Where does one begin?
OK, they weren't "smoked" by Syracuse. The game was tied halfway through the 2nd half. They inexplicably fouled 3 times under a minute to play giving SU a 15pt margin in what was an 8-10 point game.Now that enough time has gone by I will say that I think Bona not getting in was not as big a snub as you guys are making it out to be. To start with their OOC schedule was horrible. They lost both quality games they played: at home against Hofstra and at Cuse where the got smoked. They lost to a mediocre Siena team, that losses to CAA and MAAC teams for those counting at home. In conference they lost to Duquesne and Lasalle which matters because they had no good OOC wins, none. Even with this spotty record all they had to do was beat a Davidson team that was less than impressive in Brooklyn and they did not get the job done. Do I think they could have gotten in over Tulsa sure but the outrage was overblown.
Lol any metric that weights running up scores is not one I'm going to lean on. Kenpom is influenced, highly, by the P5's own horrible ooc scheduling. 12 home games against cupcakes they destroy and kenpom makes them look like basketball savants and a trip to the Bahamas to play other P5 teams. Kiss my ass.
I agree, I'm not so sure beating Davidson would have gotten Bona in. Not that they didn't deserve it; they did regardless of the Davidson game. But I think the winner of the potential Bona/VCU game was in and the loser was out.And don't be so sure beating Davidson would have gotten them into the field. They may have needed a win over VCU as well. The committee created a moving target for teams like SBU, and they were dead set on lining it up in such a manner to exclude them.
RPI matters, advance metrics matter, margin of victory matters...until it doesn't. RPI matters when it helps the committee's arguments for a team they want in, but it doesn't when it helps a team they don't want.So basically the committee said RPI, the tools that factors all this in, doesn't matter anymore. And that's BS. Advance metrics, margin of victory apparently do, and our own JP had a nice post about why margin of victory and efficiency numbers mean shit (or are at least misinterpreted). Why doesn't the committee just come out and say, "we value P5 teams more." Despite the fact that the very metric that interprets wins/losses/home/road in the most vanilla flavor put SBU at #30 .
A simple solution to all this is publish your algorithm. And I know they won't do that for proprietary reasons, but until they do, you have to take those rankings with a grain of salt. Maybe a big grain of salt, but RPI is at least published. You know what they are calculating.How about Sagarin? The only ranking system Bonnies were ahead of Vandy Michigan Tulsa Syracuse was RPI. Add that to losses at home against Hofstra at Siena (not top 100 in any other system) and to Duquesne/Lasalle you have a team squarely on the bubble where you can make an argument either way.
I honestly can't believe I'm still having this discussion with after everything that has been posted on this already. :jr:I wasn't comparing apples and oranges. Somehow it's a true fact that the A10 got 6 bids.
With the 14 teams it should be ideal with JP's approach to set it up so that 6 teams is the norm, not the exception.
All of a sudden you're hypothesizing dropping teams to achieve that? That seems bass ackwards given all the discussion about adding teams. If those teams on the bottom of a league have any value in JP's equations, it's to absorb losses for the good of the teams on the top. Why would you drop them?
So are you saying comparing the Big East to the A10 is apples and oranges?That's not the case with the BE, you guys already started on great footing when you formed. You're comparing leagues that are apples to oranges Paul and you know it.
A simple solution to all this is publish your algorithm. And I know they won't do that for proprietary reasons, but until they do, you have to take those rankings with a grain of salt. Maybe a big grain of salt, but RPI is at least published. You know what they are calculating.
Jay Bilas was half right when he said, post the top 68 prior to conference tourney weekend, and slot teams out as the autos are won. The half he missed was not only post teh top 68, but post the metric that got you there.
I think one point we're missing here is that there are 68 teams in the field. 68! Of which about 20 are auto-bids that wouldn't even be considered. So we're really trying to index about 48 teams. You can't tell me we need to be that picky about teams #48 and #49 . College BB is all over the map with scheduling and balance. The NCAA should create a new committee, and issue a directive, create a formula, publish it, and have the damn computer spit out the teams in a list, and go with it. We don't need 9 people selectively interpreting whether you are #48 or #49 . At that point who cares, let the computer decide, spit out the schools, and make a roll call. Let the committee do the dirty (err.. important) work for seeding since the computer won't have the geographical and conference concerns.
Who are you? You speak for most fans?Who is Rich93?
St Bona NOT getting an invite was a huge snub.
And Syracuse and Tulsa getting invites was pathetic.
I think most college basketball fans generally agree with that.
Who are you? You speak for most fans?
This is the reason I waited to post this opinion. This board would have literally broken out the pitch forks and torches if I posted it right afterwards. I was not surprised they did not get in even though they were worthy of consideration for the reasons I posted above. Sorry to intrude on the circle jerk, have a good summer see everyone in the fall.
Ps saying a current final four team was a pathetic choice is not a good look.
Reading comprehension: I said not a good look, i.e. optics for a guy representing most college basketball fans. Subtle point that not surprising a guy who roots for a program that protects felons and has no moral compass can't understand. Who is next year's disciplinary problem? Should we start a pool? Larceny, sexual assault your guys are raising the bar what's next?This is where you show you know nothing about the college basketball season and post season play. Which doesn't surprise me, you're a Fordham fan. The post season doesn't exist.
What I don't get is that if you have enough teams, why aren't you getting more bids? It should be easy if JP's math is right.Paul, if the A10 dropped it's 2 worst teams over the last decade....the A10 would STILL have enough teams to beat on. What don't you get about that? Bottom line is, the A10 has too many bottom feeders....you have a hard time compartmentalizing the argument.
Speaking of reading comprehension. What does your opinion of St.Bonaventure getting snubbed have to do with reshuffling conferences?Reading comprehension: I said not a good look, i.e. optics for a guy representing most college basketball fans. Subtle point that not surprising a guy who roots for a program that protects felons and has no moral compass can't understand. Who is next year's disciplinary problem? Should we start a pool? Larceny, sexual assault your guys are raising the bar what's next?