41 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

Then never complain about why or why not the committee put a team in or kept them out. Humans have bias and flawed logic, math doesn’t. 

Have you ever heard me complain about any team being in or left out of the tourney? Humans do make mistakes at times with judgement, including all of us, but letting a computer pick teams and not taking conference tourney winners into consideration is absolutely wrong and would hurt college basketball collectively.

23 minutes ago, nikeman49 said:

Have you ever heard me complain about any team being in or left out of the tourney? Humans do make mistakes at times with judgement, including all of us, but letting a computer pick teams and not taking conference tourney winners into consideration is absolutely wrong and would hurt college basketball collectively.

How does having the best 68 teams in the tournament hurt college basketball?

12 hours ago, 16thBBall Fan said:

Joe Lunardi had a good year this year his final bracket he picked 67 of the 68 teams picked correctly his only miss was he had Louisville in over Wichita State. Pretty good this year.

Let me guess? He was able to correctly pick Baylor making it, Georgetown, Gonzaga, Morehead State, Kansas, etc.

The biggest ruse ESPN has ever done is convinced people Joe Lunardi is some kind of savant. Outside of UK, I have maybe watched the equivalent of 10 games this college basketball season. I bet you I could have picked at least 64 of the 68 teams in the field.

This would have been a tough year to select from those on the fringe. Schedules were unbalanced and some teams benefited from that, others did not. Not that I was in favor of it, but before the year Jim Boeheim suggested every team being let in to the tournament. Again, I was not for that, but at least this year there was some rationale to it.

7 minutes ago, bugatti said:

Let me guess? He was able to correctly pick Baylor making it, Georgetown, Gonzaga, Morehead State, Kansas, etc.

The biggest ruse ESPN has ever done is convinced people Joe Lunardi is some kind of savant. Outside of UK, I have maybe watched the equivalent of 10 games this college basketball season. I bet you I could have picked at least 64 of the 68 teams in the field.

They change their brackets constantly, which is why it's hilarious to me when they say "they got 64 of 68 teams right." 

Release a bracket in February, don't change it. Then let's see how good ole Joe is. 

1 minute ago, TheDeuce said:

They change their brackets constantly, which is why it's hilarious to me when they say "they got 64 of 68 teams right." 

Release a bracket in February, don't change it. Then let's see how good ole Joe is. 

That's a good point. It is the equivalent of me picking the Tampa Bay Bucaneers to beat Kansas City mid-fourth quarter in the last Super Bowl.

 

1 hour ago, bugatti said:

Let me guess? He was able to correctly pick Baylor making it, Georgetown, Gonzaga, Morehead State, Kansas, etc.

The biggest ruse ESPN has ever done is convinced people Joe Lunardi is some kind of savant. Outside of UK, I have maybe watched the equivalent of 10 games this college basketball season. I bet you I could have picked at least 64 of the 68 teams in the field.

Sorry I didn't make that clearer the auto qualifiers count as correct he missed 1 of the 37 at large bids. You are correct really ESPN should report it that way.

8 minutes ago, 16thBBall Fan said:

Sorry I didn't make that clearer the auto qualifiers count as correct he missed 1 of the 37 at large bids. You are correct really ESPN should report it that way.

I get how they do it. And even at the 37 of 38 he got right, let's be honest, we are only talking about a handful of teams up for debate. Virginia and Florida State did not take any level of clairvoyance to put into his final field of 68. He is at 63-64 teams each year without using a brain cell.

2 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

It’s not pointless. A conference championship still means a lot, IMO. I don’t think a mediocre (or worse) team should get in the dance just because they get hot for 3-4 games and win the conference tourney. 

In the case of a major conference such as the SEC, no matter who won the conference tourney, six teams were still selected into the big dance, so if by chance Kentucky, with their terrible season, could’ve won it, they’d get in, but the other good teams in the conference were deservedly so going to get in anyhow even if they laid an egg in the conference tournament, so I’m not sure what the point of the conference tournament is outside of giving another team a chance who wasn’t going to earn an at large bid. 

 

Many mid-majors can only get in by merit of winning their conference tournament where the season’s best team in their conference may get overlooked if it’s not a big conference, so if we go to an all computer selection where only the best 68 teams are let in, what would be the point of a conference tournament if a non 68 best team won their conference tournament, because doing so would no longer let them in to the big dance anyhow? 

 

I suppose that they could be thrilled to just win their conference tourney to end their season, but the conference tourney would no longer serve its current purpose of letting “lucky enough to win 3 or 4 games mediocre teams” in. 

 

I’m not sure how the conference tournament would “still mean a lot” when it would no longer serve the purpose of deciding if a conference tournament winner gets in when they didn’t have a decent enough season to earn an at-large bid.

6 minutes ago, B-Ball-fan said:

In the case of a major conference such as the SEC, no matter who won the conference tourney, six teams were still selected into the big dance, so if by chance Kentucky, with their terrible season, could’ve won it, they’d get in, but the other good teams in the conference were deservedly so going to get in anyhow even if they laid an egg in the conference tournament, so I’m not sure what the point of the conference tournament is outside of giving another team a chance who wasn’t going to earn an at large bid. 

 

Many mid-majors can only get in by merit of winning their conference tournament where the season’s best team in their conference may get overlooked if it’s not a big conference, so if we go to an all computer selection where only the best 68 teams are let in, what would be the point of a conference tournament if a non 68 best team won their conference tournament, because doing so would no longer let them in to the big dance anyhow? 

 

I suppose that they could be thrilled to just win their conference tourney to end their season, but the conference tourney would no longer serve its current purpose of letting “lucky enough to win 3 or 4 games mediocre teams” in. 

 

I’m not sure how the conference tournament would “still mean a lot” when it would no longer serve the purpose of deciding if a conference tournament winner gets in when they didn’t have a decent enough season to earn an at-large bid.

I get that mid-majors getting in a is a feel good story for many, but it doesn't make the tournament any better most years. If mid-majors want to get in, schedule better opponents where you can. 

Do we want the best 68 teams in, or do we want a feel good basketball tournament?

1 hour ago, TheDeuce said:

How does having the best 68 teams in the tournament hurt college basketball?

What criteria would be used in the computer selection and who will enter the data?

Just now, nikeman49 said:

What criteria would be used in the computer selection and who will enter the data?

We can start with the RPI and adjust it as needed to include appropriate data that may not be currently included. 

Why does it matter who enters the data? You can use the official statistics that the NCAA records. 

1 minute ago, TheDeuce said:

We can start with the RPI and adjust it as needed to include appropriate data that may not be currently included. 

Why does it matter who enters the data? You can use the official statistics that the NCAA records. 

“And adjust as needed” is exactly what the selection committee does as teams play the season out. Your computer theory is something we don’t have to worry about anytime soon.

2 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

I get that mid-majors getting in a is a feel good story for many, but it doesn't make the tournament any better most years. If mid-majors want to get in, schedule better opponents where you can. 

Do we want the best 68 teams in, or do we want a feel good basketball tournament?

I don't fully disagree, but the scheduling "better opponents" is the toughest obstacle these teams face. These teams are given no margin of error where an SEC school, for example, is given a margin of error to stumble out of the blocks since they have a chance down the road to collect quality wins. P5 schools get credit for improving through a year, smaller schools aren't given that same luxury.