that should be out in favor of Utah St.

Congrats JeeberD. I thought UTEP deserved it, and will be rooting hard for them to beat the overseed of all time, Maryland. Can you give us a scouting report?

[Wolfpack]

NC State draws a 3 and heads to Orlando against the Ragin' Cajuns. Win that and it's probably Vandy in round 2. Hmm...play like they did in the first half on Saturday, they'll roll to the Sweet 16. Play like the second half, they may not get out of Orlando. I hope they do, though. I really, really, really want another crack at UConn after what happened two years ago.

[Radii]

I am pretty excited about a potential NC State-UConn matchup myself. I still objectively think a healthy UConn will win the national title, but I would love to see NC State get a shot at them...

[Butter]

Ah, you guys won't have to worry. Dayton will beat DePaul, UConn, AND NC State on their way to the title. ;)

[JeeberD]

ought UTEP deserved it, and will be rooting hard for them to beat the overseed of all time, Maryland. Can you give us a scouting report?


Thanks Samdari, I'm glad you're rooting for the Miners. I also want to thanks SackAttack, k0ruptor, Marm, mckerney, and the other folks who were pulling for the Miners to make it into the Tourney. I'm sure the Miners will do their best to not let you (and the Miner fanatics everywhere) down... :)

I'll do my best shot at a scouting report for you...

Coach Billy Gillispie

Billy G is a young coach (44) that the Miners hired away from Illinois. He is a Bill Self disciple after having under him at Tulsa and Illinois. Billy stresses defense first and the Miners play a strong man-to-man defense. On offense he likes to push the ball up the court and try to wear out the opposing team. The Miners are a very well conditioned team and Billy works them hard to keep them that way (they have a full practice on gameday rather than just a shoot-around like every other team). Billy got hired two weeks before the start of last season and inherited little talent. He promised right away that while the Miners might not win many games that they would lead the NCAA in floor burns, and that's just what happened. The Miners only won six games but they played their hearts out every game and were constantly hustling.

Billy is an outstanding recruiter. Last season's recruiting class included two JUCO All-Americans (Fili Rivera and Omar Thomas) and this year he has signed Alex Galindo, who barely missed out on making the McDonalds High School All American team.

Billy is already on the screen of several AD's who are going to try and take him away from El Paso. So far Texas A&M and Houston are both actively seeking his services, and if the Miners pull the upset of Maryland I can see that list growing much larger. However, I'm pretty sure that Billy will stay in El Paso for at least another season. And I'm praying that he'll be like Don Haskins and coach the Miners for 35 years...

Starting Five

PG - 6'1" JR. Filiberto Rivera
11.2 pts, 4.7 asst, 3.1 rebs, 1.8 steals, 2.1 Ast/TO

Fili is the heart and soul of the Miners squad. This is his first year in El Paso and he has made a huge impact. He is lightning quick and is a great defender. He doesn't shoot the ball a whole lot, but he can knock down the occasional three. He's at his best when he's driving to the hoop and either taking it to the rack himself or finding the open man for an easy lay-up. He's a very good rebounder for a PG, and he was the WAC leader in steals this season. Fili will push the ball up the court all game long, using his speed to wear the other team down. The only questionmark on Fili is his ankle, which he a second degree sprain of last Saturday in the Miners' final regualr season game. He was noticably slower during the WAC tournament, but hopefully by Thursday he will fully healed.

SG - 6'1" SR. Chris Craig
9.0 pts, 2.4 rebs, 2.1 asst, .429 3PT%, 2.1 Ast/TO

Craig was the Miners starting PG our our six win squad last year, but he has made the transition to SG smoothly. Actually, SG might not be his actual position. More like PG2. He's strictly a spot up shooter, but he set a new UTEP record with 81 three pointers this season. He can't creat his own shot, so you had better not leave him unguarded. If he's alone anywhere near the three point line he'll knock the shot down. Craig actually made far more three pointers than two pointers he took (22). Craig is a good ball handler and pushes the ball up the court right next to Fili. He's not great at spotting the open man and making great passes like Fili is, but he rarely turns the ball over. Craig also provides some senior leadership for the team.

SF - 6'5" SO. Jason Williams
11.6 pts, 6.0 rebs, 3.5 asst, 1.1 steals

Jay Dub is our jack of all trades and he's probably the most athletic player on the team. He's comfortable bringing the ball up the court, slashing to the basket, and taking the three. He's the teams leading rebounder as well. The knock on him is that he can play out of control at times, and he doesn't have the greatest mid-range jumper. Still, he's a very good player and he's going to be a team leader for the next two years.

PF - 6'6" SR. Roy Smallwood
8.2 pts, 5.2 rebs, 1.8 asst

Roy is a fifth year senior and the final player left from the Don Haskins era. He's had a solid career, though he never became the player Miner fans were hoping he would be when he averaged 13.4 points and 59 rebounds his freshman year. He's a solid post player who can block some shots and rebounds well. He also has good range. He knocked down 20 three pointers ths year at 47%, and his mid-range jumper is solid as well. If Miners are undefeated on the season when Roy scores in double digits, so if Roy has a solid game on Thursday expect the Miners to be in the game.

C - 6'8" SO. John Tofi
10.7 pts, 5.8 rebs, 1.2 asst, 1 block

Tofi was the second leading scorer on last year six win team, and he's done well taking a back seat as an offensive threat to some of the new Miners. He's big and strong, but he really doesn't konwhow to use his strength to his advantage yet. When he gets the ball inside he has a variety of nice finesse moves that he uses to put the ball into the basket, but it would be nice to see him take it hard to the rim on occasion. When he wants to Tofi can be a good rebounder and shot blocker, and he has improved his intensity in the later part of this season. If the Miners are going to be in the game on Thursday they will need Tofi to step up and play hard against the Maryland big men.

Key Bench Players

SF/PF - 6'5" JR. Omar Thomas
15.5 pts, 4.8 rebs, 1.1 asst

Omar is the Miners leading scorer while coming off of the bench. He has some amazing low post moves, and he really knows how to use the glass. When he's on it's a thing of beauty. It looks like he's just throwing shots up, but they always seem to go in. But when he's off, it can be ugly. He had a rough game against Nevada in the WAC championship game and it hurt the Miners. OT usually sticks to the post, but he also has a very nice mid-range jumper. If he's up against a taller player he can take him off the dribble, or if he's on a smaller player he can post him up. OT is also an aggresive rebounder, and he likes to push the ball up the court when he grabs a board.

PG/SG - 6'3" SO. Giovanni St Amant
5.8 pts, 1.4 rebs, 1.4 asst.

Gio was the Miners leading scorer last season (13.6ppg), but this year he has been relegated to the bench. He's had a great attitude about it so far and has been good coming off the bench. He can player either PG or SG and he's best when he's taking it to the rack. Last year the knock on him was his outside shooting, and while he's improved on it this year he's not a consistent outside threat.

SF/PF - 6'8" SO. Brent Murphy
2.7 pts, 1.2 rebs, .440 3pt%

Murph usually gets a few minutes a game, but he doesn't do a whole lot. He has a sweet outside shot, but he's too slow to take anybody off the dribble and he doesn't use his size to post up at all. Hopefully on Thursday he'll just get a few minutes to get Tofi or OT some rest, and that's all. If Murph has to see big minutes then the Miners are in trouble.

PF - 6'6" SR. Darius Mattear
1.1 pts, 1.1 rbs

D-Mat is a bit of an enigma. He was last season's leading rebounder, but he was often in foul trouble. He hardly saw any action during the regular season this year, but he started seeing some minutes in the conference tournament. He had a big game against Boise St and played some solid minutes against Nevada as well. With some playing time D-Mat can grab rebounds and block some shots. He's not a scoring threat, though. At most, I would expect him to get ten minutes against the Terps.


Does anyone have any questions? If so, just let me know and I'll do my best to answer them. Also, feel free to check out the UTEP message board at utep.rivals.com. There are some knowledgable people there, though we do have our fair share of buffons as well... :)

[dawgfan]

BTW, I think the Committee sent a clear message that strength of schedule was the key evaluation criteria this season, although how that could get torpid Washington in, is unclear to me.

The PAC10 has clearly slipped to low mid-major status and really should have recieved only one bid this season. Utah State instead of Washington would have been a solid, admiralbe slelection.

Both Arizona and Maryland benefited by being recent national champs, lending name recognition and fan interest. But those are likely the only other two big school acts of favoritism, along with Washington being in at all.

Washington an 8?????? They did not deserve to be in. They are the team that should be out in favor of Utah St.

:rolleyes:

The NCAA has also been promoting the idea that it's more important how a team finishes a season than how they start it, and on that basis there's no question Washington deserved an NCAA bid. Clearly from the NCAA's selections, they disagree strongly with your opinions about how deserving Washington is.

No question that the UW was not a good team early on in the season - the losses to Wyoming and Houston were bad. But from the Oregon State game on, this was a different team. They finished 14-3, the only losses coming to UCLA, Stanford and NC State on the road. The 14 wins include 3 over Arizona and Stanford's only loss on the season. The UW's RPI is 57 - not great, but within previously established criteria.

I feel bad for Utah State and think they got jobbed, but Washington is not the team that should've been bumped for them.

[Butter]

Utah State played 4 games against teams in the top-100 of the RPI, and split them. The next fewest from what I've looked at for a team in the at-large field is 9, for UTEP and Air Force. Gonzaga went only 5-2 against the top-100. Bitch about Air Force all you want, but they played 9 games against the top-100, and went 5-4, not too bad.

The Big West is a bad conference. There are 5 teams with RPI's of 220 or more. No way should they have gotten 2 teams in, despite the fact that Utah State did beat BYU, who barely squeaked in themselves.

[Samdari]

:rolleyes:

The NCAA has also been promoting the idea that it's more important how a team finishes a season than how they start it, and on that basis there's no question Washington deserved an NCAA bid. Clearly from the NCAA's selections, they disagree strongly with your opinions about how deserving Washington is.


Well, one thing that they hammer home is that the entire season (a team's "body of work") is the most important thing. All of the other things they talk about, last 10, road/neutral record, is a way to separate a morass of teams that look pretty much the same. Washington's season as a whole looks dreadful compared to Utah St.'s as well as several other teams that got left out. You should not be rewarded for playing well for 10 games when you played the first 17 so lousy. This bid was based SOLELY on politics - they could not give the Pac10 only 2 bids, and thus protected their own conferences in the future.

[Blade6119]

Everyone bitching about wisconsin and pitt and all the other teams(though i cant see how maryland got a 4, thats besides the point). My team, even though they deserved it for ruining the potential final 4 season, didnt even make it in...so you can all kiss my Mizzou ass and ill see you guys again after we beat Utah State to win the NIT. ;)

[dawgfan]

Washington's first 13 games were lousy, but from that point on they were very good. Utah State had a real nice season going 24-3, but that was against a schedule rated the 250th in the country. The Huskies went 19-11 on a schedule ranked 81st. Look at Utah State's schedule and point out a big win for them if you can find one.

Washington beat an admittedly down Arizona team (but one still ranked in the top-25) 3 times out of 3 games. They pinned the only loss on the top-ranked Stanford Cardinal. They played #17 NC State down to the wire in a close loss on the road.

Utah State has only themselves to blame - they lost in their tournament to a team they'd blown-out twice before. I feel bad for them, but not at the expense of Washington being left out of the tournament.

[panerd]

BTW, I think the Committee sent a clear message that strength of schedule was the key evaluation criteria this season, although how that could get torpid Washington in, is unclear to me.
.

I will have to disagree 100%. They sent the message to Mizzou and Michigan State that they should schedule a bunch of patsies and go 11-0 heading into Big 12/Big 10 play. While Mizzou probably sealed their own fate by not winning any of three games that could have put them in the tournament how they get snubbed for Air Force is beyond me. And Michigan State gets an 8 seed? I will admit I have always been a supporter of the power conferences in football and basketball but I hate to say it this "tournament for the mid-majors" may have just screwed all of the mid-majors over when it comes time to schedule games in the next several years.

Throw all the head-to-head statisitcs you want about the big 12 against other conferences. But put the five Atlantic-10 teams that made the tournament in the big 12 for a season and let's see why the big 12 is considered a far superior conference in any other season. I say OSU, KU, and Texas would wipe the floor with even St. Joes. We have something called big men in the midwest.

[dawgfan]

BTW, I think the Committee sent a clear message that strength of schedule was the key evaluation criteria this season, although how that could get torpid Washington in, is unclear to me.

The PAC10 has clearly slipped to low mid-major status and really should have recieved only one bid this season. Utah State instead of Washington would have been a solid, admiralbe slelection.

I find it very amusing that you push the strength of schedule argument in one sentance and then promote Utah State (SoS: 250) over Washington (SoS: 81) in the next. Who exactly did Utah State beat?

[Buccaneer]

While Mizzou probably sealed their own fate by not winning any of three games that could have put them in the tournament how they get snubbed for Air Force is beyond me.
And what place did Missouri end up in their conference? I am very happy to see Missouri not rewarded, given the awful stink/scandals coming from their coach and basketball program.

[panerd]

And what place did Missouri end up in their conference? I am very happy to see Missouri not rewarded, given the awful stink/scandals coming from their coach and basketball program.


Like I said in my earlier post. 6th place is the big 12 with a 9-7 record is a far greater accomplishment than 1st place in the Mountain West with no conference title. What did 6th place Mizzou do to one of the teams (UNLV) in the MWC conference title game? Spanked them by 35! This same team beat Air Force at home and played them to the buzzer at Air Force.

A far as the supposed "stink" aroud Mizzou... one idiot does not define a program. Yes, Quin made a mistake by thinking he could help an obviously troubled kid. But he didn't make him hold a girl hostage and send him to prison. And no matter what the bleeding hearts say it is his word against dozens of other players and coaches who didn't just get done serving time for assault and didn't have axes to grind with the Mizzou athletic department. So let's wait and watch when nothing comes out of this idiot's allegations.

EDIT: And I don't beleive Mizzou should be in the tournament. They embarassed the program with thier game against KU last Friday night. But Air Force? This isn't 2001.

[Neuqua]

Coach Billy Gillispie
Billy G is a young coach (44) that the Miners hired away from Illinois. He is a Bill Self disciple after having under him at Tulsa and Illinois.

As long as you agree to never mention $elf's name again, I will continue to root for UTEP.

[JeeberD]

Deal... ;) :D

[sterlingice]

As long as you agree to never mention $elf's name again, I will continue to root for UTEP.
Sorry, we had to steal $elf from you to replace R(EGO)oy

(I had no idea how to fit that in, but something to the effect of we stole your coach for cash because ours left to feed his ego)

SI

[Neuqua]

No need to apologize, we're more than happy with Bruce Weber who has an actual clue of what he's trying to teach, he just lacks the charisma that $elf has.

I'm interested to see how much Kansas fans enjoy $elf (are they? I'm just assuming they like him) after a few early tourney exits, the man simply does not how to coach in the tournament.

[hoopsguy]

I'm thinking Self will at least play to seed this season in the tournament, given that his first two games will be in Kansas City.

[sterlingice]

No need to apologize, we're more than happy with Bruce Weber who has an actual clue of what he's trying to teach, he just lacks the charisma that $elf has.

I'm interested to see how much Kansas fans enjoy $elf (are they? I'm just assuming they like him) after a few early tourney exits, the man simply does not how to coach in the tournament.
Kansas fans are like they always are. When we were losing, it was "the new coach, he fouled up the offense, never mind that we didn't have the tools we had last year" but now that he's winning "he's the man! three cheers for bill"

SI

[Butter]

But put the five Atlantic-10 teams that made the tournament in the big 12 for a season and let's see why the big 12 is considered a far superior conference in any other season. I say OSU, KU, and Texas would wipe the floor with even St. Joes. We have something called big men in the midwest.

That's 4 Atlantic-10 teams. And Richmond (the 3rd place team in the A-10 West) beat Kansas and Colorado on the road, so stick that in your Big 12 pipe and smoke it, beyotch. :p

[Samdari]

The Huskies went 19-11 on a schedule ranked 81st.

You make this easy, making my point for me. The above clearly does not deserve a bid.

[Samdari]

$elf ....the man simply does not how to coach in the tournament.

He took Tulsa to the Sweet 16 and Final 8, both times as double digit seeds.

[Neuqua]

He then went on to inherit one of the most talented teams in the nation and every year they became progressively worse and worse. Although since he's the media darling, no one calls him out on it.

[dawgfan]

You make this easy, making my point for me. The above clearly does not deserve a bid.

But 25-3 on a strength of schedule of 250 is more deserving? The Tourney committee clearly values more highly how you finish the season and they also value big wins and how you play top teams. Washington finished 14-3, gave Stanford its only loss, beat top-20 Arizona 3 out of 3 and had a narrow loss on the road to the ACC's #2 team NC State. Utah State played nobody in the top-25.

[OldGiants]

Who exactly did Utah State beat?

24 of the 27 teams they played. You can only beat who you play, and Washington has a built-in SOS edge as a PAC10 member. Ignoring PAC10 play, Washington lost to NC State, the only 'name' school it scheduled. I don't see where that rates over Utah State's accomplishments.

There has to be a balance between game results and SOS, and I don't see where Washington did anything outside the wussy PAC10 to rate a bid.

I agree with Samdari, the choice of Washington was purely poitical.

[Samdari]

But 25-3 on a strength of schedule of 250 is more deserving? The Tourney committee clearly values more highly how you finish the season and they also value big wins and how you play top teams. Washington finished 14-3, gave Stanford its only loss, beat top-20 Arizona 3 out of 3 and had a narrow loss on the road to the ACC's #2 team NC State. Utah State played nobody in the top-25.

Utah St.'s SOS is actually 194. Still not terribly impressive, but a fair sight better than 250.

When discussing appropriate seed, you really must not include terms like "top-20 Arizona". Based on no measure of actual performance were they a top-20 team. If they had beaten they teams they beat with the words Oregon St. on their jerseys, they might not have even made the tourney. Note that the committee agreed, giving them a 9 seed. Moral: the polls are a terrible indicator of how good a team is.

Also, I interpret "narrow road loss" as simply "loss". There are no moral victories.

Still, UA was better than anybody Utah St. beat. Despite that, I happen to think that 25-3 against the #194 schedule is more impressive than 19-11 against roughly the 100th best. Those teams you say were terrible in the Big West are the caliber of teams that were beating Washington early in the season.

[Arles]

The PAC10 has clearly slipped to low mid-major status and really should have recieved only one bid this season.
I don't see how Arizona doesn't get in if teams like Air Force, BYU, and UTEP got in. While Arizona probably should have been a 10, they had the 6th best nonconference RPI in the nation, beat a pretty good Texas team in a neutral court and finished 20-9 for the season.

To the Pac-10 "slipped to low mid-major status" statement, there are a few things people need to realize. First, out of 50 starters in the Pac-10, five were seniors. This is an extremely young league and almost everyone of note will be returning for next season. Next, UCLA, Washington, WSU, and Oregon State all have had new coaches in the past couple seasons. It takes them a year or two to get the guys they want in their system. This is another reason why more young guys are playing.

Next year the Pac-10 will be one of the top conferences in the nation. Arizona, Washington and Stanford are returning 14 of 15 starters. Plus, Arizona, UCLA, USC, Oregon and Stanford all had very good recruiting seasons.

One thing that will always hurt the Pac-10, though, is that they play 18 conference games and the conference tourney. Most power conferences play 16 and those extra two games (10 losses) will always knock down the conferences RPI. Instead of going out and beating up on Liberty and Sam Houston State, Pac-10 teams are playing two more games against each other.

[Samdari]

I don't see how Arizona doesn't get in if teams like Air Force, BYU, and UTEP got in. While Arizona probably should have been a 10, they had the 6th best nonconference RPI in the nation, beat a pretty good Texas team in a neutral court and finished 20-9 for the season.

To the Pac-10 "slipped to low mid-major status" statement, there are a few things people need to realize. First, out of 50 starters in the Pac-10, five were seniors. This is an extremely young league and almost everyone of note will be returning for next season. Next, UCLA, Washington, WSU, and Oregon State all have had new coaches in the past couple seasons. It takes them a year or two to get the guys they want in their system. This is another reason why more young guys are playing.

Next year the Pac-10 will be one of the top conferences in the nation. Arizona, Washington and Stanford are returning 14 of 15 starters. Plus, Arizona, UCLA, USC, Oregon and Stanford all had very good recruiting seasons.

One thing that will always hurt the Pac-10, though, is that they play 18 conference games and the conference tourney. Most power conferences play 16 and those extra two games (10 losses) will always knock down the conferences RPI. Instead of going out and beating up on Liberty and Sam Houston State, Pac-10 teams are playing two more games against each other.


Ummm, Arles, with the 5 extra losses come 5 extra wins. in fact, if all the teams had good non-con records (the norm for big conferences) playing each other actually artificially raises the individual RPIs of the members. If your team got whacked in non-con this would indeed hurt. The RPI is more a measure of who you played than anything so losing to a good conference team helps your RPI more than beating Sam Houston St. Those two extra games are not hurting the Pac-10 in terms of RPI.

I don't think the Pac-10 has slipped to mid-major status (I agree that they will be back, for some of the reasons you indicate) but they did play to a level below several of the mid-major conferences this year.

As for Arizona, UW and Stanford returning 14 of 15 starters, there is simply no way. There may be only one starter who is a senior, but you are not considering early defections. Lottich is Stanford's second best player, but their best, Childress is almost a lock to go pro. They lose their two best players. Arizona's starters are all underclassmen, but all are also pro prospects (how did this group lose so many games?) and Iguodala at a minimum will go pro. Frye and Adams will consider it, with Frye likely to go. Heck, don't be surprised if Shakur overrates himself so much as to declare. He considered jumping from HS. Washington looks like they will be in good shape the next couple years.

[Arles]

Ummm, Arles, with the 5 extra losses come 5 extra wins. in fact, if all the teams had good non-con records (the norm for big conferences) playing each other actually artificially raises the individual RPIs of the members. If your team got whacked in non-con this would indeed hurt. The RPI is more a measure of who you played than anything so losing to a good conference team helps your RPI more than beating Sam Houston St. Those two extra games are not hurting the Pac-10 in terms of RPI.
Wins matter a great deal in RPI ranking. Look at St. John's. They played a top 20 schedule and have an RPI in the 170s because they lost a bunch. The reason this hurts is not because a team like Stanford or Arizona plays Oregon State an extra time. But, because a team like Oregon State play Cal an extra time instead of maybe scheduling an easy win like Portland State. So, no matter how "good" each team is, the bottom rung of Pac-10 teams has a great deal of losses. This pulls down their RPI (the losses). Then, wins over them are less valuable to a team like Arizona or Stanford, which hurts their RPI. It's a big spiral.

What helps these bottom rung of major conference teams (Georgetown, Kansas State, Penn State) is that they can creep to within spitting distance of .500 by playing patsies. Team like Washington State, Oregon State and Arizona State have two less wins because they have to play the Pac-10 instead.

I don't think the Pac-10 has slipped to mid-major status (I agree that they will be back, for some of the reasons you indicate) but they did play to a level below several of the mid-major conferences this year.
I agree that the Pac-10 was one of the weaker major conferences and that's why they barely got three teams in, and two were ranked 8 or below. The quote I took issue with was:

"The PAC10 has clearly slipped to low mid-major status"

"Low mid-majors" do not have a top 5 team, two in the top 25 and three in the NCAAS.


As for Arizona, UW and Stanford returning 14 of 15 starters, there is simply no way. There may be only one starter who is a senior, but you are not considering early defections. Lottich is Stanford's second best player, but their best, Childress is almost a lock to go pro. They lose their two best players. Arizona's starters are all underclassmen, but all are also pro prospects (how did this group lose so many games?) and Iguodala at a minimum will go pro. Frye and Adams will consider it, with Frye likely to go.

I follow Arizona very closely and doubt either Frye or Adams will even consider it. Iguodala is about 30-70 to go pro as he still needs a lot of work on his jumper. Also, Stanford and Arizona both have top 15 recruiting classes coming in. My comment on youth was both in reference to the top guys (returning most of their contributing players), but more towards the Washingtons, Oregon States and Washington States. None of their young guys will be going pro.


Heck, don't be surprised if Shakur overrates himself so much as to declare. He considered jumping from HS. Washington looks like they will be in good shape the next couple years.
I would say the odds are greater that no Arizona player goes pro over losing two guys. Adams is a 6-4 Power Forward, why would he go pro as a sophomore? Shakur was awful through most of January and February. The played a senior walkon over him (Ranne) in some key games. Iguodala is the only guy with pro skills and a pro body, but his shooting is poor. I would bet good money Arizona will lose no more than one guy this year.

[dawgfan]

24 of the 27 teams they played. You can only beat who you play, and Washington has a built-in SOS edge as a PAC10 member. Ignoring PAC10 play, Washington lost to NC State, the only 'name' school it scheduled. I don't see where that rates over Utah State's accomplishments.

There has to be a balance between game results and SOS, and I don't see where Washington did anything outside the wussy PAC10 to rate a bid.

I agree with Samdari, the choice of Washington was purely poitical.

Please.

Are you seriously saying that Utah State's wins over teams like Idaho State and Illinois State were more impressive than Washington's 5-point loss on the road to NC State?

If Utah State had wanted to be taken more seriously they should've scheduled some tougher non-conference games. Yes, they can't do anything about their conference schedule and associated prestige, but they could've added 1-2 pretty good non-conference games to make up for it.

So Stanford and Arizona are wussy teams eh? Giving Stanford its' only loss and beating Arizona 3 out of 3 doesn't mean anything?

Are you seriously suggesting that the way Washington is playing now (and has been for the last 17 games) doesn't make them one of the top-30 teams in the country right now?

[dawgfan]

When discussing appropriate seed, you really must not include terms like "top-20 Arizona". Based on no measure of actual performance were they a top-20 team. If they had beaten they teams they beat with the words Oregon St. on their jerseys, they might not have even made the tourney. Note that the committee agreed, giving them a 9 seed. Moral: the polls are a terrible indicator of how good a team is.

Arizona lost by 1 to Florida and beat Texas. They may not be up to the best Arizona teams of the past but this is still a good team. Maybe they don't deserve their top-20 ranking, but how low would you rank them?

Also, I interpret "narrow road loss" as simply "loss". There are no moral victories.

Yeah, it still goes in the loss column, but you don't actually believe that a 5 point loss on the road is the same thing as a 40 point loss at home do you? My point with that loss is showing that the Huskies are playing at a very high level right now, at least top-30 level.

Those teams you say were terrible in the Big West are the caliber of teams that were beating Washington early in the season.

Yeah, Washington lost to Wyoming and Houston - those were bad. But were they any worse than losing to CS Northridge?

[Butter]

So, Utah St. got spanked by Hawaii.

Maybe we could stop all this now. :)