2009 NCAA Tournament Mock Selection Committee

[SouthSideRyan]

Does any other team in the country(not just bubble teams) have 2 noncon wins as good as UCLA and Duke?

 

xavier beat memphis and mizzou on neutral courts.... that's at least as impressive if not more so.

 

michigan has two road games all year, and those were against northwestern and indiana. if they lose at minneosota they'll be 18-13 and below .500 in the conference. non-conference wins are nice, but they haven't done well enough in conference to get in.

 

That and those wins came extremely early on and don't really show how good that team is. They are capable of beating great teams but play way to inconsistent to be a tourny team at this point.

 

Who cares when the wins came? Teams should make the tournamet based on what they've done, not how good they are.

 

There is no other logical path. It must be an objective, rather than subjective, standard.

 

I guess this comes back to my dislike of the last 12 stat. I don't care if a team lost their last 3 games 80-2 if they hadn't lost a game before that. I don't think there's much of a difference between a team that hobbles into the tourney vs. a team that enters hot. Anecdotally, I think of the Syracuse team that went from bubble to some absurdly high seed by winning the Big East tourney. They proceeded to lose in the 1st round. I want to say Maryland did the same thing.

 

It was my huge issue a few years back when Air Force was given an at large bid seemingly because they created a tough matchup for people. Their resume was complete ass, but the committee thought they'd make for a good game. What's the point of the regular season if what you get done during the first 20 games of it don't matter, and it only matters how pretty you look down the stretch?

[bukie]

As a contrary opinion, I think how a team finishes is at least somewhat indicative of the quality of the team they put out there. No, not to the degree of Maryland and Syracuse 3-4 years back where they jumped from out of the tourney into a first-round exit as a 4-5 seed, but let's use New Mexico as an example. They were, to put it mildly, a bad team during November and December. They've got 3 bad losses during that time. However, since the turn of the year (coinciding with the start of the conference schedule), they've been easily the best team in their conference, efficiency-wise, and are one win away from winning the MWC.

 

Now, their overall numbers are definitely not at-large worthy, but the MWC was arguably the sixth best conference in the country this year, and winning the regular season title for the conference (and it's a double-round-robin, so every team's schedule was the same in-conference) means more to me than losing some bad games early in the year.

[stuy119]

Does any other team in the country(not just bubble teams) have 2 noncon wins as good as UCLA and Duke?

 

xavier beat memphis and mizzou on neutral courts.... that's at least as impressive if not more so.

 

michigan has two road games all year, and those were against northwestern and indiana. if they lose at minneosota they'll be 18-13 and below .500 in the conference. non-conference wins are nice, but they haven't done well enough in conference to get in.

 

That and those wins came extremely early on and don't really show how good that team is. They are capable of beating great teams but play way to inconsistent to be a tourny team at this point.

 

Who cares when the wins came? Teams should make the tournamet based on what they've done, not how good they are.

 

There is no other logical path. It must be an objective, rather than subjective, standard.

 

I guess this comes back to my dislike of the last 12 stat. I don't care if a team lost their last 3 games 80-2 if they hadn't lost a game before that. I don't think there's much of a difference between a team that hobbles into the tourney vs. a team that enters hot. Anecdotally, I think of the Syracuse team that went from bubble to some absurdly high seed by winning the Big East tourney. They proceeded to lose in the 1st round. I want to say Maryland did the same thing.

 

It was my huge issue a few years back when Air Force was given an at large bid seemingly because they created a tough matchup for people. Their resume was complete ass, but the committee thought they'd make for a good game. What's the point of the regular season if what you get done during the first 20 games of it don't matter, and it only matters how pretty you look down the stretch?

 

The same people looked like geniuses when they didn't make Cincinnati the top team overall when Kenyon Martin broke his leg, then lost in the 2nd/3rd round based on their last few games.

[SouthSideRyan]

Does any other team in the country(not just bubble teams) have 2 noncon wins as good as UCLA and Duke?

 

xavier beat memphis and mizzou on neutral courts.... that's at least as impressive if not more so.

 

michigan has two road games all year, and those were against northwestern and indiana. if they lose at minneosota they'll be 18-13 and below .500 in the conference. non-conference wins are nice, but they haven't done well enough in conference to get in.

 

That and those wins came extremely early on and don't really show how good that team is. They are capable of beating great teams but play way to inconsistent to be a tourny team at this point.

 

Who cares when the wins came? Teams should make the tournamet based on what they've done, not how good they are.

 

There is no other logical path. It must be an objective, rather than subjective, standard.

 

I guess this comes back to my dislike of the last 12 stat. I don't care if a team lost their last 3 games 80-2 if they hadn't lost a game before that. I don't think there's much of a difference between a team that hobbles into the tourney vs. a team that enters hot. Anecdotally, I think of the Syracuse team that went from bubble to some absurdly high seed by winning the Big East tourney. They proceeded to lose in the 1st round. I want to say Maryland did the same thing.

 

It was my huge issue a few years back when Air Force was given an at large bid seemingly because they created a tough matchup for people. Their resume was complete ass, but the committee thought they'd make for a good game. What's the point of the regular season if what you get done during the first 20 games of it don't matter, and it only matters how pretty you look down the stretch?

 

The same people looked like geniuses when they didn't make Cincinnati the top team overall when Kenyon Martin broke his leg, then lost in the 2nd/3rd round based on their last few games.

 

Injuries are a different issue because the team literally isn't the same team that won those games earlier in the season.

 

I understand the desire to say well this team just didn't find its groove until midseason, they needed to play together for a while before playing to their potential. Well, too bad. It's not the team that beat them's fault for being prepared for a full season rather than taking actual game time to get together. That's good coaching to have your team prepared out of the gate. Sure it puts teams full of upperclassmen at an advantage because they've played together, but why should they be punished?

[bukie]

Some media "locks" and "bubble" lists:

 

ESPN: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bubblewatch?id=90

SI: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_glockner/03/02/bubble.watch/index.html

CBS: http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bubble

[bukie]

A locks and bubbles list from Basketball Prospectus: http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=574

[CubInOK]

Bukie, can I play the blind evaluation game too?

 

Team A: 25-4, 1-1 against the RPI top 25, 1-2 against the top 50, no losses outside the top 100, 10-4 R/N, 9-3 last 12, SOS 134

Team B: 25-5, 1-3 against the RPI top 25, 2-3 agaist the top 50, 1 loss outside of the top 100, 6-3 R/N, 10-2 last 12, SOS 95

 

Who's better?

[Derwood]

i'm still not convinced PSU is in.

[bcl412]

i'm still not convinced PSU is in.

 

I'm trying to say this as objectively as possible. I really could see them losing at Iowa.

 

Stupid being drunk and not spelling words right.

Edited March 6, 2009 by bcl412

[TruffleShuffle]

i'm still not convinced PSU is in.

 

I'm trying to say this as objectionably as possible. I really could see them losing at Iowa.

 

oh i definitely can see that. iowa isn't bad, that was an emotionally-draining win and the game is less than 48 hours away.... the flight to iowa leaves in like 10 hours actually. plus cornley is playing with one arm now and battle is struggling with his jumper. it's almost set up for penn state to lose. hopefully the possibility of getting the #2 seed and knowing that a win over iowa is just about a guarantee for the tourney will get them over the hump.

[bukie]

Bukie, can I play the blind evaluation game too?

 

Team A: 25-4, 1-1 against the RPI top 25, 1-2 against the top 50, no losses outside the top 100, 10-4 R/N, 9-3 last 12, SOS 134

Team B: 25-5, 1-3 against the RPI top 25, 2-3 agaist the top 50, 1 loss outside of the top 100, 6-3 R/N, 10-2 last 12, SOS 95

 

Who's better?

Sure, anyone can play. I'd probably go team A, personally. Both are close, though.

[bukie]

One more reminder that if you'd like to participate, pm me your locks and bubbles lists, or post them here and let me know by the end of the day today.

[TruffleShuffle]

i have cal and tennessee as locks now after winning last night.

[Exile on Waveland]

i have cal and tennessee as locks now after winning last night.

 

I would have to agree.

[CubbieBum]

Bukie, can I play the blind evaluation game too?

 

Team A: 25-4, 1-1 against the RPI top 25, 1-2 against the top 50, no losses outside the top 100, 10-4 R/N, 9-3 last 12, SOS 134

Team B: 25-5, 1-3 against the RPI top 25, 2-3 agaist the top 50, 1 loss outside of the top 100, 6-3 R/N, 10-2 last 12, SOS 95

 

Who's better?

Sure, anyone can play. I'd probably go team A, personally. Both are close, though.

 

I don't even see how that is close. Team A beats team B in everything but strength of schedule and that is close. Team A has better overall record, better win percentage versus top 25 teams, no bad losses and a better R/N record.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Is that LSU and Utah State?

[TruffleShuffle]

Bukie, can I play the blind evaluation game too?

 

Team A: 25-4, 1-1 against the RPI top 25, 1-2 against the top 50, no losses outside the top 100, 10-4 R/N, 9-3 last 12, SOS 134

Team B: 25-5, 1-3 against the RPI top 25, 2-3 agaist the top 50, 1 loss outside of the top 100, 6-3 R/N, 10-2 last 12, SOS 95

 

Who's better?

Sure, anyone can play. I'd probably go team A, personally. Both are close, though.

 

I don't even see how that is close. Team A beats team B in everything but strength of schedule and that is close. Team A has better overall record, better win percentage versus top 25 teams, no bad losses and a better R/N record.

 

their strength of schedule isn't really that close. lsu will have played 15 top 100 rpi teams against utah st's 9; 6 of the 9 teams that utah st does play in the top 100 are rated 87-100. it's an really soft schedule; lsu's schedule is soft (especially OOC) but not as big of a joke.

 

plus utah state's loss to boise state is a bad loss, i don't care if boise has a bizarrely-high rpi or not. boise hasn't beaten a good team all year and got destroyed by their two good OOC opponents (siena, byu).

[CubInOK]

Is that LSU and Utah State?

Team A is Utah State and Team B is LSU.

[SouthSideRyan]

Go ahead and add Tennessee to my locks. Last night cinched that.

 

And I already told you guys LSU was way overrated, and that Utah st. sucked. Still though, USU out, LSU in. Boise St., and Nevada??? [expletive] that.

[bukie]

Analyzing data...got a ton of it to sift through since there are a lot of participants this year (which is good!). I'll post the results early tomorrow.

 

Step 2 of the process will be to PM me your top 16 overall from the IN list I post, and your top 8 from the BUBBLE list I post by the end of Monday. Obviously, nobody can do that until I actually post the results.

 

EDIT: Almost forgot, Cornell is the first automatic bid clinched, from the Ivy league.

[bcl412]

Analyzing data...got a ton of it to sift through since there are a lot of participants this year (which is good!). I'll post the results early tomorrow.

 

Step 2 of the process will be to PM me your top 16 overall from the IN list I post, and your top 8 from the BUBBLE list I post by the end of Monday. Obviously, nobody can do that until I actually post the results.

 

EDIT: Almost forgot, Cornell is the first automatic bid clinched, from the Ivy league.

 

Andy Bernard is celebrating.

[bukie]

OK, finally, here's the results from round 1:

 

13 Committee members:

bukie (Illinois)

ISUCubsFan (Iowa State)

Tranny Tiger (Mizzou)

CubInOK (Oklahoma)

mul21 (Illinois)

Z38Cubs (Illinois)

Exile on Waveland (Indiana)

Flames24Rulz (Southern Illinois)

Prior4CyYoung (Louisville)

CubbieBum (Purdue?)

Vanilla Ice (Duke)

SouthSideRyan (Illinois)

TruffleShuffle (Penn State/Holy Cross?)

 

Auto-bids (31):

Cornell (Ivy)

 

At-large Locks (25):

Arizona State

Butler

Clemson

Connecticut

Duke

Florida State

Gonzaga

Illinois

Kansas

Louisville

LSU

Marquette

Memphis

Michigan State

Missouri

North Carolina

Oklahoma

Pittsburgh

Purdue

Syracuse

UCLA

Villanova

Wake Forest

Washington

Xavier

 

Under consideration (roughly in order of support):

BYU

California

Utah

West Virginia

Texas

Tennessee

Minnesota

Oklahoma State

Wisconsin

Ohio State

South Carolina

Arizona

Boston College

Creighton

Dayton

Penn State

Providence

Florida

Maryland

New Mexico

Rhode Island

Siena

Texas A&M

Cincinnati

Kentucky

San Diego State

St. Mary's

UNLV

Virginia Tech

Davidson

Kansas State

Miami

Michigan

Northwestern

Utah State

UAB

Notre Dame

Georgetown

USC

Temple

Tulsa

Washington State

Auburn

Baylor

Houston

Illinois State

Nebraska

Northern Iowa

VCU

Green Bay

Niagara

Vermont

 

 

I'll be updating the first post with this information as well.

 

Step 2: By the end of Monday, PM me your top 16 locks in order, and your top 8 under consideration in order.

[bukie]

Game results involving teams in consideration:

@Iowa 75 Penn State 67 2OT

Michigan 67 @Minnesota 64

@BC 67 Georgia Tech 66

Albany 56 @Vermont 52 OT (AE Quarters) (Motion to eliminate Vermont from consideration?)

Seton Hall 67 @Cincy 63 OT

@Miami 72 NC State 64

@Kansas St 76 Colorado 64

@Florida 60 Kentucky 53

South Carolina 68 @Georgia 51

Massachusetts 72 @Rhode Island 71

@Texas A&M 96 Missouri 86

@Davidson 84 Appalachian St 68 (Southern Quarters)

@Arizona State 83 California 66

@Northern Iowa 76 Bradley 62 (MVC Semis)

@UAB 70 Marshall 52

@Oklahoma 82 Oklahoma State 78

@Virginia 68 Maryland 63

New Mexico 74 @Wyoming 73

@Auburn 69 LSU 53

Nebraska 66 @Baylor 62 (Motion to remove Baylor from consideration?)

Tulsa 60 @Rice 50

@Kansas 83 Texas 73

@Georgetown 48 DePaul 40

@Siena 77 Canisius 52 (MAAC Quarters)

Illinois State 73 @Creighton 49 (MVC Semis)

@Washington 67 Washington State 60

@Utah 68 TCU 49

[Prior4CyYoung]

Ya both Baylor and Vermont are for done for.

[Prior4CyYoung]

East Tennessee State and Radford are now in.