Go back to previous topic
Forum nameOkay Sports
Topic subjectbiggest NCAA Tournament snub?
Topic URLhttp://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=8&topic_id=2784794
2784794, biggest NCAA Tournament snub?
Posted by ThaTruth, Wed Dec-31-69 07:00 PM

Poll question: biggest NCAA Tournament snub?

Poll result (7 votes)
Rutgers (3 votes)Vote
Vanderbilt (3 votes)Vote
Oklahoma State (0 votes)Vote
Clemson (0 votes)Vote
North Carolina (1 votes)Vote
somebody else? - post it below (0 votes)Vote

  

2784798, None of the above. They all had flaws
Posted by allStah, Mon Mar-13-23 01:02 PM

Clemson had a poor non-conference schedule and lost
to Louisville

Rutgers had a poor big ten record (10-10), and a mediocre
regular season record ( 18-13)

NC is self explanatory…they were shit all year long, and then
had the nerve to turn down the NIT after they didn’t get
a ncaa selection.
2784801, soooo...who?
Posted by ThaTruth, Mon Mar-13-23 01:04 PM
2784803, No one
Posted by allStah, Mon Mar-13-23 01:08 PM
2784804, Turned their nose up at the NIT. Hilarious… who the hell do they think they are?
Posted by Beezo, Mon Mar-13-23 01:20 PM
>NC is self explanatory…they were shit all year long, and
>then
>had the nerve to turn down the NIT after they didn’t get
>a ncaa selection.
2784806, it makes perfect sense that UNC turned that down, assuming...
Posted by PROMO, Mon Mar-13-23 01:24 PM
all the rumors about what went on between the players, girls, etc. is true.

like, if you got those kinda issues, you don't wanna make these dudes play together MORE. shit, i bet they wished they coulda ended the season early but you HAVE to play those games.

opting out of MORE games together? makes sense to me.
2784807, I missed this story. What happened?
Posted by Beezo, Mon Mar-13-23 01:41 PM
2784810, local sports radio predicted they would turn it down
Posted by legsdiamond, Mon Mar-13-23 01:57 PM
bjt I didn’t hear anything about girls. Just that this team was a disaster
2784812, two of the best players were smashing the same girl...
Posted by PROMO, Mon Mar-13-23 02:20 PM
and some players were making fun of Bacot on social media were two of the things i saw online.

this was hard to verify and obviously legit news sites are loathe to report on stuff like that even if it's true, but it would explain how the team w/ a lot of the same players as last year has played this year.
2784815, Good grief, sucka shit.
Posted by Beezo, Mon Mar-13-23 03:10 PM
2784818, supposedly, RJ Davis is with one of the gals from the womens team
Posted by mikediggz, Mon Mar-13-23 04:16 PM
and Caleb Love slid in her DMs, which absolutely there is no excuse for. Didnt hear anythg about Bacot but if thats true thats fucked up because dude is really the only one who showed up consistently for those guys. i think lil bro has a bright future and im a Duke fan...Hes come a long way.
2784805, No such thing as a snub.
Posted by BrooklynWHAT, Mon Mar-13-23 01:22 PM
Ain’t trying to hear someone crying bout “we were the 68th most deserving”
How does that sound
2784808, LOL - Need 100 teams in a football playoff tho
Posted by Ceej, Mon Mar-13-23 01:41 PM
2784809, I was surprised NC State made it in over Clemson
Posted by legsdiamond, Mon Mar-13-23 01:54 PM
but iont give a shit since VCU and Pitt made it.

2784813, me too...but we also have no pedigree in hoops to get the edge ever
Posted by tomjohn29, Mon Mar-13-23 02:49 PM
which is on the program and not anyone else
2784843, Clemson lost by 10 to Louisville. That did it by itself.
Posted by Frank Longo, Mon Mar-13-23 11:33 PM
There was no coming back from that without winning the ACC Tournament.

And they lost by 18 to a Loyola Chicago team that barely won 10 games.

You just have to avoid those sorts of catastrophic losses when you're a bubble team.

State honestly shouldn't have gotten in either. If the ACC had been a 3-bid league, I would've understood.
2784814, I hate college basketball
Posted by guru0509, Mon Mar-13-23 02:51 PM
TOSU athletic department needs to be tarred and feathered for hiring chris Holtmann

Worst coach ever
2784841, Who in the world is voting for Vanderbilt? lol
Posted by Frank Longo, Mon Mar-13-23 11:30 PM
Vanderbilt was ranked 81st in the NET, 80th in KenPom. They were 5-11 in Quad 1 games, had two Quad 3 losses and a Quad 4 loss (at home to Grambling State!). The vast majority of their wins were single digit ones, including against a lot of *really* bad teams. They just weren't good all year. Beating a mediocre Kentucky team twice in ten days and catching Tennessee after their nightmare skid began doesn't really move the needle for me.

If anything, I would've gone Rutgers over Nevada. Wins at Purdue, at Penn State, at Northwestern-- massive road wins that show you can beat the best, those are always teams I want to go to bat for. At 35th, Rutgers is the highest rated team in KenPom to not make the dance. That said? They have four Quad 3 losses. Like... you can't do that if you want me to think you were snubbed. Nevada has *one* win away from home against Top 90 opponents, against New Mexico, and they have two Quad 3 losses-- they probably shouldn't have been in either. And they'd be an underdog to Rutgers on a neutral floor.

But really, this is where I'd take my soapbox to advocate for getting rid of the First Four. Pitt, Mississippi State, Nevada, Arizona State-- none of these teams are *really* good enough for the dance imo.

The only time a team is *really* snubbed is when they win a Saturday conference tournament game, barely lose the championship on Sunday, and don't get in because the tournament pretty openly just doesn't consider the Saturday and Sunday games when it comes to seeding. Like, Texas A&M last year had a decent argument to be called a "snub"... but even then, they lost, like, 7 games in a row in conference play. It's just hard to feel good about your chances when that happens.
2784850, watch your mouth.. Pitt deserved to get in
Posted by legsdiamond, Tue Mar-14-23 06:01 AM
that loss to VCU doesn’t look so bad now.

2784880, Pitt is the worst at-large to make the dance.
Posted by Frank Longo, Tue Mar-14-23 02:12 PM
On KenPom, they're ranked 77th in the country, behind every 11, every 12, and half the 13s. Their NET is 67th, also the worst of any at-large team.

They finished 7-9 against Quads 1 and 2, third worst of any at-large team in the field-- and unlike the two teams with worse Quad 1 and 2 resumes (Mississippi State and Providence), Pitt also has a Quad 4 loss.

If they didn't have that 29 point win at Northwestern dramatically inflating their resume, they'd be ranked between 95th and 100th in the country. (Capel should thank fellow Brotherhood member Chris Collins for doing him a solid and getting him into the dance.)

That's not to say Pitt can't get hot and do some damage-- that Syracuse First Four team didn't deserve to get in and then they made the Sweet 16. But yeah. If Pitt had missed the tournament, I would've just shrugged and been like "don't lose that Quad 4 game next time."
2784927, this Quad shit isn’t law... lol
Posted by legsdiamond, Wed Mar-15-23 09:18 AM
2784930, Right this mf quoting quad and kenpom like it’s the gospel lol
Posted by ThaTruth, Wed Mar-15-23 10:00 AM
2784946, So I shouldn't use a team's resume, nor should I use statistics.
Posted by Frank Longo, Wed Mar-15-23 12:19 PM
Got it. Next time, when I need to determine a college basketball team's quality, I'll consult the true arbiter on the subject: the eye test of a man who admittedly rarely watches college basketball.
2784952, Until recently most people had never heard of those metrics and…
Posted by ThaTruth, Wed Mar-15-23 12:59 PM
they weren’t used in evaluating teams for the tournament lol
2784961, And which metrics did they use this year?
Posted by Frank Longo, Wed Mar-15-23 02:16 PM
You know, the present year, the one we're discussing?
2785006, we know you hate Stackhouse but his program is on the come up
Posted by ThaTruth, Thu Mar-16-23 11:54 AM
2785031, I agree! His future looks promising.
Posted by Frank Longo, Thu Mar-16-23 06:05 PM
But his future is not the same as his resume this season.

I also don't hate Stackhouse, lol. One of my least hated UNC players ever. Ever since TheRealBillyOcean from OKP said he looks like a vampire ln the sidelines, I smile whenever I see him, lmao.
2784972, you’re giving that FSU loss a bit too much energy
Posted by legsdiamond, Wed Mar-15-23 04:53 PM
they were 10-1 against quad 4 teams.

2784979, Not a lot of at-large teams have a worse loss, tbh.
Posted by Frank Longo, Wed Mar-15-23 08:51 PM
And nearly all of those that do-- TCU and Iowa, for example-- were missing an All-American caliber player for those games.

The number of at-large teams that had fewer than 8 combined Quad 1 and Quad 2 wins *along with* a Quad 4 loss on the resume... is one. It's Pitt.

But hey, none of that matters now, tbh. Like I said above, having a bad resume, any questions of "should the resume get them in?" etc... all of that gets tossed out the door the second you win a game, lol. So props to Pitt for getting across the finish line and into the next round.

And obviously I love Jeff Capel as a dude, so I hope he finds enough success to get him to keep his job (especially since he keeps beating UNC, lol).
2784962, Michigan blasting Pitt by 30 feels like it happened in a different season
Posted by cgonz00cc, Wed Mar-15-23 02:25 PM
2784973, it was a looooong time ago.
Posted by legsdiamond, Wed Mar-15-23 06:04 PM
and since this is a whole new team of 5th year seniors

2784941, we're talking about the 68th best team in the country
Posted by will_5198, Wed Mar-15-23 11:34 AM
at that point, subjectivity is an acceptable reason
2784948, lol fair enough, I suppose
Posted by Frank Longo, Wed Mar-15-23 12:24 PM
When it comes to finding the best of the mediocre, perhaps "vibes" should play the largest role. Certainly would explain why Rutgers was left out, as their vibes down the stretch were pretty woeful.

Feel like it's worth pointing out that Vanderbilt is a 3-to-4 point underdog on a neutral floor to any of the other teams in the poll-- but you're right that, ultimately, looking into a pile of glop and thinking "I dunno, they seem like the best today" might be just as valid as anything else. It's still all glop end of the day.
2784994, Nevada looked like shit yesterday
Posted by legsdiamond, Thu Mar-16-23 05:32 AM
2784997, Understatement
Posted by Ceej, Thu Mar-16-23 08:26 AM
2785068, PSU won 22 games and barely snuck in as a #10 seed. I’m not
Posted by Mignight Maruder, Fri Mar-17-23 05:11 AM
about to feel sorry for any team that was “snubbed.”

Side question: how did Iowa at 19-13 (now 19-14) get in as an #8 seed??
2785110, Iowa was overseeded imo.
Posted by Frank Longo, Fri Mar-17-23 01:48 PM
Then again, they drew a road game against the 9 seed with Auburn playing them in Birmingham. So maybe it all worked out the way it was supposed to? lol

I feel bad for Houston, a 1 seed playing a road game in the second round.
2785124, but Pitt lost to FSU
Posted by legsdiamond, Fri Mar-17-23 05:05 PM
2785126, lol
Posted by Frank Longo, Fri Mar-17-23 05:07 PM
2785185, Vandy goes on a 9-0 run in 58 seconds to beat Michigan in the NIT.
Posted by Frank Longo, Sat Mar-18-23 01:08 PM
Absolutely unfuckingbelievable. After allowing Michigan to get a huge lead by defending Dickinson 1v1 (?!?!), Vandy somehow pulls off the win with just an insane blitz at the end.

My comments in this post about shitty resumes are apparently blessings of good fortunes to those teams, lol. Maybe Vandy will win the NIT and Pitt will make the Elite Eight. Anything's possible-- it's March!
2785928, does anybody know the KenPom and Quad rankings of the Final Four teams?
Posted by ThaTruth, Fri Mar-31-23 07:05 AM
2785929, 22, 25, 41, 129
Posted by Ceej, Fri Mar-31-23 07:12 AM
2785930, he's lucky you memorized that with google being down
Posted by cgonz00cc, Fri Mar-31-23 08:28 AM
2785931, Alta Vista came thru in the clutch
Posted by Ceej, Fri Mar-31-23 08:32 AM
2786011, KenPom rankings: 1, 14, 17, 22
Posted by Frank Longo, Sat Apr-01-23 11:31 AM
The lowest it’s ever been for a Final Four, IIRC. (It’s always why UConn is the massive Vegas favorite right now.)
2786016, This is disingenuous
Posted by Ceej, Sat Apr-01-23 12:29 PM
2786267, Are we blaming/crediting quad rankings for this years tourney
Posted by legsdiamond, Mon Apr-03-23 12:33 PM
tons of upsets..

no number 1 seeds in the FF

I wonder if they used the old formula would the outcome be totally different of close to the same this year?

I ask as someone who thinks these quads had more influence than it should’ve.
2786293, It's just a year with tremendous parity imo.
Posted by Frank Longo, Mon Apr-03-23 05:09 PM
The most talented teams were often the youngest.
Teams with dominant big men had limitations at guard positions that created matchup issues.
Many of the mid-major teams were older than they've ever been.

It's also always a hindsight-is-20-20 kinda deal whenever anyone examines the results of the tournament. Like, *maybe* the stuff I mentioned above influenced the outcomes... or maybe it's just garden variety good and bad luck. Houston has its two best players get injured, and Brandon Miller for Alabama fucks up his groin. How many times does that happen in the tournament to *both* title favorites?

Then, for the deep runs, Miami only had an 8% chance to win in the first round with 5 minutes left, then they go to the Final Four. Florida Atlantic was losing in the first round with under a minute left, then they go to the Final Four. San Diego State was tied with Charleston under 3 minutes left in the first round, now they're in the title game. It's very easy to imagine a world in which a couple balls bounce differently, a couple injuries don't happen, and the outcomes are far more aligned with what people expected.

And for what it's worth, the old system, the RPI? It would've been soooo much worse. UConn was something like 26th pre-tournament in RPI, they could've ended up a 6 or 7 seed. Zags would've been a 1 seed, Duke would've been a 2 seed (which I wouldn't have minded but wasn't deserved, lol), etc. You can find online what the RPI rankings were before the tournament started, but they are *always* a mess.

I'm all for figuring out how to continue to tinker with the quad system most effectively, but it's easily a better system than the RPI, which is what they used to use. RPI is dreadful, lol.
2786295, well, that’s my question
Posted by legsdiamond, Mon Apr-03-23 05:52 PM
does RPI lead to less upsets this year due to seeding changes?

there is no right answer. I prefer tournament outcomes like this BUT I also don’t like the quad rankings getting this much love..


but maybe I should?
2786300, If anything, it'd likely lead to *more* upsets imo.
Posted by Frank Longo, Mon Apr-03-23 06:43 PM
>does RPI lead to less upsets this year due to seeding changes?

It's far more disconnected from actual team strength than KenPom or Quads or anything else.

Some notable RPI rankings, to show how far they differ from reality:

Utah State: 13
Memphis: 15
Boise State: 18
VCU: 19
Oral Roberts: 21
UConn: 26
Kansas State: 27
Creighton: 45
Iowa State: 46
Kentucky: 48

It would've had Maryland out of the field, Pittsburgh out of the field, TCU out of the field, Northwestern out of the field, etc.

So you'd have teams that lost in the first round as 7 through 10 seeds... as 4 and 5 seeds. You'd have a team like Kansas State around the 6 or 7 line, a team like Creighton around the 10 or 11 line.

I'm telling you, the RPI is crazy, lol.