I promised myself I wouldn’t go and fire off a post last night, even though, as Cass might be quick to tell you, some of my best work stems from fiery emotion. I’ve had a full day to stew on it, and I’ve decided to let my rage run amok. In 1611 words or less.
UC and A.K. got screwed over. Period.
Let’s examine. (There’s a typo down there; in actuality, NC St. was 22-9 on the year)
Here is the quick-and-dirty justification as to why we should have been in. Look at Cal, on the list above. Their biggest win this year is unquestionably at UCLA on New Year’s Eve, although they also beat Washington at home. Could UC have snoozed their way through the Pac-10 schedule and managed a .500 record against top 100 teams? Well, we did it against Big East competition. We had one loss outside the top 100 (Dayton in November). Cal has two, and lost to (11-17, RPI 180) Arizona St. just a month ago. We had more top 100 wins than they did, but, by merit of a (14-7) record in the illustrious Pac-10 (which contributed three other tournament teams (the Big East had eight others), they become a 7 seed, and we become (I suppose) a 13 seed, below Bradley & Air Force. Now, I don’t have a problem with them being seeded above us; they made their conference finals, and even though they got thumped, I wouldn’t be pissed if they were above us. But I do have a problem with being THAT far below. Next comparison. How about that college basketball powerhouse down south? UK has had a substandard year, I don’t care who you ask. Their record is 21-12. With a nearly identical RPI, going 9-12 against top 100 teams, and playing in a slightly weaker conference, I’ve got to think our tournament profiles were very, very similar. If the argument was our most recent performances, I offer this: UK was 5-5 in their last ten games, playing five ranked teams, beating one; UC was 5-5 as well, playing five ranked teams, also beating one (and losing to Syracuse and Villanova on last second plays). Kentucky’s an 8, and we’re out completely.
I’m not bitter, I just dig deeper. A huge factor underscored every year (and particularly in the last 3-5 years) for teams vying for tourney slots is scheduling good teams in the non-conference schedule. UC brought in Memphis, for CUSA old-time’s sake. We played LSU out in Vegas. We played OVC champs Murray St., and Ohio, who was supposed to be a lot better than they turned out to be this year. There were certainly cupcakes scattered amongst the rest of our pre-conference games, and that’s one reason we were 13-2 when Kirkland got hurt.
Which leads us to the next point of discussion. A big case has been made out of us going 6-10 since then (including the loss in that game to UConn). We’ve also played EIGHT ranked teams since then. Which isn’t counting our 17-point win in the Carrier Dome, by the way. Would Kirkland have helped us nip Villanova or picked us up when we went cold at Seton Hall? Maybe. Does he make us better? Deeper, anyway, and when he wasn’t playing soft (driving to the rim, following shots, playing defense), he was great for us. But did the ‘Cats play well against tough Big East competition? I’d say they did, in every game except at Georgetown. Syracuse at home wasn’t pretty, either.
Let’s move on to the whole RPI/MVC/CAA debacle. The RPI formula was changed this year, assigning more value to road wins. The whole point of this was to encourage teams like Pitt, who perennially doesn’t leave their own state until the New Year, to get out more. While it rewarded teams who went on the road, counting them as 1.4 wins, what it also did was penalize teams who lost at home (counting them as 1.4 losses), regardless of the opponent. So, by playing Memphis at home, we actually set ourselves up to get hurt. Had we won, it would have been worth less than half of what Memphis got (0.6 wins for a home victory). These mid-major conference teams have all benefited from this new change. How? By winning at home and playing road games the rest of the time. Think about it this way. A team that goes 6-9 on the road is considered to be (8.4-5.4) by the new RPI. If a team goes 15-4 at home, they’re considered (9.0-5.6). Those teams? Bradley and UC.
Seriously, does that make sense? The old RPI gave a bonus for road wins, which is good, but a penalty for all home games? A team who is 11 games over .500 at home is considered to be less than four over? Seems a bit severe to me. But, the RPI is only one tool, and Craig Littlepage, the selection committee chair, said it was definitely not the end-all deciding factor. That’s fine, and I have to agree it shouldn’t be.
But I ain’t done. I know Cass and Brice and several others have navigated away by now, and that’s why I can get down to the juicy bits.
Seton Hall’s in, we’re not. Seton Hall beat us heads-up two weeks ago at their place. Good work. It’s a good win for them, for sure. We bounce back, beating West Virginia, and then losing our Big East tournament game by the slimmest of margins against a team who streaked through the rest of the Big East tournament. Seton Hall played St. John’s (12-15) and South Florida (7-22) twice each during the season. And lost to Rutgers in their first Big East tournament game. By 13. After scoring 19 points in the first half.
But get this. Littlepage said, and I wouldn’t shit you on this, that the Syracuse loss is not� is NOT what kept us out of the field. �No, no,� he said, �we looked at every aspect of the body of work, [�] we try not to put that much importance on one individual game.�
So I went over all of these factors in my head. And asked myself what else could possibly be keeping us out. I believe it’s a combination of several things. The tournament selection committee decided that, since they were making history by allowing eight Big East teams in, they shouldn’t be allowing any beyond that. They needed a team to leave out. And a team who had things they could point to in their defense. After demoting George Washington so harshly for their A10 tournament loss and an injury to one of their big guys, I believe someone on the committee decided to point the same finger at Armein. However, I don’t believe the choice between us and Seton Hall was as simple as our head-to-head game, no matter what anyone says.
For the record, while I wrote this as a reasonably-biased UC fan, my outrage at teams like George Mason and Air Force getting in extends to at least one other team — Maryland. They got screwed too, if you ask me. Go compare them to Arizona, if you’re interested. Michigan, however, didn’t get screwed. They played themselves out of a bid; after starting 16-3, they lost 7 out of 9 coming in.
I’m not done, though. This is where it gets real shady. Real shady indeed. On August 17th of last year, the NCAA purchased the NIT. The basketball tournament that is the Mad TV of live comedy. I always notice that it’s on, same as Mad TV, but it’s always teams who won’t be vying for the national title and, quite honestly, I couldn’t tell you any of the last five NIT champions. Nor, I’m guessing could anyone who didn’t attend the universities that won them. Wow, it really is like Mad TV. For the record, those teams are, according to infoplease.com, Tulsa, Memphis, St. John’s, Michigan, and South Carolina.
But now that the NCAA owns this tournament, I’d expect to see lots more big name schools on the bubble get the finger. How, my dear readers, do you get people to watch a tournament that nobody really cares to watch? It’s simple. Put big-name schools in there who have rabid alumni and fan bases. They announce that they’re making things better for everyone, by bringing in the regular-season champions in leagues who may not have won their conference tournaments� and appease the media by bringing more mid-majors into the Big Dance (you won’t have to tune out when George Mason/Bradley/Air Force/some other MVC team is getting killed, because there’ll be three other games on you’ll be feverishly switching between, checking your brackets). The early-round NIT games nobody cares about are hosted by the higher ranked team, so they can cash in on an additional home game or two while everyone else is watching the Dance, and the “Sweaty Sixteen” (I don’t think anybody calls it that; I just made it up) games that feature decent matchups are played early next week. Know why? Because the Big Dance is on intermission until next Thursday. That’s not stupid; it’s good business sense.
However, if teams are being left out of the NCAAs just because the committee can find a reason for them to be an NIT draw� that’s not business sense, it’s a conflict of interest. Look for big schools to continue to be left out in favor of mid-majors who can cobble together any reason to be in.
Just two more words outta me, and I’m done.
Hire A.K.
