Selection Sunday Thread

[ShockdaWorld]

I read somewhere that Arizona has to travel either the furthest or the second furthest of any team in the tournament for the first weekend. Somehow that doesn't hurt my feelings.

[ShockerFever]

Sample region:

(1) 1 Kansas
(16) 66 Farleigh Dickinson / 67 Southern

(8) 32 St. Joes
(9) 33 Providence

(5) 17 Indiana
(12) 50 South Dakota St

(4) 16 Iowa St
(13) 51 UNCW

(6) 24 Seton Hall
(11) 41 Vandy / 45 Tulsa

(3) 9 West Virginia
(14) 58 SFA

(7) 25 Wisconsin
(10) 40 VCU

(2) 8 Xavier
(15) 59 Middle Tennessee


Other than an occasional conference rematch in round 1, this would be fine, but it would be much worse for travel. I know WSU got a raw deal going to Dayton, then Rhode Island, but generally speaking, travel distances are shorter the way the committee does things now than they would be if the bracket was an exact match with the seed list.

God that looks horrible. Just no.

The bracket isn't it broken. It's the idiots picking out the teams that are.

[Cdizzle]

I read somewhere that Arizona has to travel either the furthest or the second furthest of any team in the tournament for the first weekend. Somehow that doesn't hurt my feelings.

Yeah. Arizona usually benefits from being a high seed in a bid-deprived West. They travel well, but they travel really well west of the Mississippi. I'm glad we would be facing them in Rhode Island. And I'm not entirely sure it's a bad thing that this WSU team is pretty much in their own little bubble for the next few days. Time to find the angry and the fun.

#LYNH

[fansince80s]

Sample region:

(1) 1 Kansas
(16) 66 Farleigh Dickinson / 67 Southern

(8) 32 St. Joes
(9) 33 Providence

(5) 17 Indiana
(12) 50 South Dakota St

(4) 16 Iowa St
(13) 51 UNCW

(6) 24 Seton Hall
(11) 41 Vandy / 45 Tulsa

(3) 9 West Virginia
(14) 58 SFA

(7) 25 Wisconsin
(10) 40 VCU

(2) 8 Xavier
(15) 59 Middle Tennessee


Other than an occasional conference rematch in round 1, this would be fine, but it would be much worse for travel. I know WSU got a raw deal going to Dayton, then Rhode Island, but generally speaking, travel distances are shorter the way the committee does things now than they would be if the bracket was an exact match with the seed list.

Thanks for doing this, this would be straight up fair based on rankings , but travel and a that get in the way. Thanks again!

[Ricardo del Rio]

Here is my criteria to qualify, which is not tomato proof, as follows:

1. Teams must be at least 2 games over 0.500. Maybe 3.
2. No seeding
3. Pairings determined by drawing.

Excluded factors:
1. RPI
2. Top 50 wins
3. Top 100 wins
4. Any other similar gate

Shorten preseason games to offset expanded tournament games.

Yes, I know that the plan above might be considered as silly. Nevertheless, I would not mind some similar process, which takes rationalization out of the process.

[WSUwatcher]

As bad as the selection committee's performance was in some ways this year -- and thanks for throwing the First Four label right back at them, Shocks -- and as ominous as their message of no at-large teams (except WSU, of course) from "mid-major" conferences might seem, I think there's far less reason for WSU to be concerned about their NCAA tournament future than might meet the eye.

WSU's whole problem this year can be summarized in one fact: 24-8 (actually, excluding their non-D1 game, 23-8). The last time the Shocks reached tournament time 24-8, they were headed off to (win) the NIT. But if FVV hadn't been hurt this year, does anyone seriously believe WSU would have been close to 24-8? I'd say 27-5, even assuming the usual St. Louis mishap, would have been a conservative guess -- in fact, I remember early on counseling caution and patience for posters who were already counting this as Marshall's fourth straight 30-win season (still possible, by the way, and the play-in game even adds a bonus win), because lots of things could go wrong. And sure enough they did, in the form of a small plague of injuries, especially Fred's, thereby leading to WSU's uncharacteristically modest record.

But if the Shocks had been even just 27-5 instead... Well, the last time WSU entered tournament time 27-5, they drew a #5 seed (and their VCU nemesis, unfortunately), and there wasn't the slightest doubt they'd be in at large and get a high seed in the process. The problem this year was that no one who got left out had a record like that.

So the committee can continue to be craven and suck up to the bigger leagues if it wants, but as long as WSU just gets back into the habit of winning a flock of games before March Madness begins (at least 26, judging from their Final Four year), their string of tournament appearances will keep on stringing along even without a routine of success in St. Louis. Of course, FVV and Ron won't be back next year to keep things going, which may make it somewhat more challenging, but on the other hand there's also a lot of talent coming back or in (including coaching talent, plus a guy named Shamet who even very briefly this season gave some signs of an exceptionally bright future).

Therefore, assuming WSU stays healthier next season than this one and the Marshall Plan continues to operate, I'm not worried (as the saying goes) about another at large spot, if necessary, for next year's Valley bound Shocks, But right now I'm too busy enjoying Fred and Ron's last roundup even to concern myself with next season. Let's just keep this one going as long as possible.

[ShockdaWorld]

counting this as Marshall's fourth straight 30-win season (still possible, by the way, and the play-in game even adds a bonus win), because lots of things could go wrong. And sure enough they did, in the form of a small plague of injuries, especially Fred's, thereby leading to WSU's uncharacteristically modest record.

If that was a small plague of injuries, I don't even want to think about what a big plague may entail. Everything else, I agree with 100%.

[WSUwatcher]

If that was a small plague of injuries, I don't even want to think about what a big plague may entail. Everything else, I agree with 100%.

Didn't have the locusts, Shockda -- falling or twisting an ankle as you try to dodge locusts can be very painful.

[WillieJeffJeffries]

Looking back at Mich St resume, it is ridiculous to not have them as a 1. They dominated many good opponents. Oregon was great, but should've been a 2.

Solid call, MSU looks poised to make a deep run, as usual your numbers and spot on. I don't know why I tried to justify MSU as a 2 seed.

[ShockerFever]

Solid call, MSU looks poised to make a deep run, as usual your numbers and spot on. I don't know why I tried to justify MSU as a 2 seed.

Are you really trying to justify Michigan State being a 2 over a 1 based on a loss to 15th-seeded MTSU? I guess by that rationale, Michigan State should have been a freaking 16 seed.

Michigan State was a legit 1 seed. Upsets happen.

And because of posts like these you are considered one of the dumbest posters on this board.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Solid call, MSU looks poised to make a deep run, as usual your numbers and spot on. I don't know why I tried to justify MSU as a 2 seed.

Please. Do tell. Spell it out for me. Dig your hole deeper.

[Stickboy46]

Solid call, MSU looks poised to make a deep run, as usual your numbers and spot on. I don't know why I tried to justify MSU as a 2 seed.

Oregon got a 1 over Michigan State based on it's performance in the Pac 12. You can definitely argue that the Pac 12 was overrated due to their performance so far also. It works both ways