So, every year, this feels like a necessary article. If I am going to create my bracketology and do all this research on the teams, it seems to only make sense to have at least one post about how the selection committee did.
So, lets first talk about a couple strengths. At the end of the day, the committee always does a really great job of selecting and seeding the field. We could make some arguments about some teams here and there, but at the end of the day, the teams that most deserve to be in the dance are playing.
You also can give them a lot of credit for seeding the top part of the tournament. 12 of the 16 protected seeds made it to the Sweet 16, and two of the missing 4 seeds were replaced by 5 seeds. All-in-all, they got the top part of the bracket right.
They also deserve a little bit of grace – I have been doing my bracketology for a long time, and this was one of the hardest fields to create. There is always one or two teams that steal bids in the smaller conferences, but I don’t remember a time when there was clearly 5 bids that teams who knew their season was over without a tournament victory managed to earn their ticket to the dance. By the way, I am not opposed to teams earning their ticket. At the end of the day, one of the interesting things about the NCAA Championship is almost every team has a chance to play in it simply by winning their conference championship.
But it certainly makes the lives of the Selection Committee harder. At the end of the day, most people who watch the game can agree that the teams in the polls should be in the dance – that is 25 teams. Last year, 10 of the automatic bids belonged to the polls. So after including the rest, the committee still had spots for 21 other teams. This year, it was 5. So, the committee only had spots for 16 other teams. This year, teams that would normally be safely in the tournament were playing in the First Four in Dayton. It is one thing to debate whether or not a team should have been a 11 seed in the play-ins or a 9/10 seed. The committee has some margin of error to be wrong. This year – all those 11 seeds are eliminated from the tournament.
The committee is also relatively predictable. Whether I agree with the rankings or not, I was able to predict 34 of the 36 at large teams. When a Lunatic can come up with that list, they are at least relatively consistent. Lets be clear – I would not have picked the 36 teams they did, and I would not have picked the 36 teams that I did in my bracketology – my beliefs and rules of giving at large teams would be different. But because of the process the committee uses, they tend to be very predictable. You might not like the rules of the game – but you at least know the rules.
That doesn’t mean that the Lunatic doesn’t have complaints. I might dig into some of these more next week while I have few games to rant about. But here are my main complaints.
The committee uses the non-conference schedule to keep a team out, but this then diminishes their conference schedule. Clemson went 11-9 in conference and ended up being a 6 seed. Pitt went 12-8 in conference and was left out of the tournament. Sure – the committee doesn’t have the hindsight here – but the rest of the NCAA field so far is 1-8 against the ACC – so 12-8 is pretty good. Add the fact that Clemson swept the Panthers, and that means they went 12-6 against the rest of the conference. Pitt was eliminated because their non-conference schedule was awful. But some of the final teams in didn’t have the greatest non-conference schedules either. Leaving the 4th place team from the ACC out feels like a significant miss.
I also feel like the committee made mistakes on the Mountain West. To be fair, none of us knew what to do with the Mountain West. But I can tell you for sure, there is no reason that the Mountain West should be getting 5 at-large teams when the Big East is getting 2 at-large teams. Those 2 Big East teams are 4-0. The 5 Mt West teams were 4-4 (and one of those wins was a First Four game). When we are taking a team that went 10-8 in the Mountain West over a team that went 13-7 in the Big East, we probably have made a mistake.
The committee also couldn’t figure out how to seed correctly within the Mountain West. San Diego State went 11-7 in conference and was a 5 seed. Utah State won the conference at 14-4, was ranked better than the Aztecs in the polls, and was a 8 seed. I don’t even know how that happens. I could understand if one was a 5 seed and one was a 6 seed. But Utah State finished 3 games ahead of the Aztecs in the standings – how do they fall 3 seed lines below them.
The committee is too tied to the NET rankings. This is the reason why so many Mountain West teams got in – all 6 of the Mountain West teams were in between 20 and 38 in the NET. I will probably rant more about this at some point. But here is the clearest point about the NET – which also ties to the final complaint.
We can not have major conference teams finishing in the top 4 of their conference missing the tournament when we are letting teams in with losing records from their conference.
Lets take Mississippi State – the Bulldogs went 8-10 in the SEC. The Bulldogs finished 9th in the SEC, and while they had 2 big victories over Tennessee, a victory over Auburn, and non-conference wins against Washington State and Northwestern, they also had plenty of losses – including one at Georgia Tech and one at home vs. Southern University.
Now, lets take Seton Hall – who went 13-7 in the Big East. Their big victories included UConn and Marquette. They also had 2 victories against St. John’s and victories against Providence, Villanova, Butler and Xavier. They lost their main non-conference games to Iowa, USC and Rutgers, but that Rutgers loss was the worst NET team they lost to. So – let compare.
Record – Seton Hall (20-12), Mississippi State (21-13)
Conf Record – SH (13-7), Miss St (8-10)
Quad 1 Record – SH (5-8), Miss St (4-9)
Quad 2 Record – SH (4-3), Miss St (4-3)
Quad 3 Record – SH (2-1), Miss St (7-0)
Quad 4 Record – SH (9-0), Miss St (6-1)
NC SOS – SH (227), Miss St (234)
SOS – SH (33), Miss St (28)
So – Seton Hall had a much better conference record in their conference, had comparible records across the different quads, didn’t have the horrible loss to a Quad 4 team, and yet they were left out of the tournament while the Bulldogs were an 8 seed (comfortably in). It is crazy that the 9th place team in the SEC is comfortably in the tournament when the 4 place team in the Big East (behind 3 teams that were seeded no worse than 3rd) is left out. It doesn’t help the Committee’s argument when the Bulldogs then lost by double digits to Michigan State (another .500 team).
But there was one statistic I left out that explains this. Mississippi State’s NET ranking was 31st. Seton Hall’s NET ranking was 67th. I am not sure how this happens, but it did.
There is a point where we need to move away from the statistics and value the conference records. They are not always perfect ways to rank the team, but when teams like Pitt and Seton Hall finish 4th in the competitive ACC and Big East, you have to feel for them when it is because the efficiency statistics say an 8-10 team in the SEC is better than them.
Look – at the end of the day, Seton Hall or Pitt are probably not going to win the National Championship. And Pitt ruined any argument for me when they declined the NIT invitation – if you don’t want to compete any chance you get, it is probably best that you are watching the games at home. But did they deserve a chance over some of the teams that got in? Yes – they probably did.
At the end of the day, all these teams on the bubble had blemishes that meant it was up to the committee to decide their fate. Unlike teams like NC State and Oregon who took their fate into their own hands and earned their tickets to the dance, these bubble teams needed the committee to select them. It is a terribly difficult job that gets heavily scrutinized – so they deserve a ton of credit for always putting together a fantastic tournament. But I still feel like they could do better. It probably doesn’t change the the final weekend – but it certainly matters to those players. Of course, what do I know – I am crazy.
Looks like the North Carolina / Alabama game is really good (and I suspect the Iowa State / Illinois game will also be good). So, I will leave the committee belong and go back to enjoying the games!!!!