NCAA Tourney Talk

[engrshock]

Why is the RPI not used other than as an excuse to keep some teams out or in? There were only two teams in the top 40 RPI that did not get into the tournament and that was Ill. St. and Dayton at 31 and 32 yet Kentucky and Oregon at 57 and 58 made it in.

Still until WSU gets back into the tournament, I do not really care.

Again, you can't look directly at a team's RPI for tournament consideration. You look at the RPI of teams they played.

Oregon had two losses outside the top 100. But they made up for it with wins against KSU (50 and NCAA-bound), Arizona twice (38) and Stanford (14). Kentucky had bad losses against Gardner Webb (200), Georgia (98) and San Diego (94). (Maybe Houston at 80). They had wins against Vandy (12), Tennessee (2), Arkansas (31) and Mississippi (48). That is the only team I really see an argument with. But out of all the at-large selections, there will be one or two questionable ones.

I still see the BCS teams getting an advantage from the RPI, not a disadvantage. So all this talk from the pundits (Bilas, Katz, Packer, etc.) is still drivel. Are they not paying attention?

The RPI is supposed to figure in the RPI's of the opponents as well as whether the games were home, neutral or away. It should not be discounted in favor of BCS league bias. While Oregon beat KSU which has an RPI of 50 I would not consider a win over KSU to be an outstanding win as opposed to Il. States wins over SIU and Creighton (RPI's 62 and 46). They also won their Bracketbuster for all the good that did them.

Still until WSU does well enough to get in and elevate the rest of the league the MVC will be stuck as a 1 or 2 bid league.

[Smooth007]

See this article written by Gary Parrish. http://www.sportsline.com/collegebas...story/10715037

He makes an interesting point and mentions WSU.

[ISASO]

FWIW Blake Griffin and Longar were both healthy when KSU beat OU.

Somebody mentioned that dividing D1 basketball up like football would help. I agree - seems to me that a D1 and D1A division work work well to limit the nondeserving low level teams which would allow more mids in. I'm not sure if attendance would be the best way to separate the divisions but it would be a good start.

I just can't get excited watching the 1/16 seed games.

Would Duke ever make the Tournament if attendance was a criteria?

[BCSCat]

That's why I said I'm not sure about attendance though Cameron Indoor holds about 9300 and is always sold out. I was thinking something like 5,000 as the dividing line. Most of the low D1 schools average less than that and play in gyms that don't hold that many.

[7hottamales]

I guess with the injury factor I can understand OU's seeding a little more.

But, 7hot, I can't agree with your assesment that ISU getting in only helps ISU.

The simple reason it helps is financial. The more MVC teams in, and the more they win, the more money comes the way of all MVC schools (which helps with coaching hires and recruiting budgets).

While I can't prove it, I would think that teams who get at-large births are looked at more favorably when it comes time to schedule games against quality opponents. Getting those games improves not just that team's RPI, but the RPI of teams who play them. That then helps the quality wins vs. bad losses when a team is getting looked at for an at-large bid. It's a process that feeds on itself. And I think we've been seeing the value in that for the past several years.

Just the fact that in a down year we were talking about the possibility of getting our 2nd-best team in the tournament says a lot.

I realize I'm in the minority and I totally understand the other side of the argument...I just have never liked the other schools in the Valley so it's much easier for me to fixate on my counterexamples. I fully understand that I may be wrong, but I am definitely jealous of Gonzaga's situation.

It doesn't really matter anyways, because the window of opportunity to create that situation was probably wasted during the period of Cohen, Thompson, and Smithson. There's probably too much competitive balance in the league for any one team to rise above the fray and become a perennial top 20 program.

Having said that, how many times in the past 20 years has the Valley gotten only 1 team in?

7hot - I respect your opinion, you've always been a good SN contributor but you're 100% wrong on this one. You stated you don't like the other Valley schools - So brother just set the emotion to the side and understand the following:

There are mutliple advantages to a strong multi-bid league:

1) Greg Marshall stated that is one of the reasons (if not the main) he's here. He got tired of 1-bid crap leagues.

2) Helps recruiting. Kids like exposure and the chance to play on TV on the most important stage.

3) Helps OOC scheduling. There's a certain respect for perrenial multiple bid leagues.

4) Helps our team. I strongly feel there was a direct correlation with WSU and Bradley advancing to the S16 and a very strong Valley.

5) Financial advantages have already been stated.

And I know I'm missing other advantages.

All excellent points. I'll take it under consideration. 8)

Maybe, just maybe I can get around my bias.

[RoyalShock]

All excellent points. I'll take it under consideration. 8)

Maybe, just maybe I can get around my bias.

You can do it!

[martymoose]

Maybe, just maybe I can get around my bias.

I don't think that will ever happen. Question, do you still think KSU would beat Drake 9 out of 10 on a neutral court?

[7hottamales]

Maybe, just maybe I can get around my bias.

I don't think that will ever happen. Question, do you still think KSU would beat Drake 9 out of 10 on a neutral court?

No, thank God. KSU has come back to reality since Jan. Stopped playing defense, Pullen has regressed. Sutton has been basically worthless since returning from his injury. All if right in the universe again.

KSU got a horrible match up in an athletic, long team that plays nutty defense, so I think their little aberration is about over for good.

Drake has grown on me. I will be very interested in seeing if Emmenecker can use that high pick and accomplish anything against Price and Thabeet / Adrien / Robinson...and if not, how successful Drake will be at initiating half court offense.

A game against UConn will be a true test of Davis as I suspect Drake will be forced out of their usual formula.

Edit: Of course you already knew that Moose as we discussed this at the Mo Valley Tourney...not sure why you felt the need to bring up an irrelevant point from a private discussion to this thread.

[BA2929]

BA, the answer is obvious. The bigger question is, would Drake have played those teams if given a chance? As long as the BCS schools refuse to play high caliber non-BCS schools, the BCS schools will be able to rely on the but-you-guys-didn't-play-anybody defense.

A few years ago, the committee seemed to be encouraging those types of games to take place. Now, I'm not so sure. Until the BCS schools are willing to schedule good non-BCS programs on a home and home, the system will be inherently unfair.

I'm not a BCS lover, but I know how the system works. The high BCS teams have no need to play mid-range conference schools. What would Duke have to gain from playing Southern Illinois non-conference? Duke wins - they're supposed to. Duke loses - its a huge story because Duke is upset by a "mid-major." I'd go so far as to say that all the BCS school ADs and Presidents got together and said "Try not to schedule high-mid majors for non-conference games. If you lose it'll hurt our chances at getting more teams in the tournament and getting more money."

[BA2929]

Why is the RPI not used other than as an excuse to keep some teams out or in? There were only two teams in the top 40 RPI that did not get into the tournament and that was Ill. St. and Dayton at 31 and 32 yet Kentucky and Oregon at 57 and 58 made it in.

Still until WSU gets back into the tournament, I do not really care.

Again, you can't look directly at a team's RPI for tournament consideration. You look at the RPI of teams they played.

Oregon had two losses outside the top 100. But they made up for it with wins against KSU (50 and NCAA-bound), Arizona twice (38) and Stanford (14). Kentucky had bad losses against Gardner Webb (200), Georgia (98) and San Diego (94). (Maybe Houston at 80). They had wins against Vandy (12), Tennessee (2), Arkansas (31) and Mississippi (48). That is the only team I really see an argument with. But out of all the at-large selections, there will be one or two questionable ones.

I still see the BCS teams getting an advantage from the RPI, not a disadvantage. So all this talk from the pundits (Bilas, Katz, Packer, etc.) is still drivel. Are they not paying attention?

The RPI is supposed to figure in the RPI's of the opponents as well as whether the games were home, neutral or away. It should not be discounted in favor of BCS league bias. While Oregon beat KSU which has an RPI of 50 I would not consider a win over KSU to be an outstanding win as opposed to Il. States wins over SIU and Creighton (RPI's 62 and 46). They also won their Bracketbuster for all the good that did them.

Still until WSU does well enough to get in and elevate the rest of the league the MVC will be stuck as a 1 or 2 bid league.

The RPI is a useless tool. Kentucky lost to Vanderbilt by 41 points this season and GAINED 8 spots in the RPI.

[WuDrWu]

The rpi works fine. It does not see names on the jersey. It sees black and white.

The funny thing is that it basically does the same thing the computers do in the BCS football poll and I don't hear the schools complaining about that.......


It's so simple......If it helps the power schools then it works fine....if it helps the other schools then it is flawed. You have to give it the "eye test".

We are gaining momentum and approaching the time when there will be a Basketball SubDivision (or whatever the hell they call it) where it will be only the big boys playing for the NCAA and the rest of us will sit around and play in a tournament that nobody is going to care about or watch. It will be less important than the NIT. That day IS coming folks.........

[Shox21]

We are gaining momentum and approaching the time when there will be a Basketball SubDivision (or whatever the hell they call it) where it will be only the big boys playing for the NCAA and the rest of us will sit around and play in a tournament that nobody is going to care about or watch. It will be less important than the NIT. That day IS coming folks.........

It this is indeed the case, then I suggest we all get our backsides in gear and get a game plan. I don't want to be at the top of the second tier -- I would rather be at the bottom of the first tier. We can then work our way up.

[RoyalShock]

If that came to fruition, I would expect the MVC, along with conferences like the A-10, MWC, CUSA and WAC to stay with the BCS'ers.

Conferences like the Big South, Ohio Valley, Summit and Atlantic Sun would join the new division.

The two real questions would be:

1. Where do the Horizon, MAC, Colonial, WCC (mid-level) leagues go?

2. Would the NCAA be able to reduce the number of teams in the tournament? (When was the last time the number of post-season teams decreased?)

I just don't see a BCS-only division forming within the next few decades.

[calfan]

WuDrWu wrote:

We are gaining momentum and approaching the time when there will be a Basketball SubDivision (or whatever the hell they call it) where it will be only the big boys playing for the NCAA and the rest of us will sit around and play in a tournament that nobody is going to care about or watch. It will be less important than the NIT. That day IS coming folks.........

Doc, again I have to agree, so we have a choice to make. Either we get into a power conference, or form one out of top non-BCS schools to good to ignore. I think those are our only two choices that I can think of.

The other choice is to do nothing and Become 1AA- Basketball schools like Football some time in the future.

[RoyalShock]

I could also see a massive reshuffling of non-BCS conferences. Then you'd see schools like Evansville, Fordham, Duquesne, Rice, etc. get dumped into lesser leagues.