menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: I'm curious about opinions on the selection process/criteria on here
Page: 1 of 2
OU_Country
General User
Member Since: 12/6/2005
Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County
Post Count: 8,401
mail
OU_Country
mail
Posted: 3/13/2016 7:40 PM
settings_applications edit_note
After watching that selection show and seeing the bracket, I'm more disgusted by my perception of big school TV money winning out more than ever before. Monmouth, SDSU, and others have legit arguments on why they belong more than 'Cuse, Tulsa, and Vandy. Monmouth should be furious after playing exceptionally well in a tough November and December and being left out.


One of my biggest frustrations is that there's no true formula for a mid-major to get in short of playing 15 road games to start the year and hope you can win 12. It feels like the at-large criteria change every single year, and I just don't understand why there can't be minimum criteria laid out in May for the following year to be considered for an at-large. Something printed in writing publicly that the NCAA can't change after the fact.
Chuck_IV
General User
CIV
Member Since: 1/20/2005
Location: CT
Post Count: 198
person
mail
Chuck_IV
mail
Posted: 3/13/2016 7:43 PM
settings_applications edit_note
I mentioned Monmouth in another thread. They beat UCLA, USC, #17 ND and only lost by 3 to Dayton, yet because they had 2 questionable CONFERENCE losses, that was their reasoning for leaving them out. Essentially, no matter how good you do, if you give us the slightest bit of bad, we will use this as an excuse to exclude you.

This IMO is one of the biggest snubs in quite some time and reeks of big conference influence.

**EDIT**

Monmouth also beat Georgetown, wow, how the heck were they left out?
Last Edited: 3/13/2016 8:34:59 PM by Chuck_IV
OU_Country
General User
Member Since: 12/6/2005
Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County
Post Count: 8,401
mail
OU_Country
mail
Posted: 3/13/2016 7:49 PM
settings_applications edit_note
I would be really interested to hear Schaus' candid comments about this.
bornacatfan
General User
Member Since: 8/3/2006
Post Count: 5,752
mail
bornacatfan
mail
Posted: 3/13/2016 7:49 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Got to listen to Mark Adams about the inequity. https://soundcloud.com/dandakich/030916-markadams-dandakich

Still say go to 128 add a day and get rid of the controversy of Big not coming out of their house
Pete Chouteau
General User
Member Since: 11/17/2004
Location: You Can't See Me
Post Count: 1,696
mail
Pete Chouteau
mail
Posted: 3/13/2016 7:57 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Every year they omit deserving mid majors, and every year it's a different reason.

I think this is the straw for me, because our AD is now part of it, and I'm a fool for thinking he wasn't going to be part of the problem.

Just like bowl season, the fun week is 10 days of mid major chaos, which is then followed by old money. Disillusionment sucks.

This year, I'm hitting the woods for the boy's first Boy Scout camp (because Cub Scouts doesn't count), and I don't think I'll miss much, and I certainly won't regret it.
100%Cat
General User
Member Since: 1/17/2013
Post Count: 2,726
mail
100%Cat
mail
Posted: 3/13/2016 7:59 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Akron got snubbed?
Alan Swank
General User
AS
Member Since: 12/12/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,375
person
mail
Alan Swank
mail
Posted: 3/13/2016 8:25 PM
settings_applications edit_note
OU_Country wrote:expand_more
I would be really interested to hear Schaus' candid comments about this.
Good luck. He doesn't give candid comments
FearLeon
General User
Member Since: 3/13/2005
Post Count: 5,135
mail
FearLeon
mail
Posted: 3/13/2016 9:06 PM
settings_applications edit_note
If Monmouth can't get in this year, the MAC will never get 2 teams in again. Monmouth did everything the committee asked. Just shows you how impossible it is for the MAC moving forward.
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 3/13/2016 10:22 PM
settings_applications edit_note
bornacatfan wrote:expand_more
Got to listen to Mark Adams about the inequity. https://soundcloud.com/dandakich/030916-markadams-dandakich

Still say go to 128 add a day and get rid of the controversy of Big not coming out of their house

I'm in for 128. It's the solution.

Pete--JS may have been in the room, but how much influence can we expect him to have?

128 should significantly do away with the need for influence.


For those wondering why 'kron didn't get in, I have the highly complex, deeply reasoned, quite technical reason:

AKron sucks.
OU_Country
General User
Member Since: 12/6/2005
Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County
Post Count: 8,401
mail
OU_Country
mail
Posted: 3/13/2016 11:24 PM
settings_applications edit_note
I'm not opposed to 128, but at least enough to have the outright conference winner and tournament champion both get auto bids.
Andrew Ruck
General User
Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 5,643
mail
Andrew Ruck
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 12:24 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Going to 128 would just piss us off differently...Sure they would put the Monmouth type teams in, but then snub a team like Ohio for a team like Florida State or something.
rpbobcat
General User
R
Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,662
person
mail
rpbobcat
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 7:10 AM
settings_applications edit_note
FearLeon wrote:expand_more
If Monmouth can't get in this year, the MAC will never get 2 teams in again. Monmouth did everything the committee asked. Just shows you how impossible it is for the MAC moving forward.
According to the papers and news reports out here,the committee gave the following reasons for leaving Monmouth out:

1.They beat UCLA and Georgetown>But those schools weren't "impressive enough" this year.

2.They lost to Army,Canisius and Manhattan.

What really has people upset is that Syracuse got in.Especially with their coach having ot sit out games for NCAA violations and them losing 5 of their last 6.
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,820
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 8:46 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Andrew Ruck wrote:expand_more
Going to 128 would just piss us off differently...Sure they would put the Monmouth type teams in, but then snub a team like Ohio for a team like Florida State or something.
Agreed. There will always be a reason that a Power Conference team gets in over a lesser conference team. That's just the way it is.

Monmouth didn't get in because they lost a couple conference games to opponents that had an RPI above 200. It's funny how they don't fault other teams for that though. Had Monmouth not lost to those teams, they would have found some other reason to not let them in.

I know a lot of people are whining about Syracuse, but has anyone looked at Michigan's schedule? Who did they beat? OK, they get a pass for beating Indiana without Caris Levert.

-They beat Texas in November which was introducing a new coach.

-They beat Maryland at home, by 3.

-They beat Purdue at home, by 5.

That's it. That's the list. They had 11 losses by double digits, including a 24-point thrashing at SMU and a 16-point loss to Xavier at home. Their record since the beginning of February is 5-7. How is that a tournament team?
Last Edited: 3/14/2016 8:49:11 AM by GoCats105
UpSan Bobcat
General User
Member Since: 8/30/2005
Location: Upper Sandusky, OH
Post Count: 3,817
mail
UpSan Bobcat
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 8:51 AM
settings_applications edit_note
If the tournament went to 128, major conference teams with a .500 or better record overall (with losing conference records) would be almost automatic to be in the field. And a conference like the MAC still would be lucky to get two teams in. I'm not sure it would help much to expand the field.
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,652
person
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 9:10 AM
settings_applications edit_note
The real issue is that the selection committee has no real sense of--and therefore no respect for--how difficult it is to win on the road at many mid-major schools.

So when a team like Monmouth goes on the road and loses to Army, a 19 win team, that's automatically viewed as a bad loss. Why? Because nobody of note ever pays at Army, so there's no frame of reference for how difficult it is to win there. A loss at Army's a bad loss no matter what, because only mid-major and low major teams lose at Army. It's a cycle that perpetuates itself, and one that the major conference schools have no incentive to break.
Chuck_IV
General User
CIV
Member Since: 1/20/2005
Location: CT
Post Count: 198
person
mail
Chuck_IV
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 9:11 AM
settings_applications edit_note
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
If Monmouth can't get in this year, the MAC will never get 2 teams in again. Monmouth did everything the committee asked. Just shows you how impossible it is for the MAC moving forward.
According to the papers and news reports out here,the committee gave the following reasons for leaving Monmouth out:

1.They beat UCLA and Georgetown>But those schools weren't "impressive enough" this year.

2.They lost to Army,Canisius and Manhattan.

What really has people upset is that Syracuse got in.Especially with their coach having ot sit out games for NCAA violations and them losing 5 of their last 6.
Right and they also lost to a sub 250 RPI team I believe.

Funny how the committee conveniently ignores that fact that Monmouth also beat USC and #17 ND and lost by only 3 to Dayton, ALL of these on the road or neutral sites, NONE at home.

This is the problem, no matter how much "good" a mid-major does, the committee always looks for excuses to exclude them based on anything bad. So it only takes 1 or 2 bad things to completely negate any good done. Yet when it comes to Majors, the same thing doesn't apply. They quickly look past anything bad and brush it off.

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
The real issue is that the selection committee has no real sense of--and therefore no respect for--how difficult it is to win on the road at many mid-major schools.

So when a team like Monmouth goes on the road and loses to Army, a 19 win team, that's automatically viewed as a bad loss. Why? Because nobody of note ever pays at Army, so there's no frame of reference for how difficult it is to win there. A loss at Army's a bad loss no matter what, because only mid-major and low major teams lose at Army. It's a cycle that perpetuates itself, and one that the major conference schools have no incentive to break.
+1000

This is an excellent point. They also completely ignore the fact that playing within your own conference is ALWAYS tough, no matter what conference it is. When was the last time ANYBODY in ANY conference went undefeated?
Last Edited: 3/14/2016 9:14:35 AM by Chuck_IV
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,652
person
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 9:14 AM
settings_applications edit_note
UpSan Bobcat wrote:expand_more
If the tournament went to 128, major conference teams with a .500 or better record overall (with losing conference records) would be almost automatic to be in the field. And a conference like the MAC still would be lucky to get two teams in. I'm not sure it would help much to expand the field.
Agreed. They'd also very likely structure the field to have a whole round of play-in games, with the core teams receiving a bye. So a day one upset for a team like Ohio would come against a 16-16 Arkansas team, after 3 games in 3 days to win/go to the finals of the MAC Tournament and the reward would be playing your 5th game in 7 days against a 3 seed like Utah.
colobobcat66
General User
C66
Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,744
person
mail
colobobcat66
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 9:20 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
Got to listen to Mark Adams about the inequity. https://soundcloud.com/dandakich/030916-markadams-dandakich

Still say go to 128 add a day and get rid of the controversy of Big not coming out of their house

I'm in for 128. It's the solution.

Pete--JS may have been in the room, but how much influence can we expect him to have?

128 should significantly do away with the need for influence.


For those wondering why 'kron didn't get in, I have the highly complex, deeply reasoned, quite technical reason:

AKron sucks.

For the first time in history, I agree with Monroe on all three main points.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 9:24 AM
settings_applications edit_note
I think the biggest problem with expanding to 128 is it would suck the excitement and buildup leading up to selection Sunday which is a big part of the process. IMO 64 is enough. If you expand to 128 they are still going to screw the little guy. We have an RPI of 80 and we would be sitting on the outside looking in. All you would be doing is moving the line of conversation down 64 spots. And this morning we would be complaining about how we didn't get in ahead of Northwestern or Penn State. Monmouth and St. Mary's were screwed but moving to 128 only changes who gets screwed and it waters down the tournament to the point that it wouldn't be seen as a big accomplishment making it.
Andrew Ruck
General User
Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 5,643
mail
Andrew Ruck
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 9:36 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Monmouth played 23 (!) games away from home. They say these teams just didn't challenge themselves enough, yet 90% of the power conference OOC games are at home. It's a crock.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 9:40 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Andrew Ruck wrote:expand_more
Monmouth played 23 (!) games away from home. They say these teams just didn't challenge themselves enough, yet 90% of the power conference OOC games are at home. It's a crock.
It is a crock and when they aren't screwing teams like Monmouth by leaving them out they are screwing them with seedings if they are lucky enough to make it in. But nothing will be done because the people in control aren't concerned about fairness. They are concerned about making money.
D.A.
General User
DA
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,198
person
mail
D.A.
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 9:56 AM
settings_applications edit_note
No offense to many here that know far more about hoops than me, but you really need to get "One shining moment" out of your heads and really embrace the reality of the situation: The tourney funds a major chunk of the NCAA budget, and the Power Five drive the bus. As long as the college athletics system is structured the way it is, selection Sunday will always be as it is. This is not a democracy.

So just cozy in and enjoy the next couple of weeks, because no degree of righteous indignation is going to lead to a change to reality.
OUs LONG Driver
General User
OLD
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Copley, OH
Post Count: 707
person
mail
OUs LONG Driver
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 9:59 AM
settings_applications edit_note
I know this would never happen but.....if we're going to rely on all these metrics like RPI, BPI, KenPom, Strength of Schedule, etc., then make it a rule the committee doesn't get to see the team name when selecting the field or setting seeding. Why would the team name matter for anything other than introducing bias? Sure watching a team is an important part of the process, but we all know the committee isn't watching too many games below the major level. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some members of the committee hadn't seen Monmouth or St Bonaventure play all year. If you've seen Team X more than Team Y and the metrics are similar you're probably going to select Team X.
OU_Country
General User
Member Since: 12/6/2005
Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County
Post Count: 8,401
mail
OU_Country
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 10:14 AM
settings_applications edit_note
I'm gonna go a step farther, and say that it's time for the mid-major schools to consider class action lawsuits. Require the tournament committee to lay out criteria, in advance of the season's scheduling, that will lead to being in the conversation for at-large bids. At least then they know what the goal is and what they're shooting for. Monmouth did everything right according to previous years selection criteria, and got screwed over.

I have friends who support the B1G bandwagon, etc, who think I want every mid-major in the dance. I want the best TEAMS in the dance. I want the mid-majors who have earned their way in to get a shot to prove it, just like I've seen for years. The committee is increasingly trying to kill Cinderella, and it will ruin the first weekend of the tournament if it continues.



Yahoo Sports assessment:

"The appeal of the NCAA tournament's opening weekend is the potential for a no-name mid-major to pull a stunning upset, but this year's committee members robbed the event of some of its usual charm."

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab-the-dagger/five-thing...
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,683
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 3/14/2016 10:51 AM
settings_applications edit_note
What a difference five years or so makes. I was widely skewered on this board several years ago for suggesting that the selection process was not exactly objective and that smaller conferences were getting screwed. I believe I even said the process was corrupt. Now it appears that most posters in this thread agree with me. Welcome aboard! ;-)
Showing Messages: 1 - 25 of 47
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)