Official NCAA Selection Show thread
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
this isnt the final matrix.....most of the final ones came in after their update
but yeah it will be a low number who got them all right still
very top heavy but beyond that pretty mediocre. You got it right, this area is very bias toward this conference...a reality check
have 2 atrocious programs is killing it
Wouldn’t that mean that if they’re 29th nationally in net that the net pretty useless. You say it’s used for sorting but why is the method that lacks any credibility. It says 29 maybe it really came in at 69.. Simply saying that it’s used for sorting doesn’t make it logical in anyway. They didn’t play anyone they didn’t beat anyone and yet they’re ranked 29th in the net. If there weren’t the five bids dealers, and they got in, then that will replace them at the seven seed.
UVA is better than St. John’s and seton hall. This isn’t vintage UVA but they do have good wins ( Texas AM @ Clemson Florida ) and no quad 3/4 losses
That’s kind of my point. The commissioner was on saying how difficult this all was and they were up until 2 etc..and I get it. But basically they had to add in a few teams and change some of the lower teams’ seedings. Not saying a lot of work doesn’t go into it, but 90% of the work was done last week….and there are always going to be “beefs” by the last few teams.
exactly and every year we all get guilty of getting caught up in the excitement of champioship week only to forget what we learned from previous seasons
the talk of iowa state as a 1 was just stunning, you dont get movement like that in 3 days...pundits should have known better
the lesson is you cannot make a resume in 3-4 day....if you want to make the NCAAas a bubble team...win your conference tourney
this is correct...as bad as they look vs st johns, by criteria its a better and clean resume
the net does not corrrelate to seeding...it just doesnt...auburn is a 4 seed but was 5 OVERALL in net
yeah stunning...looks like their failure in performance besides San Diego State is definitely being held against them.
Yes and no. Dont pass the eye test though. Get over their pace and can beat them easily like VA Tech.
He's not going to gripe, but the NET is fraudulent, lol
St Johns had one win vs the field...sorry beating Creighton does not get it done
BAC did the same work as the committein a committee of 1 and although they were very similar, his inclusion of Oklahoma made more sense and his seedings were better.
Why would you say that the work was done last week? While committee members do research on their own, none of the work starts until they convene on Wednesday.
Folks fell in love with that season-ending win streak but the best win was Creighton. The bulk of it was DePaul, GTown, and a middling Butler. SHU was a good win but not enough with the other results. No credit is given for “hanging” with UConn.
Lol. Pretty clear it’s done and they just work around bid stealers.
Go to 128 and skip the phony conference tourneys which screw regular season winners.
Count me in the list of people who don’t understand the use of the NET.
It apparently isn’t a direct reflection of “rankings,” i.e., Indiana State isn’t the 29th best team in the country, and yet they finished with a NET of 29.
And yet the NET is used to create the “quad” system that the committee HEAVILY relies on in making the selections. We have quad wins and losses based on NET rankings that are ADMITTEDLY flawed.
So let me get this straight — the NET is not a ranking system and yet it directly determines every team’s quad wins and losses, and by extension determines every school’s tournament resume.
How can this NET system possibly be viewed as credible? Whether used as a sorting tool, a seeding tool, or otherwise? Might as well just throw darts against the wall blindfolded.
It apparently isn’t a direct reflection of “rankings,” i.e., Indiana State isn’t the 29th best team in the country, and yet they finished with a NET of 29.
And yet the NET is used to create the “quad” system that the committee HEAVILY relies on in making the selections. We have quad wins and losses based on NET rankings that are ADMITTEDLY flawed.
So let me get this straight — the NET is not a ranking system and yet it directly determines every team’s quad wins and losses, and by extension determines every school’s tournament resume.
How can this NET system possibly be viewed as credible? Whether used as a sorting tool, a seeding tool, or otherwise? Might as well just throw darts against the wall blindfolded.
Agreed, they are better than those 2. I would have picked Indiana St. or Oklahoma over them though. Their losses were atrocious and non-competitive (I think by 10+ points except 1 game).
It does for the minor conferences-winner takes all, while purportedly better teams sit home. St Peters in the MAAC is going dancing, but Quinnipiac was superior all season, beating St Peters handily twice, but losing in a buzzer beater to them in the semifinals. But them are the rules. I'll jump on the waaahmbulance with Jerry and Sha. My son goes to Quinnipiac.
Last edited:
Just listened to NCAA guy and geographical crap to justify East being most difficult is a cop out.
Please. Not directed at you, directed at the PC coach. He’s barking up the wrong tree with that argument. Any team that got left out can find their look-in-the-mirror moment. For us it was Minn and SHU last year among others. Temple was bad too.
The NET is pretty stupid if we’re being real
The NET isn’t where you rank, butttttt they use it to determine bad losses.
Example, our loss against Nebraska last year was a bad loss. Nebraska got hot at the end of the season last year and finished 9-11 in conference. But because of the “Net,” that was a quad 3 loss.
The NET isn’t where you rank, butttttt they use it to determine bad losses.
Example, our loss against Nebraska last year was a bad loss. Nebraska got hot at the end of the season last year and finished 9-11 in conference. But because of the “Net,” that was a quad 3 loss.
Daytons metrics and sor cant be ignored
Yet only 2wins vs Duquense in the field but dont forget Longwood and Grambling State wins
Why is it a cop out? Geography has always been a primary driver to placing the teams in the bracket.
Well we lost to them at home and overall they were not that good
A bad loss for a team who wants to be an at large
Boise and fau should have been flipped but looks like SOR played a role
Sparty as a 9 isnt crazy given their metrics
What about it is pretty clear? I think that the conference tournament games mean almost nothing once we've hit Friday and they are well on the way to building the bracket. But people get overly swayed by the results of them...they are still just one game in a 30+ game data point, and mean nothing more than a game played in November.
The committee doesn't start voting or building the bracket until they convene on Wednesday...while each member has their opinions coming in, it's not like they've actually done anything to select or bracket teams, outside of each filling in their top 36, and all teams they think should get at-large consideration.