The first games have tipped off, and wow, Memphis struggling with Cal-Northridge. Great game b/w LSU and Butler, going to be a good second half. A&M controlling BYU thus far.
And Jim Calhoun is in hospital, will miss U Conn’s first round game today.
Best weekend of the year.
Amen to that! Memphis survives. Damn.
I friggin LOVE this tournament! My only gripe is the fact that it is 65 teams instead of 64, but that’s a minor thing.
Ditto. I wouldn’t be as upset if the at-large spots weren’t going more and more heavily to the power conferences. If that extra spot meant that a mid-major like St Mary’s got in, then it would be fine. I don’t want to watch Michigan, Penn State, or Arizona or some other middling power conference team though. They had their chances to make a statement and get in, and didn’t. Give me a Creighton or St. Mary’s over the 7th Big Ten team that finished .500 in conference anyday.
I’ll disagree about the power conference vs mid major making it in. Please make your case for Creighton or St Mary’s to make it in instead of the two .500 conf record Big Ten teams (Michigan & Minnesota). It is much easier to end up with only 6 or 7 losses when you don’t play anybody. They need to schedule some nonconference games that show they deserve to be there or have so few losses that they are an obvious at-large pick.
Creighton and St. Mary’s combined games vs. RPI top 25 teams - 1
Michigan and Minnesota’s combined games vs. RPI top 25 teams - 20
No name dropping but I have shared more than a few beers with a Mid-Major coach and he has told me it is next to impossible to get a “BCS” school to schedule a solid Mid Major. They are too scared that they might lose or not beat them bad enough. Here in Virginia there are a number of Mid-Major teams, do you know neither UVA or Virginia Tech play any of the “local” teams and they all but refuse to discuss playing these teams.
So what is a Mid-Major to do? What it all boils down to is MONEY, the “BCS” schools have more fans and alumni than the small school and they will fill the arena better than the small school. The NCAA has taken away true competition from both Basketball and Football.
Well, one thing they could do is not end up with 6 or 7 losses on a schedule that easy. Some of their losses are bad. Then look at the losses by Minnesota and Michigan. Combined they lost to 1 team outside of the RPI top 75.
Remember that rankings are subjective. Lets remember what happened to USC in football, everyone said the Pac-10 was weak, however, the Pac-10 was the only undefeated conference in the Bowl season, and at the end of the season most pundits said Wow maybe USC should be playing in the BSC game. Why were they left out because they lost a game to a team that was perceived to be weak. Rankings are subjective.
Now lets exam the computations for RPI:
RPI = 1/4 * team’s record + 1/2 * opponent’s record +
1/4 * opponent’s opponent’s record
http://www.laxpower.com/update09/ex_rpi.php
Why should a teams opponents oppponents record matter? How does that prove one team is better than another?
What non-athletic computer geek came up with this?
I’m not going to create a new system just to discuss this with you. But go ahead and make your case for the two given mid majors. I contend that they had their opportunity and they lost it when they lost 6 or 7 games. But really if MN or MI would have been left out that would have been fine with me. By having a 65 team field you really do include every team that has a chance long before the last 4 in or the first 4 out are determined.
http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html
notice that San Diego State and Creighton have higher RPI rankings than:
Texas, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Arizona
.
So you criticize RPI then use it as your only justification as to why they should be in the tournament?
Nobody said it had to make sense. This is the Lavender Room.
No the point is the NCAA is a bias organization
.
Make your case then. I’m not just trying to argue, but the decisions made by the selection committee are hard ones and there will be people who are critical of them no matter what they decide.
Here’s my argument. No .500 team from a power conference is going to win anyway. When we are talking about the 32, 33, and 34th at-large teams getting in, they aren’t threats to win it. So who would you rather see? What are you going to remember in 10 years. You going to remember Michigan as a 10 taking down Clemson as a 7? Hell no. You are going to remember Bryce Drew’s incredible jumper to beat Ole Miss, you are going to remember Harold “The Show” Arcenieaux and Weber State making the Sweet 16. Can you say that any team in the Final Four stands out more in the last 10 years in your memory than George Mason?
I want teams that are going to get people huddled around a TV at work in the last 3 minutes of a game when it is close. I want the little guy to show they can play on the big stage, despite their conference. I don’t buy the argument that it absolutely has to be the best 34 to get at-large, because those last teams aren’t going anywhere. I’ve seen the power conferences all year, they dominate the TV landscape. I can watch Michigan at 9-9 in the Big Ten almost anytime. Who’s gives a rat’s ass? And those Power Conference teams had every advantage to make a statement in their season to say they deserved to get in. Finish .500 in the Big Ten? Who cares? Give me the Richmond Spiders, the No. Iowa Panthers, or the Siena Saints taking down a big boy anyday.
The earlier poster was right, the little guy has to play big guys always on the road, or get lucky in neutral site early season tourneys. Can’t get a home and home.
St. Mary’s lost 2 games all year when Patty Mills was in the lineup. Until the WCC tourney when he was rusty. 2 games. The schedule is made a couple years in advance. St. Mary’s had Providence, Oregon, Kent State, and So. Illinois on their schedule for this year, and had the weird occurence that all those normally good teams were down. They tried to schedule non-conference. Is Louisville’s non-conf schedule better or worse? No road games and 3 neutral site games, 2 of which they lost. St. Marys had fewer losses non-conf than Louisville, and had a tougher or equal schedule.
November 22 Morehead State W 79-41 1-0 November 23 South Alabama W 81-54 2-0 November 30 vs. Western Kentucky* L 68-54 2-1 December 6 Indiana State W 83-43 3-1 December 7 Ohio W 91-56 4-1 December 8 Lamar W 78-56 5-1 December 13 Austin Peay W 94-75 6-1 December 18 vs. Mississippi* W 77-68 7-1 December 20 vs. Minnesota* L 70-64 7-2 December 27 UAB W 82-62 8-2 December 31 UNLV L 56-55 8-3 January 4 Kentucky
It’s funny how you bring up Louisville’s (#1 overall tournament seed) nonconference schedule and one of the losses was to a .500 big ten team. Without that win MN would not have been in.
It seems to me you want the selection committee to be biased on the side of the mid majors because it makes for better tv watching. I agree that it’s fun to watch. But I also remember WI as an 11 seed, I believe going to the elite 8 a while back. That was fun to watch too.
St. Mary’s may not have played any tough teams, but they lost to a few that were probably key to the selection committee. The 18 point loss to Santa Clara was probably pretty hard for them to over look even without Mills playing. Or how about losing by 18 to Portland? They lost to UTEP by 13 with Mills. I’ll stick with the idea that they had their opportunity, but I do think it’s unfortunate as well. They would have been a fun team to watch.
“It seems to me you want the selection committee to be biased on the side of the mid majors because it makes for better tv watching. I agree that it’s fun to watch.”
Bingo. And let’s not forget, it’s the TV watching (and the money that comes with it) that matters. 
Seriously though, not necessarily biased, but to consider the fact that the mid-majors don’t have the same opportunites that the BCS conferences do. Believe me, as a life long UK fan, I know that UK has a target on it’s back every single night in the SEC. No matter how good (or bad) the league is, or bad UK is (and they are bad right now). Some of these mid-major teams that dominate their conferences go through the same thing. Fact of the matter is, 1. it is hard to win on the road in any conference, and 2. Northwestern may not “get up” to play an Iowa or a Michigan on a given night, or say a DePaul get up to play Syracuse. I only mention UK because I don’t think any other team in a power conference has historically dominated that conference like UK has, and like some of these mid-majors do in long stretches. Butler in the Horizon for example, or Siena, or Western Ky.
Give me a team that went 16-2 in their mid-major conference over a team that went 9-9 in a power conference anyday. That 9-9 team probably hasn’t shown at any part of the year the consistency needed to win 6 straight games in March to win a championship. Or for that matter 4 to get to Final Four. So, with that in mind, let’s let a team in no one has heard of and give them a chance at the stage on this, the best weekend in all of sports.
Give me Fang Mitchell and Coppin State with a magical weekend run over a 9-9 in the PAC 10 underachieving Arizona anyday.
I am intrigued and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Signed, a Syracuse alum who loves watching his alma mater tank at the hands of a low- or mid-major.
P.S.: The mid-majors are the draw of this tournament. No other sporting event, this side of the Olympics (1980 U.S. Hockey, among others) or the World Cup (2002, Senegal over France), champions the underdog like the NCAA men’s basketball tournament. Wisconsin as an 11? Please, they got to the Elite 8 by playing some of the most disgusting basketball since Naismith invented the game. Give me a fired-up mid-major over a listless major every time.
Amen Brother! Drink the Kool-Aid!