Yes, Rutgers got screwed (article)

[kcg88]

Yes, Rutgers got screwed

We can all stop pretending "bracketing principles" exist

theb1gpicture.substack.com

Highlights:

I talked about how getting screwed is an entirely separate question from "could Rutgers have done more to avoid this?"

I talked about how dumb non-conference strength of schedule is:

And I dove into how ridiculous it was to cite Mag's injury as a reason to keep Rutgers out:

 

[ClassOf02]

Really good article. Clearly written from a Rutgers perspective, but driven by data.

 

[DennisHajekRC84]

LOVE IT. Expose the hypocrisy but falling on deaf ears. We got screwed just like OSU and in a short period of time everyone is (already) saying deal with it. Move on.

 

[The RUT]

People need to stop trying to make sense of something that doesn't make sense.

We got hosed, period.

 

[BIGRUBIGDBIGredmachine]

Thread-of-the-Year so far. Thanks OP.

 

[MGSA99]

Bigger RU Screw, this or the NCAAs being cancelled in 2020?

 

[ClassOf02]

Bigger RU Screw, this or the NCAAs being cancelled in 2020?

This, by far. 2020 screwed everyone and was a much larger societal issue.

This is a straight up hose job directed at just RU. Classic case of looking for data points to support an arbitrary opinion.

 

[tjb]

It's always going to be an 'eye test' by the eyes of the people on the committee.

You can have all the guidelines you want, if there is no hard-and-fast arithmetical method, human beings are going to make human judgments. All the things being mentioned here really boil down to

Classic case of looking for data points to support an arbitrary opinion.

All bubble teams are terribly flawed *every* year. (This really only comes into sharp focus for a typical fan when your team is one of them.)

That results in committee members being able to latch onto the things about résumés that are bad to rationalize a decision that probably they didn't even consciously reach.

The reptile brain makes the decision, then the evolved portion searches for reasons to justify it. (See the research of Antonio Damasio about how we all actually make 'rational' decisions.)

But RU did get screwed, IMO.

 

[bac2therac]

tremendous piece, thank you for writing

the thing that infuriates me you touch upon......that wins and losses to crap teams like Colorado are considered Q1, then games vs most of the MW and WCC qualify as Q2 on the road, The west coast conferences...pac 12, mountain west, west coast are all benefitting from this. Riding great Q2 marks playing nobodies and the top programs cleaning up agains crappy Q3 schools.

Nevada had 10 losses from the Mountain West and made the field...ten! Despite not doing anything other than splitting with the other top 4 schools in the MWC, Thats all you have to do now to get a bid...go 1-1...they didnt win any of those on the road. New Mexico at least beat San Diego State and St Marys on the road. They fell off the bubble with too much losing but they have better wins than 2 of the MWC schools that made

a complete overhaul of the net system needs to happen. Some sort of point system needs to be used. I get that the conferences beyond the power 6 have issues and might need to be judge differently. If so then do that. Put the conferences in tiers with the point system and then rank them.

on the ooc stuff, I do think RU failed miserably and has continued to be told but does not listen to schedule tougher. They do that at their own peril. Non conference stuff is being stressed so while I agree that overall schedule should matter more. I do think its an issue that RU needs to fix...more Q3s and less Q4s

 

[bac2therac]

the eye test admission..while claiming no eye test was a big revelation yesterday. Recency bias is now a thing after years of saying it wasnt. I get that the losses down the stretch hurt RU metrics, then say that..dont say RU looked like a different team. The committee is violating its own rules

 

[kcg88]

tremendous piece, thank you for writing

the thing that infuriates me you touch upon......that wins and losses to crap teams like Colorado are considered Q1, then games vs most of the MW and WCC qualify as Q2 on the road, The west coast conferences...pac 12, mountain west, west coast are all benefitting from this. Riding great Q2 marks playing nobodies and the top programs cleaning up agains crappy Q3 schools.

Nevada had 10 losses from the Mountain West and made the field...ten! Despite not doing anything other than splitting with the other top 4 schools in the MWC, Thats all you have to do now to get a bid...go 1-1...they didnt win any of those on the road. New Mexico at least beat San Diego State and St Marys on the road. They fell off the bubble with too much losing but they have better wins than 2 of the MWC schools that made

a complete overhaul of the net system needs to happen. Some sort of point system needs to be used. I get that the conferences beyond the power 6 have issues and might need to be judge differently. If so then do that. Put the conferences in tiers with the point system and then rank them.

on the ooc stuff, I do think RU failed miserably and has continued to be told but does not listen to schedule tougher. They do that at their own peril. Non conference stuff is being stressed so while I agree that overall schedule should matter more. I do think its an issue that RU needs to fix...more Q3s and less Q4s

The guy saying "we were looking for something to grab onto" in the non-conference when Nevada's best win is Sam Houston and NC State's is Dayton/Vanderbilt is insane. Wake Forest is basically no worse than any of those teams. And they don't account at all for the Big 10 playing 20 games versus 18 for the ACC and MWC. Go ahead and calculate our December games against Ohio State and Indiana into the non-conference rating and see how it shakes out.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

the eye test admission..while claiming no eye test was a big revelation yesterday. Recency bias is now a thing after years of saying it wasnt. I get that the losses down the stretch hurt RU metrics, then say that..dont say RU looked like a different team. The committee is violating its own rules

The comments seem to imply were only a “thing” because of Mag. Which is ridiculous.

 

[The RUT]

the eye test admission..while claiming no eye test was a big revelation yesterday. Recency bias is now a thing after years of saying it wasnt. I get that the losses down the stretch hurt RU metrics, then say that..dont say RU looked like a different team. The committee is violating its own rules

Something tells me next year we'll be back to no recency bias.

Last year it wasn't there, otherwise A&M surely would have gotten a bid.

 

[bac2therac]

The guy saying "we were looking for something to grab onto" in the non-conference when Nevada's best win is Sam Houston and NC State's is Dayton/Vanderbilt is insane. Wake Forest is basically no worse than any of those teams. And they don't account at all for the Big 10 playing 20 games versus 18 for the ACC and MWC. Go ahead and calculate our December games against Ohio State and Indiana into the non-conference rating and see how it shakes out.

my take is they are judging the major conference schools differently, if you are in a major conference they want to see either a clean resume or something non conference. They are in love with how you do before Jan 1 for some reason. With the mid majors which is mountain west really one anymore since they were rated ahead of pac 12 and acc, they seem to give passes in non conferences and all these schools seem to clean up in Q2/3 but no tourney teams. if Mountain West is going to be rated 5th, they need to start scheduling like the other power conferences. Fortunately the reshuffling of the deck coming soon will have major implications for the MW and Pac 12

 

[scarletrat]

If RU was playing either Arizona State (who may have gotten in due to the half court prayer at Arizona) or Nevada on neutral court, or MSU, who would Vegas favor?

I can’t see RU not favored.

Not just Minny loss, or at OSU debacle, but either or both of those get us a higher seed and likely, given how RU played, beat 2 teams in B1G

RU didn’t do itself favors, but got bad breaks as well.

 

[skydog0784]

Iowa fan here... I'd like to echo the sentiment that Rutgers got screwed. You can't tell me that Nevada (fourth place in the MWC) nor NC State (one quad one win) deserve to be in before Rutgers.

Anyway, hang tough, do some real damage in the NIT, and make the tourney next year. You guys are a great team!

 

[BIGRUBIGDBIGredmachine]

They must have had their eyes closed at R re-configured team with Simpson starting PG. Yeh a brief slide while we adjusted to a significant injury and then started returning to R previous form means Nevada is a better team for the NCAA. #Horse💩

 

[scarletrat]

Committee IMO uses the first 4 at large selections to spread it around…they don’t want same team there 2x

IMO we should be playing Creighton in 6/11 game. NC State getting in is as big a joke as anything

 

[rubjk]

It's always going to be an 'eye test' by the eyes of the people on the committee.

You can have all the guidelines you want, if there is no hard-and-fast arithmetical method, human beings are going to make human judgments. All the things being mentioned here really boil down to



All bubble teams are terribly flawed *every* year. (This really only comes into sharp focus for a typical fan when your team is one of them.)

That results in committee members being able to latch onto the things about résumés that are bad to rationalize a decision that probably they didn't even consciously reach.

The reptile brain makes the decision, then the evolved portion searches for reasons to justify it. (See the research of Antonio Damasio about how we all actually make 'rational' decisions.)

But RU did get screwed, IMO.

If it’s an eye test it needs to include the conference tourneys and ALL games. The committee failed the eye test by not looking at last two games. We clearly returned to how we looked before Mag went down.

 

[anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy]

tremendous piece, thank you for writing

the thing that infuriates me you touch upon......that wins and losses to crap teams like Colorado are considered Q1, then games vs most of the MW and WCC qualify as Q2 on the road, The west coast conferences...pac 12, mountain west, west coast are all benefitting from this. Riding great Q2 marks playing nobodies and the top programs cleaning up agains crappy Q3 schools.

Nevada had 10 losses from the Mountain West and made the field...ten! Despite not doing anything other than splitting with the other top 4 schools in the MWC, Thats all you have to do now to get a bid...go 1-1...they didnt win any of those on the road. New Mexico at least beat San Diego State and St Marys on the road. They fell off the bubble with too much losing but they have better wins than 2 of the MWC schools that made

a complete overhaul of the net system needs to happen. Some sort of point system needs to be used. I get that the conferences beyond the power 6 have issues and might need to be judge differently. If so then do that. Put the conferences in tiers with the point system and then rank them.

on the ooc stuff, I do think RU failed miserably and has continued to be told but does not listen to schedule tougher. They do that at their own peril. Non conference stuff is being stressed so while I agree that overall schedule should matter more. I do think its an issue that RU needs to fix...more Q3s and less Q4s

Beating a #31 at home being a q2 and beating a #149 on the road being a q2 is dumb. Which is why id like to cheat in our ooc schedule and essentially run home and homes with schools like temple, princeton, hofstra, fordham. All driving distance and q2 road games on what will in essence be a neutral court type of environment. Same goes for monmouth, sign a 2 for 1 with them. Most years away at monmouth with be a q3 and every once in a while even a q2.

 

[GRU23]

Great piece. In full agreement. I also think Pitt is being given a pass for their terrible resume as well. Their SOS is way worse than ours, terrible metrics, worse Q1-Q2 record, a quad 3 and quad 4 loss. There’s not many conceivable ways that Pitt and Nevada should be ahead of Rutgers.

 

[ru66]

my take is they are judging the major conference schools differently, if you are in a major conference they want to see either a clean resume or something non conference. They are in love with how you do before Jan 1 for some reason. With the mid majors which is mountain west really one anymore since they were rated ahead of pac 12 and acc, they seem to give passes in non conferences and all these schools seem to clean up in Q2/3 but no tourney teams. if Mountain West is going to be rated 5th, they need to start scheduling like the other power conferences. Fortunately the reshuffling of the deck coming soon will have major implications for the MW and Pac 12

Face it all the calculations, manipulations and study is (sorry) a waste of time. When it's not automatic or obvious that committee either is affected politically or by the press clippings or is just plain lazy and does no where the study of guys trying to predict the hard ones. Forget SOS, etc look who they chose above us those teams sucked worst than us at the end.

 

[LOU-RU85]

That was excellent. Puts the excuses from the committee to shame.

 

[pmvon]

Please send this article to NCAA selection committee hacks

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Nevada had a similar overall schedule to our in terms of SOS. They were 22-10 and we were 19-14.

If Nevada called all 14 B1G schools and asked for a home and home they would get the same answer from 14 schools.

 

[bac2therac]

you cannot tell me those crappy western teams are better than the 11th, 12th and 13th place teams in the Big 10

 

[Degaz-RU]

If it’s an eye test it needs to include the conference tourneys and ALL games. The committee failed the eye test by not looking at last two games. We clearly returned to how we looked before Mag went down.

Yeah, this is the other thing that galls me. If they're going to use a "recent eye test" like they clearly did "starting February 7," WHY THE HELL DID THEY IGNORE THE TOURNAMENT GAMES?!

We played very well in both games, and that should have been proof enough that Pike had adjusted to Mag's injury and that we were "back."

Plus, the losses we suffered after Mag's injury are already baked into our resume. Why not just compare resumes instead of basically double-counting Mag's injury with BOTH resume AND eye test?!?

 

[RUChoppin]

Nevada had a similar overall schedule to our in terms of SOS. They were 22-10 and we were 19-14.

If Nevada called all 14 B1G schools and asked for a home and home they would get the same answer from 14 schools.

Nevada NET SOS: 71
Rutgers NET SOS: 41

That's similar?

 

[rudad02]

That was excellent. Puts the excuses from the committee to shame.

Absolutely.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Nevada NET SOS: 71
Rutgers NET SOS: 41

That's similar?

No. Looked at Bart SOS and they were in ballpark

 

[MiloTalon13]

And they don't account at all for the Big 10 playing 20 games versus 18 for the ACC and MWC. Go ahead and calculate our December games against Ohio State and Indiana into the non-conference rating and see how it shakes out.

THIS!
When/IF the Big 10 goes to 22 conference games, it's even more stupid.

 

[MiloTalon13]

Time for a Big Ten/Mountain West Challenge???

 

[Doctorzit]

Yes, Rutgers got screwed

We can all stop pretending "bracketing principles" exist

theb1gpicture.substack.com

Highlights:

I talked about how getting screwed is an entirely separate question from "could Rutgers have done more to avoid this?"

I talked about how dumb non-conference strength of schedule is:

And I dove into how ridiculous it was to cite Mag's injury as a reason to keep Rutgers out:

What no one has brought up is the fact that the 3 teams mentioned most as undeserving, to be in the NCAAs, belong to theACC and SEC. Who has a vested interest in those teams; ESPN. ESPN wants bragging for covering the " best leagues" compared to all the others. Those leagues represent money to ESPN (ie ACC TV Network). You better believe ESPN has influence and exerts that influence. This is the USA, money talks.

 

[B1GRUfan]

Clearly there was anti-B1G bias. We happened to be at the bottom of the group being considered so we took the brunt of it. The fact that we are not a traditional power coupled with our late season slide made it all the easier for the committee to reject us.

Like many have said, it's also clear the committee is not considering play in conference tournaments. Their impressions of us were cast when we were losing our last 6 of 8 regular season games including 3 straight home losses. They probably even discounted a 1 point win at Wisconsin and the miracle comeback at PSU as anomalies and otherwise we would have been 0-8. Short of beating Purdue in the B1G tournament, we weren't going to change their minds. It stinks and isn't fair, but we gave them the opening to leave us out by not controlling our own destiny. Unless and until selections are strictly determined by a computer algorithm, there will always be a level of human bias.

 

[kcg88]

View embedded media

Link (or video or whatever) not working for me. Can you repost?

 

[bac2therac]

yeah for some reason didnt work...here is the link to Kerry Millers piece....thought Vandy and RU screwed, I agree

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Nevada had a similar overall schedule to our in terms of SOS. They were 22-10 and we were 19-14.

If Nevada called all 14 B1G schools and asked for a home and home they would get the same answer from 14 schools.

Their schedule is hardly similar in difficulty regardless of what the blended SOS metrics say. Nevada played a total of 7 games against teams selected for At Large bids vs RU’s 17. It’s not like they stocked up on teams just a cut below either. Both of us played 4 NIT teams.

You do understand this is a huge difference, right? 10 more games against the field…

 

[kcg88]

yeah for some reason didnt work...here is the link to Kerry Millers piece....thought Vandy and RU screwed, I agree

View embedded media

If the tournament was 72 teams Vanderbilt's screw job (not even being in the First Four Out and thus not in a 72 team field) would be worse than ours is now.

 

[RUChoppin]

No. Looked at Bart SOS and they were in ballpark

Closer there, but Bart isn't included in the team sheets provided to the committee.

 

[bac2therac]

If the tournament was 72 teams Vanderbilt's screw job (not even being in the First Four Out and thus not in a 72 team field) would be worse than ours is now.

i even wonder if that loss to LSU made a difference for them, they would be the hottest team in the country that lost in the SEC semis and still left out