NCAA Tournament seeding thoughts, ideas, discussion...

[Original Rookie]

I don't post very much anymore but check in from time to time. I'd love to open the discussion up and see if we can fix this mess of a tournament that was just put together. Luckily for all fans, the tournament is impossible to screw up. We could draw out of a hat and it would be entertaining but that's not the point.

 

This video is a good start to get familiar with how it is now...

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2011/news/story?id=6214265&campaign=rss&source=NCBHeadlines

 

The biggest thing that jumps out at me is when he says, "Keep in mind there are 10 committee members and we all have different criteria..."

 

First of all, why would they all have a different criteria? Over the past 15 years I've heard about 20 different things that 'matter' but who really knows? Is body of work more important than your last 10 games? Do conference tournaments matter at all? I heard that the 1-4 seeds were set by noon today and with three major conference title games left to be played, I really hope that isn't true. Do good wins matter? Bad losses? RPI, SOS, yada yada yada.

 

All of this left up to 10 guys, most of whom don't have much basketball experience.

 

If it were up to you, how would you fix it?

[GrizzlyAdams]

I think Dickie V had it spot on when he was saying how the need some type of college basketball coach. He brough up Bobby Knight. I think some retired coaches would help get the bracket straightend up.

[MJAlltheWay24]

Do conference tournaments matter at all? I heard that the 1-4 seeds were set by noon today and with three major conference title games left to be played, I really hope that isn't true.

 

That would certainly make sense considering some of their decisions.

[Hatz]

I think Dickie V had it spot on when he was saying how the need some type of college basketball coach. He brough up Bobby Knight. I think some retired coaches would help get the bracket straightend up.

 

I understand the principle behind all of that but whose to say those coaches don't have an agenda as well? Do you really see Bobby Knight looking at certain programs objectively? I for one have a hard time seeing him being objective about anything.

[MJAlltheWay24]

I understand the principle behind all of that but whose to say those coaches don't have an agenda as well? Do you really see Bobby Knight looking at certain programs objectively? I for one have a hard time seeing him being objective about anything.

 

That was the point that Mark Gottfried made as well. And as a UK fan...I definitely wouldn't want Bobby Knight on the selection committee lol.

[bugatti]

My suggestions:

 

- Rank and play. Have the teams ranked 1-68 and slot them in order from there. If I understand correctly they rank the teams, but they are concerned with conference affiliations, moving teams up and down 1 spot, etc. Just rank them and play. If two Big East teams are playing in the first round, what does it matter? No person has ever explained that to me.

 

- Don't worry about the pod. The pod system does not work out for everyone. What often happens is the committee gets too concerned with making sure a team is closer to home, they will place them in a bracket at the expense of someone else obtaining a higher seed. It is what I think happened in the Florida situation. The only way I see the pod system working is by expanding the field even more.

 

- Televise the selection meetings. Talk about must see television. PPV would never be the same. Will never happen for obvious reasons, but it would require more accountability.

[TheLegends64]

Make everything more transparent. Allow us to listen to discussions. That way people can't hide behind the "committee".

[BleedBlue12]

Just let me make the brackets!!

[oldrambler]

Firsit of all I agree with you OR in that it would hard to screw up the tournament. These three weeks are by far my favorite event in all of sports,pro or college. Having said that it would be hard to screw up imo the tournament commitie keeps trying, (example-Va Tech, Bama and. I agree with a couple of earlier post Colorado not in and teams like UAB and VCU in). and the espn analyst in that the tournament commitie needs to have people on it, ALL persons on it that know basketball and have a better idea of the teams that some of those clowns in suits on the commitie now do.

I don't exactly know what the answers are but former coaches and players as well would be good. I would certainly hope that whoever would be chosen would be fair in judgement and I don't think they would let personal feelings (good or bad) about current teams/coaches get in the way on their decisions.

Any of the espn anaylyst imo would do a good job, or at least better than some of the stuffed suits on there now.

 

BTW: Another example of the tournament powers to be screwing up is expanding the tournament......Stupid, if it ain't broke don't fix it!

[Colonels_Wear_Blue]

Some interesting thoughts on seeding...

 

[oldrambler]

I understand the principle behind all of that but whose to say those coaches don't have an agenda as well? Do you really see Bobby Knight looking at certain programs objectively? I for one have a hard time seeing him being objective about anything.

 

I can understand that point but as I said earlier I would certainly hope that they would keep personal feelings out of it. Bob Knight wouldn't scare me close to as bad if they would put Bill Gillispie on it. :scared:

[Big Slick]

According to what I heard on Sporting News Radio this morning the committee chair when interviewed basically admitted to going against at least 2 by-laws of the NCAA selection process. He was also heard on a Pittsburgh radio station saying seeds were already set late Saturday night.

[Voice of Reason]

I posted this in the Selection Sunday thread and will re-post here:

 

After looking at all the complaints about seeding and bubble teams, the one stat that seems to best explain this committee's decisions is top 100 wins. It looks to me like they very heavily weighted the team's record versus the top 100 with no extra weighting for top 50 and/or top 25 wins.

 

For example, why Florida a 2 and UK a 4 ... Florida 16-4 vs top 100 and UK 12-7. Louisville 14-8 vs. top 100 which also puts them behind Florida.

 

How does UAB get in with no top 50 wins? They have 10 top 100 wins for an overall top 100 record of 10-7. Compare that to Colorado's 8-11 and Va. Tech's 8-8 and that seems to give insight into how this committee made decisions. Harvard only had 3 top 100 wins. St. Mary's had 2 top 100 wins. VCU is in because they had 9 top 100 wins.

 

Of course there are always exceptions as Georgia went 5-11 vs top 100. But Alabama only had 4 top 100 wins so that seems to be the killer for them.

 

I think the top 100 record was the big factor used this year that led to some of these odd decisions.

[Voice of Reason]

Also, let me add that a team's record in their last 10 games is no longer a factor in selection. The committee felt that was unfair due to competition levels being so different in the various conferences.

[Hatz]

Some interesting thoughts on seeding...

 

 

Priceless, Colonels, priceless.