Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 58 of 58

Thread: NIT Selection Thread

  1. #41
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Gold, Mississippi
    Posts
    26,385
    vCash
    1094082
    USC getting left out after finishing 2nd in Pac12 reg season and runner up in Pac12 tourney while they put in Arizona St. in when they finished 9th in Pac12 and lost first game in Pac12 tourney is the biggest screw job in the history of the tourney. USC has an RPI of 34. Committee seems to have punished them for being one of the schools named in the FBI thing but that's totally unfair imo as they let other schools in that are also named and with worse resumes than USC.

  2. #42
    Senior Member msstate7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    72,078
    vCash
    10439
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawg61 View Post
    USC getting left out after finishing 2nd in Pac12 reg season and runner up in Pac12 tourney while they put in Arizona St. in when they finished 9th in Pac12 and lost first game in Pac12 tourney is the biggest screw job in the history of the tourney. USC has an RPI of 34. Committee seems to have punished them for being one of the schools named in the FBI thing but that's totally unfair imo as they let other schools in that are also named and with worse resumes than USC.
    Well I guess this proves pipedream correct. Conference standing did not mean jack

  3. #43
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    7,074
    vCash
    52060
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawg61 View Post
    USC getting left out after finishing 2nd in Pac12 reg season and runner up in Pac12 tourney while they put in Arizona St. in when they finished 9th in Pac12 and lost first game in Pac12 tourney is the biggest screw job in the history of the tourney. USC has an RPI of 34. Committee seems to have punished them for being one of the schools named in the FBI thing but that's totally unfair imo as they let other schools in that are also named and with worse resumes than USC.
    So much for the idea that major conference teams with top 40 RPIs can't be left out.


    They really should switch to an objective, pre-established and public computer formula to pick the teams. The Committee can't even be consistent from year to year on what's important.
    Last edited by Quaoarsking; 03-12-2018 at 08:22 AM.

  4. #44
    Senior Member Bulldog1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    5,061
    vCash
    3978
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    Well I guess this proves pipedream correct. Conference standing did not mean jack
    Yep. I stand corrected. You were right, pipedream.

  5. #45
    Senior Member Ari Gold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    West coast
    Posts
    4,734
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    Well I guess this proves pipedream correct. Conference standing did not mean jack
    USCw RPI 35 BPI 42 ... so apparently that doesn’t matter either.

    There’s is no formula they go by. They may say they do , but this year they failed bad.

  6. #46
    Senior Member smootness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    15,079
    vCash
    3000
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    Well I guess this proves pipedream correct. Conference standing did not mean jack
    The committee has consistently said several things:
    1) Conference standing is not taken into account, it's your individual games
    2) OOC play matters just as much as in-conference
    3) RPI is a guide but is not an absolute
    4) Scheduling matters
    5) Good wins, especially on the road, and bad losses are probably the most important aspect

    In looking at USC vs. Arizona State, here it is:
    1) USC finished above ASU by 4 games in P12 play
    2) But USC was 9-2 OOC while ASU was 12-0 against a tougher OOC schedule
    3) USC was well ahead of ASU in RPI
    4) ASU gave themselves opportunities for very good OOC wins
    5) And they capitalized. Here is what it really comes down to:
    USC: best wins - 33, 35, @59; worst losses - 226, @112, @86
    ASU: best wins - 3, @5, 34, 36 (beat USC H2H); worst losses - 137, 86, @86

    So ASU beat Xavier and Kansas, and USC H2H, and they didn't lose to #226. That's basically what that decision came down to.

  7. #47
    Senior Member thf24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,543
    vCash
    3200
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaoarsking View Post
    They really should switch to an objective, pre-established and public computer formula to pick the teams. The Committee can't even be consistent from year to year on what's important.
    You mean like the BCS?

    I know, I know, the BCS wasn't ultimately objective. But it was a hell of a lot closer to objective than to whatever the NCAA basketball committee does.

  8. #48
    Senior Member msstate7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    72,078
    vCash
    10439
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    The committee has consistently said several things:
    1) Conference standing is not taken into account, it's your individual games
    2) OOC play matters just as much as in-conference
    3) RPI is a guide but is not an absolute
    4) Scheduling matters
    5) Good wins, especially on the road, and bad losses are probably the most important aspect

    In looking at USC vs. Arizona State, here it is:
    1) USC finished above ASU by 4 games in P12 play
    2) But USC was 9-2 OOC while ASU was 12-0 against a tougher OOC schedule
    3) USC was well ahead of ASU in RPI
    4) ASU gave themselves opportunities for very good OOC wins
    5) And they capitalized. Here is what it really comes down to:
    USC: best wins - 33, 35, @59; worst losses - 226, @112, @86
    ASU: best wins - 3, @5, 34, 36 (beat USC H2H); worst losses - 137, 86, @86

    So ASU beat Xavier and Kansas, and USC H2H, and they didn't lose to #226. That's basically what that decision came down to.
    Not sure they compared the 2 head-to-head. If they did, not sure why it was either/or

  9. #49
    Senior Member MetEdDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Birmingham, AL
    Posts
    8,373
    vCash
    2610
    Quote Originally Posted by smootness View Post
    The committee has consistently said several things:
    1) Conference standing is not taken into account, it's your individual games
    2) OOC play matters just as much as in-conference
    3) RPI is a guide but is not an absolute
    4) Scheduling matters
    5) Good wins, especially on the road, and bad losses are probably the most important aspect

    In looking at USC vs. Arizona State, here it is:
    1) USC finished above ASU by 4 games in P12 play
    2) But USC was 9-2 OOC while ASU was 12-0 against a tougher OOC schedule
    3) USC was well ahead of ASU in RPI
    4) ASU gave themselves opportunities for very good OOC wins
    5) And they capitalized. Here is what it really comes down to:
    USC: best wins - 33, 35, @59; worst losses - 226, @112, @86
    ASU: best wins - 3, @5, 34, 36 (beat USC H2H); worst losses - 137, 86, @86

    So ASU beat Xavier and Kansas, and USC H2H, and they didn't lose to #226. That's basically what that decision came down to.
    This should highlight why we want teams we beat to do well. You have to have great wins. You don’t get in the tournament by beating a bunch of decent teams. Bad losses are typically forgiven if you’ve got solid wins and show capability of beating tournament teams. We have a few that qualified as good wins, but no really great wins. @TAMU is the best we got. Needed better. UT, Auburn, Cincinnati, and wins against the blue bloods usually do the trick for the eye test. We didn’t have any of those.

    I actually think this is pretty easy to be honest with you. Need a reasonably tough OOC schedule and win the majority of them. Less than 150 in RPI for total non conference SOS but preferably Top 100. Need to win some on the road or on neutral sites, even if it’s against weaker opponents. Need to beat some Top 30 RPI teams. Need to avoid losses outside the Top 150 RPI.

  10. #50
    Senior Member smootness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    15,079
    vCash
    3000
    Quote Originally Posted by msstate7 View Post
    Not sure they compared the 2 head-to-head. If they did, not sure why it was either/or
    I'm not saying they did, but they obviously do compare teams. And ASU was obviously one of the last in, and I'm guessing USC was one of the first out. So I'm sure the two were discussed in comparison. And it's all one big comparison at the end of the day.

  11. #51
    Senior Member smootness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    15,079
    vCash
    3000
    Quote Originally Posted by MetEdDawg View Post
    This should highlight why we want teams we beat to do well. You have to have great wins. You don’t get in the tournament by beating a bunch of decent teams. Bad losses are typically forgiven if you’ve got solid wins and show capability of beating tournament teams. We have a few that qualified as good wins, but no really great wins. @TAMU is the best we got. Needed better. UT, Auburn, Cincinnati, and wins against the blue bloods usually do the trick for the eye test. We didn’t have any of those.

    I actually think this is pretty easy to be honest with you. Need a reasonably tough OOC schedule and win the majority of them. Less than 150 in RPI for total non conference SOS but preferably Top 100. Need to win some on the road or on neutral sites, even if it’s against weaker opponents. Need to beat some Top 30 RPI teams. Need to avoid losses outside the Top 150 RPI.
    Correct. We had the typical meh resume that doesn't get in - bad OOC schedule with no good wins there, some solid wins but no great ones in-conference, and a few rough losses (OM, Vandy, LSU). Take away at least one of those and we may have a shot. Schedule better and avoid the 300+ RPI teams in the OOC, we may get in. Beat Auburn and Tennessee, we may get in. Eliminate those 3 losses, we may get in. But you can't do all of those and get in. That won't ever happen.

  12. #52
    Founder of Summer's Eve
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    8,447
    vCash
    3663
    Isn?t the overall objective to get the best teams in the tournament? Wasn?t the SEC touted as the best conference in the nation all year, top to bottom? Didn?t we finish I. The top half of a 16 team league of which for 8 births? Are we not one of the top 8 SEC teams? The NCAA continues to change the criteria to make their selections. It?s just sad that a team who looked awful most of the SEC season and finished with the same record as we did in conference, gets in because they scheduled some high ranked teams OOC. Then Bama team got in with a worse conference record and a RPI 30 points better than us. We were two last second bad calls away from 11-7 and looked like a tourney team but get screwed because we beat everyone we were supposed to beat before conference play?

  13. #53
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    7,074
    vCash
    52060
    Quote Originally Posted by thf24 View Post
    You mean like the BCS?

    I know, I know, the BCS wasn't ultimately objective. But it was a hell of a lot closer to objective than to whatever the NCAA basketball committee does.
    The BCS formula wasn't mathematically valid, and 5 of the 6 computer polls were secret and thus unverifiable.

    But yeah, something like the BCS that's transparent and not based on random human opinions would be fairer. At least the left out teams would know exactly why.

  14. #54
    Senior Member smootness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    15,079
    vCash
    3000
    Quote Originally Posted by RougeDawg View Post
    Isn?t the overall objective to get the best teams in the tournament? Wasn?t the SEC touted as the best conference in the nation all year, top to bottom? Didn?t we finish I. The top half of a 16 team league of which for 8 births? Are we not one of the top 8 SEC teams? The NCAA continues to change the criteria to make their selections. It?s just sad that a team who looked awful most of the SEC season and finished with the same record as we did in conference, gets in because they scheduled some high ranked teams OOC. Then Bama team got in with a worse conference record and a RPI 30 points better than us. We were two last second bad calls away from 11-7 and looked like a tourney team but get screwed because we beat everyone we were supposed to beat before conference play?
    We did not get screwed. Bama and A&M both had significantly better resumes. It is what it is.

  15. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Gold, Mississippi
    Posts
    26,385
    vCash
    1094082
    Quote Originally Posted by RougeDawg View Post
    but get screwed because we beat everyone we were supposed to beat before conference play?
    In the eyes of the committee we didn't beat everyone we were supposed to beat before conference play. We didn't beat anyone. Our OOC record was basically 0-13. 13 opportunities to show we are one of the best 30 teams in the country and we chose to not take advantage of that opportunity 13 times.

  16. #56
    Senior Member KOdawg1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    10,785
    vCash
    966500
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawg61 View Post
    USC getting left out after finishing 2nd in Pac12 reg season and runner up in Pac12 tourney while they put in Arizona St. in when they finished 9th in Pac12 and lost first game in Pac12 tourney is the biggest screw job in the history of the tourney. USC has an RPI of 34. Committee seems to have punished them for being one of the schools named in the FBI thing but that's totally unfair imo as they let other schools in that are also named and with worse resumes than USC.
    OKST not getting in over Oklahoma is a travesty too imo. They beat Oklahoma twice, Kansas twice, and also West Virginia. Only reason Oklahoma got in is bc of Trae Young

  17. #57
    Senior Member BigEasyDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    367
    vCash
    3295
    Quote Originally Posted by KOdawg1 View Post
    OKST not getting in over Oklahoma is a travesty too imo. They beat Oklahoma twice, Kansas twice, and also West Virginia. Only reason Oklahoma got in is bc of Trae Young
    Exactly. Its all about that $$$$

  18. #58
    Senior Member Ari Gold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    West coast
    Posts
    4,734
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by KOdawg1 View Post
    OKST not getting in over Oklahoma is a travesty too imo. They beat Oklahoma twice, Kansas twice, and also West Virginia. Only reason Oklahoma got in is bc of Trae Young
    100% accurate .

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.