the Big Screw Job by the NCAA Committee

[lennyjones4]

This article explains in all. Bradley, Wichita and George Mason all may have ruined the mid-major chances for the next few years to come. The BCS schools and the talking heads were really pissed to see the mid-majors take out the bigger schools last year.
I just can't believe the committee made their intentions so obvious this year. Only 6 mid-majors selected, and all of them play another non-BCS team 1st round. Then in the NIT, they seeded all major conference schools higher so they could have home court advantage.
Here are the fact, they will really make you mad.

https://www.pjstar.com/php/index.php?/wessler/index

Not sure what we can do, but we need to do something.

From a Bradley fan (not disappointed in the NIT) just disappointed in the screw job we all just got.

[ceaser150]

A dead on article. It seems the Committee is drifting more and more away from cold hard facts and data and is doing more picking and choosing of more "sexy" teams. They threw the mid majors a bone this year with ODU, sent a message to Syracuse, but then went on to include Illinois, Purdue, Stanford, and Arkansas who all had questionable, at best, resumes. Maybe they took so much heat last year from including Air Force and Utah St. that they decided to go with bigger names, I don't know. All I know is that the first round will not be as fun this year with out the mid major vs major matchups.

[Panthercrazy22]

Thats BS they go from one year takin a lot of mid-majors then to screwin us over in both of the tournaments. Thats a really crappy job done by the selection commitee.

[Panthers to the Bone]

Does anyone know if the stat that was used by CBS discussing the 12 bids taken a few years ago...does that include the C-USA in those 12? I would assume that it does, but most of those 'at-large' bids ended up going to the Big East when the split took place (L'ville, DePaul, Marquette, Cincinnati, etc...).

[ceaser150]

C-USA got 5 at-larges in 2004, and only 1 (UAB) is still in the mid major catagory. The next year it dropped to 2. Incidently, C-USA was the 5th ranked league in the RPI in 2004.

[GonzoCat]

Upon further review it did include CUSA:

St. Josephs
SIU
BYU
Richmond
Dayton
Air Force
UTEP

Memphis
Louisville
DePaul
Charlotte
UAB

[jman2004]

What really pisses me off, is that the committee does all of this exact same research. Nothing that guy said in the article should come as a shock to the committee.

To me, the whole thing was very deliberate. It really sucks, and it's not good for college basketball. What impact is this going to have on recruiting for schools?

[panther2317]

It makes the rich get richer. 13 scholarships per team has been helping the "mids" get better players now for more than 10 years and the playing field is evening out. More and more non-BCS teams have the ability to beat BCS teams on any given night and that scares some people. It's ok and "cute" for Gonzaga to be good...because they've been annointed the one non-BCS team that can compete with the "big boys", but it's scary when other non-BCS schools are getting consistently THAT good.

The other thing (and the most important thing to note here) is that when non-BCS teams win multiple games in the NCAA's...it takes money away from the BCS schools...and they don't like that. This (what they did with selections this year) is what they're doing to retaliate.

The only fair thing to do...is to use a computer ranking system (RPI...Sagarin) NOT THE POLLS, to rank at-large teams. The NCAA finds it perfectly ok to use a computer to choose the #1 and #2 teams who play for the National Championship in football...but GOD FORBID they allow the computers to do their work for 34 at-large teams into the NCAA's. It's hypocritical...at best...and down right cheating at it's core.

[4N6]

Just a few observations of mine ...

1) I think S. Illinois is the best all-around team I saw v. the Panthers this year.

2) Nevada was a close second.

3) Missouri State got screwed. Come on ... why are so many people knocking the Bears? There was even a forum ... "Will you feel sorry for ... if they don't get in?" YES I was more than that, they deserved to get it.

4) UNI missed their graduating seniors from last year more than we cared to admit at the beginning of the season.

5) The Cats lacked intensity late in the season.

6) I'll STILL take Brooks for my starting point guard. Care to argue? Check his record.

7) Coleman will be a force next year.

8) T. Brown needs to step it up next year.

9) A learning year for the coaching staff. They will be given a chance to prove their worth next season.

10) I'm glad the tourney is starting. It's the best time of the year. Glad too that baseball is around the corner. Even more glad I enjoyed St. Louis, even though the Panthers lost, but man ... what a game between Mo. State and Southern. Everybody needs to put this year behind us and move on.

[Durf73]

Hey pull for the MVC teams & send some more noise to the powers of the NCAA but you know it won't do any good. It's like being a 1A high school athletic team, no matter how logical your argument, the big schools still control the organization !

This is a great time of year, but it felt so much better when the Panthers were in the dance !

The worst part is the Drake women made it in . The greatest reason in the world why the automatic bids should go the season conference champion & not to somebody who got hot for 3 or 4 days . Let the conference tournaments be the bubble decider !

[Panthercrazy22]

Hey pull for the MVC teams & send some more noise to the powers of the NCAA but you know it won't do any good. It's like being a 1A high school athletic team, no matter how logical your argument, the big schools still control the organization !

This is a great time of year, but it felt so much better when the Panthers were in the dance !

The worst part is the Drake women made it in . The greatest reason in the world why the automatic bids should go the season conference champion & not to somebody who got hot for 3 or 4 days . Let the conference tournaments be the bubble decider !

I totally don't agree with your last part thats what makes any college basketball mens or womens exciting! I think its fun to watch teams get hot and get to go to a place where no one on the team thought that they could end up getting too.

[HebrewHammer]

great article. ive been saying that kind of stuff since sunday night when i saw stanford at 18-12 get in. tennesee at 20-10 get a 5 seed? and the #17 or so ranked winthrop....gets an 11 seed. wtf?! i dont understand the comitee at all and how they can disregard the overall record and just focus on "oh they are in a big conference so they can win in the tournament!"

sorry that was kind of a rant but stuff like that hasnt been this bad for as long as i can remember.

[Matt Trump]

CBS has admitted to Sports Illustrated that "Cinderallas are nice for a little bit". The ratings for the Final 4 dropped last year when George Mason was in it so now the committee has pressure from CBS to keep things interesting. So they put all the upset potential against each other and giving bids and better seeds to the known names who have national appeal. Its a joke but until the Valley gets on CBS, ESPN, and ABC every weekend we're stuck with it.

[ceaser150]

What bothers me most is that they are trying to pass this off as a fair and legit process. They have the best sporting event in the world and they are screwing it up. At least with college football everyone goes in knowing it is corrupt and only the big boys will play for a championship. They call their championship the "BCS championship game" which tells you up front it is only the BCS conferences playing for the championship.

[SteinPizza]

The other thing (and the most important thing to note here) is that when non-BCS teams win multiple games in the NCAA's...it takes money away from the BCS schools...and they don't like that. This (what they did with selections this year) is what they're doing to retaliate.

The only fair thing to do...is to use a computer ranking system (RPI...Sagarin) NOT THE POLLS, to rank at-large teams. The NCAA finds it perfectly ok to use a computer to choose the #1 and #2 teams who play for the National Championship in football...but GOD FORBID they allow the computers to do their work for 34 at-large teams into the NCAA's. It's hypocritical...at best...and down right cheating at it's core.

Well said 2317. While I think that "retaliation" might be too strong a word, there's really no other logical way to look at the selections this year vs. last. Your point that monetary issues came into play is probably accurate too, although the committee and the NCAA would never admit it.

Regarding a software driven ranking system, it would have to be easier to do in basketball than football due to the larger base of games from which to draw comparisons. That makes legit rankings of the teams vs. each other far more valid than in footbal, IMO.