Rate The Selection Committee

[-RUFAN4LIFE-]

***** This is not to rehash RU being left out of the field *****

With a 4 seed, two 5 seeds and a 9 seed in the Final Four, how would you rate the selection committee's seeding this year?

• Are they using the wrong metrics to seed teams when almost none of the high seeds made it to the Elite Eight?
  • Did they correctly consider resumes (Insert MWC jokes here)?
• Are they weighing the wrong factors when seeding one bid AQ conferences?
  • A team like Princeton had absolutely no business being a 15 seed.
• Can the committee redeem itself?

 

[Plum Street]

It’s so hard to rate . It’s madness .

 

[RUSJ73]

They need to seed more on teams record,
no matter what conference they are in.

 

[kcg88]

Nothing done in the tournament justifies or indicts the committee. They make the field based on regular season resumes. They obviously blew the Rutgers-Nevada thing. They under-seeded FAU but realistically they should only have been as high like a 7.

 

[SirScarlet]

Can't rate them as my hatred for them blinds my objectivity

 

[mtm183]

It's not an exact science. The margins are so small in a game between any of the top 50 teams that its all a crapshoot. Great to watch.

 

[bac2therac]

Nothing done in the tournament justifies or indicts the committee. They make the field based on regular season resumes. They obviously blew the Rutgers-Nevada thing. They under-seeded FAU but realistically they should only have been as high like a 7.

Agree

Committee selects and seeds on resumes. Sd St actually had less wins vs schools in field than Rutgers at 5-5 and 3 of them were Utah State

Committee did fine

 

[SantaFeScarlet]

It’s so hard to rate . It’s madness .

March madness

 

[robjknight]

My thoughts are it should be more mathematical than political. There should be a separate group that identifies the 4-8 formulas and weighting of those formulas that will be used to select schools, but they have nothing to do with final seedings or decisions. There would be the second group that uses the mathematical results to lay out the seedings , decides how to deal with ties in math , determines goeographic assessments or any special circumstances. The first group would annually decide what are appropriate changes to the formulas.
The formulas and weighting would be made public early in the season so everyone knows the ground rules.

 

[Scarlet Shack]

***** This is not to rehash RU being left out of the field *****

With a 4 seed, two 5 seeds and a 9 seed in the Final Four, how would you rate the selection committee's seeding this year?

• Are they using the wrong metrics to seed teams when almost none of the high seeds made it to the Elite Eight?
  • Did they correctly consider resumes (Insert MWC jokes here)?
• Are they weighing the wrong factors when seeding one bid AQ conferences?
  • A team like Princeton had absolutely no business being a 15 seed.
• Can the committee redeem itself?

It’s the NCAA tournament …not the NCAA playoffs

Does anyone think FDU beats Purdue in a best of 7? Does anyone think Princeton beats Arizona in a best of 7?

One game …anything can happen.

Why do you think it’s March MADNESS???

 

[RutgersChow]

Agree

Committee selects and seeds on resumes. Sd St actually had less wins vs schools in field than Rutgers at 5-5 and 3 of them were Utah State

Committee did fine

Suck a_s job. Problem is they don't know to how read the resumes. Clemson's resume said they finished two games ahead of NC State in the ACC, had the same overall record, and beat them THREE times. Again, THREE times. NC State in, Clemson out. That's just total bulls__t. All the metrics suck. It should be the overall record and the eye test of real experts. Wasn't Condoleeza Rice actually on the committee a few years back? I'd like to see a list of exactly who is on the committee. My guess is there are people who have no business being on it.

 

[Knight Owl]

Suck a_s job. Problem is they don't know to how read the resumes. Clemson's resume said they finished two games ahead of NC State in the ACC, had the same overall record, and beat them THREE times. Again, THREE times. NC State in, Clemson out. That's just total bulls__t. All the metrics suck. It should be the overall record and the eye test of real experts. Wasn't Condoleeza Rice actually on the committee a few years back? I'd like to see a list of exactly who is in the committee. My guess is there are people who have no business being on it.

Rice was on the football playoff committee.

 

[RutgersChow]

Rice was on the football playoff committee.

And that's not absurd, or did I miss the years she played and coached football?

 

[-RUFAN4LIFE-]

And that's not absurd, or did I miss the years she played and coached football?

You realize we’re in the 21st century & women don’t stay home barefoot & pregnant anymore?

 

[WhichReligionIsRight]

I think people underestimate the amount of variability in NCAA BB.

 

[RU MAN]

It’s the NCAA tournament …not the NCAA playoffs

Does anyone think FDU beats Purdue in a best of 7? Does anyone think Princeton beats Arizona in a best of 7?

One game …anything can happen.

Why do you think it’s March MADNESS???

The NCAA tourney IMO is about matchups. Some matchups just don't play out as one would expect between lower and higher seeds. Even though coaches may have film on their opponent they still haven't played them in a game with winner takes all. If the tournament was more about a series such as best out of 3 or 5, I believe the more talented team would win, because the coach would be able to make better adjustments after playing the first game.

That's why they call it March Madness. As we have seen anything on any given day can shock, surprise and thrill all of us. For me, it's the best tournament going.

 

[NickRU714]

Suck a_s job. Problem is they don't know to how read the resumes. Clemson's resume said they finished two games ahead of NC State in the ACC, had the same overall record, and beat them THREE times. Again, THREE times. NC State in, Clemson out. That's just total bulls__t. All the metrics suck. It should be the overall record and the eye test of real experts. Wasn't Condoleeza Rice actually on the committee a few years back? I'd like to see a list of exactly who is on the committee. My guess is there are people who have no business being on it.

Wow. Look at these people nowhere close to college basketball......
Talk about a swing a miss.

NCAA Tournament selection committee members 2023​

Below are the 12 members of the selection committee this year. Committee members serve five-year terms.

• Greg Byrne (Athletic director, Alabama)
• Barry Collier (Athletic director, Butler)
• Mark Coyle (Athletic director, Minnesota)
• Bubba Cunningham (Athletic director, North Carolina)
• Keith Gill (Commissioner, Sun Belt Conference)
• Dave Heeke (Athletic director, Arizona)
• Charles McClelland (Commissioner, SWAC)
• Bernadette McGlade (Commissioner, Atlantic 10 Conference)
• Martin Newton (Athletic director, Samford)
• Jamie Pollard (Athletic director, Iowa State)
• Chris Reynolds (VP for intercollegiate athletics, Bradley)*
• Tom Wistrcill (Commissioner, Big Sky Conference)

* - Reynolds is the chair of the committee in 2022-23

 

[NickRU714]

Also, overall record? Thats a terrible metric. Nevada was 22-10. Totally blows away our 19-15 record. Didn't we have fewer wins than ever other bubble teams?

Sounds like Rutgers shouldn't have even been on the bubble under your format.

 

[kcg88]

Computers would've said to give UConn a 2 seed but not even the most ardent analytics supporters want the field selected and seeded based on that. They were seeded correctly for their resume strength, which was different from their team strength. And that's okay.

 

[mugrat86]

***** This is not to rehash RU being left out of the field *****

With a 4 seed, two 5 seeds and a 9 seed in the Final Four, how would you rate the selection committee's seeding this year?

• Are they using the wrong metrics to seed teams when almost none of the high seeds made it to the Elite Eight?
  • Did they correctly consider resumes (Insert MWC jokes here)?
• Are they weighing the wrong factors when seeding one bid AQ conferences?
  • A team like Princeton had absolutely no business being a 15 seed.
• Can the committee redeem itself?

What a dumb thread. The committee did fine seeding the teams. Do you think FDU should have been a 1 seed bc they beat Purdue? There big error was leaving us out

 

[-RUFAN4LIFE-]

What a dumb thread. The committee did fine seeding the teams. Do you think FDU should have been a 1 seed bc they beat Purdue? There big error was leaving us out

Haha, you're cute when you're angry. Let's not forget old man that a few weeks ago no one thought the committee did fine seeding teams. So going back and looking at how things played out is perfectly reasonable. Now go take your Metamucil and don't skip your anger management classes again.

 

[mugrat86]

Haha, you're cute when you're angry. Let's not forget old man that a few weeks ago no one thought the committee did fine seeding teams. So going back and looking at how things played out is perfectly reasonable. Now go take your Metamucil and don't skip your anger management classes again.

Judging by the responses to your thread, nobody agrees with your premise

 

[-RUFAN4LIFE-]

Judging by the responses to your thread, nobody agrees with your premise

I asked a bunch of questions to elicit a conversation unlike your toxic threads. The responses were expected to be varied because I didn't slant the topic in one direction.

Your attempts to hijack this thread won't lead to anything.

 

[mugrat86]

I asked a bunch of questions to elicit a conversation unlike your toxic threads. The responses were expected to be varied because I didn't slant the topic in one direction.

Your attempts to hijack this thread won't lead to anything.

Better just to stick to making stupid comments in threads. There was no dominant teams this year so as a result there were a lot of upsets. Seeding for the most part was fair.

 

[scarletnewyorker2006]

Computers would've said to give UConn a 2 seed but not even the most ardent analytics supporters want the field selected and seeded based on that. They were seeded correctly for their resume strength, which was different from their team strength. And that's okay.

Resume or body of work should determine entry but seeding should be determined based on how good you are at the time the tournament begins in order to create the most competitive tournament possible. If a team loses a star players for 4-5 weeks and then he returns, body of work might put them at a 9-10 when they might actually be among the top 15 teams in the country.

 

[RutgersChow]

Wow. Look at these people nowhere close to college basketball......
Talk about a swing a miss.

NCAA Tournament selection committee members 2023​

Below are the 12 members of the selection committee this year. Committee members serve five-year terms.

• Greg Byrne (Athletic director, Alabama)
• Barry Collier (Athletic director, Butler)
• Mark Coyle (Athletic director, Minnesota)
• Bubba Cunningham (Athletic director, North Carolina)
• Keith Gill (Commissioner, Sun Belt Conference)
• Dave Heeke (Athletic director, Arizona)
• Charles McClelland (Commissioner, SWAC)
• Bernadette McGlade (Commissioner, Atlantic 10 Conference)
• Martin Newton (Athletic director, Samford)
• Jamie Pollard (Athletic director, Iowa State)
• Chris Reynolds (VP for intercollegiate athletics, Bradley)*
• Tom Wistrcill (Commissioner, Big Sky Conference)

* - Reynolds is the chair of the committee in 2022-23

Zero x-coaches on the committee - just brilliant! What morons decided this should be the committee?

 

[willisneverrana43]

***** This is not to rehash RU being left out of the field *****

With a 4 seed, two 5 seeds and a 9 seed in the Final Four, how would you rate the selection committee's seeding this year?

• Are they using the wrong metrics to seed teams when almost none of the high seeds made it to the Elite Eight?
  • Did they correctly consider resumes (Insert MWC jokes here)?
• Are they weighing the wrong factors when seeding one bid AQ conferences?
  • A team like Princeton had absolutely no business being a 15 seed.
• Can the committee redeem itself?

I mean, it's fine, but given the content of your post--for example, "Can the committee redeem itself," "wrong metrics," "wrong factors," and "absolutely no business"--as opposed to the request in your title--"Rate the Selection Committee"--you may want to change your title to "Crap on the Selection Committee."

 

[fluoxetine]

And that's not absurd, or did I miss the years she played and coached football?

You realize we’re in the 21st century & women don’t stay home barefoot & pregnant anymore?

 

[fluoxetine]

As for rating the selection committee:

Screwed over Rutgers: -10 points

Final rating: 0/10

 

[-RUFAN4LIFE-]

I mean, it's fine, but given the content of your post--for example, "Can the committee redeem itself," "wrong metrics," "wrong factors," and "absolutely no business"--as opposed to the request in your title--"Rate the Selection Committee"--you may wan to change your title to "Crap on the Selection Committee."

Feel free to start your own thread with those ideas.

 

[-RUFAN4LIFE-]

As for rating the selection committee:

Screwed over Rutgers: -10 points

Final rating: 0/10

I'd give them at least a 5/10. There were a lot of competitive games.

 

[fluoxetine]

I'd give them at least a 5/10. There were a lot of competitive games.

Yeah, but you need to multiply # of competitive games by # that contained Rutgers, so you get zero any way you look at it.

 

[AshCatchEm]

What a dumb thread. The committee did fine seeding the teams. Do you think FDU should have been a 1 seed bc they beat Purdue? There big error was leaving us out

In what way was leaving us out an error when we got easily handled by Hofstra in the NIT. I swear our fans are just not living in reality. We didn't deserve to go. And their reasoning of "they haven't been the same team" was obviously true.

 

[fluoxetine]

easily handled by Hofstra

We lost by 2, in OT, against a team that was red hot. "Easily handled" lol. You're an idiot.

 

[-RUFAN4LIFE-]

We lost by 2, in OT, against a team that was red hot. "Easily handled" lol. You're an idiot.

He's a moron for trying to equate the NIT loss in OT as justification for why RU was left out. One has nothing to do with the other.

 

[willisneverrana43]

We lost by 2, in OT, against a team that was red hot. . . .

And then, just as quickly, they weren't.

 

[biazza38]

Didn’t read the thread.
But this year’s final four is not an indictment of the committee. The field sucked this year plain and simple. The top teams were not great. There were no major road blocks that anyone had to face. All you have to do is think back at how many weekends there were with 3,4, even 5+ top 10 teams that went down on the same weekend.
That being said, the MWC conference still sucks

 

[bac2therac]

In what way was leaving us out an error when we got easily handled by Hofstra in the NIT. I swear our fans are just not living in reality. We didn't deserve to go. And their reasoning of "they haven't been the same team" was obviously true.

Lol it was a one possession game...take your meds

Sd st had a close battle with Charleston in first ncaa game

 

[bac2therac]

In what way was leaving us out an error when we got easily handled by Hofstra in the NIT. I swear our fans are just not living in reality. We didn't deserve to go. And their reasoning of "they haven't been the same team" was obviously true.

Im sure Nevada losing by 743 to Arizona State also confirms your thoughts

 

[fluoxetine]

And then, just as quickly, they weren't.

They were red hot in that specific game.

I'm not saying we played good defense overall there, but towards the end of the game they simply would not miss.