Originally Posted by Bona03
I think they did a pretty good job. I dont get rankled by seeding too much but I thought it was decent. This committee was much better than previous ones. Its hard to say Team X should be in instead of Team Y. The 1 scenario that fits to me is UNCG over St John's. I think this proves the NET is not much more than 1 of 5 tools they use. I was glad NC St wasnt even close. What I dont know is how should teams react next season for their scheduling besides dont schedule crap cakes for your entire OOC?
Yes, I agree. It is annoying, however, that the NET was developed to avoid using RPI as *the* metric, only for the NET to be thought of doing exactly that, which then wasn't the case at the end of the day.
St. John's absolutely should not have made it. I even have quibbles with Seton Hall, but I can let them slide. But STJ is as much of a joke as having included aforementioned NCSt or their conference mate Clemson. Oklahoma being in and both Indiana and Texas even appearing in any part of the conversation is also a joke. Does anyone think UNCG came up? F no.
It rarely comes down to "do we take the P5 or the not P5," but rather "which P5 do we take." This year was the least bad in a while, but by no means just.