WHAT??!!!

[JK]

Looks like the Lone Star State may have as many as EIGHT teams representing it when the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee finishes doing their thing. Baylor, Texas and Texas Tech are in - - no doubt about that. But has anybody noticed what's quietly been going on while we've been emerged in "Civil War II - The Battles of the Big XII North and South?"

As is normally the case, the SFA Ladyjacks continue their dominance of the Southland Conference and stand at 21-5 while riding a 13-game winning streak. Barring an upset loss during the conference tourney, we'll definitely see them in the Big Dance.

Heading south to the Bayou City of Houston, a couple of sleepers lay waiting for their opportunity to make the nation stand up and recognize!!! The UofH Lady Cougars and their do-it-all superstar sophomore guard Chandi Jones, have wrapped up the second seed in the CUSA Tourney while compiling a 21-6 record to date. The "Ladies in Red" are 8-2 in their last ten games played, and are listed in the "Others Receiving...." in both the AP and ESPN/USA Today Polls. I do feel, however, to see them dancing in the NCAA's they will need to win the CUSA Tourney.

Just across HWY 288 a short distance sits the Lady Owls of Rice University. At 19-7, they are in need of a BIG SHOWING at the WAC Tournament. They do, however, have some big victories over such ranked opponents as George Washington, La Tech, and defending National Champ Notre Dame. Rice is also listed in the "Others Receiving..." category of the ESPN/USA Today Poll, and are 7-3 in their last ten games played.

Heading back to the Northern portion of the state, TCU continues to impress with the big turnaround in their program. The Lady Frogs are 22-5 on the season, are 9-1 in their last ten, and stand as the #1 Seed in the CUSA Tourney having won the regular-season title. Should they fall in the Conference Tourney, I still see them as a LOCK for the NCAA's.

Now for perhaps the biggest surprise of them all, the Lady Eagles of the University of North Texas. Standing at 18-7, UNT is in a good position to propel itself into post-season play after having claimed the Western Division of the Sun Belt Conference. The Lady Eagles are 9-1 in their last ten games played, and are listed in the "Others Receiving..." category of the ESPN/USA Today Poll. A conference tourney title would certainly put them into March Madness, and would be a momumental step in putting themselves on the map! Coach Tina Slinker has done a GREAT job with this program.

[JK]

p.s. Anybody who thinks I only care about Texas schools, read my posting on the "Calling all Okies" topic.

http://hoopscoop.net/ubb/smile.gif

[swok34]

I read your post, JK and I loved it....

I was looking through the different schools on the RPI list today and noticed Houston's, TCU....

there is actually a school that has not won a single ballgame:

the Sacramento State Hornets are 0-25

[two cents]

I noticed this pattern also, JK. In general, I'm happy about it with one caveat. TCU happens to be one of those high RPI (24) mid major teams that could steal a host site away from the Big12 if they roll through their conference tournament. In particular, they could steal a host site from Texas Tech. Although Tech will finish the season with a higher RPI, they will also finish with more losses and a fairly low conference standing. I can easily see the committee flipping the two teams making TCU a #4 and Tech a #5 to avoid giving 6 or 7 host sites to the Big12. Giving so many host sites to this conference is easy to justify analytically but not politcally. They would probably figure the Tech alumni in the metroplex would fill the seats, and it would be a short trip for Tech, almost as good as a home game. I have to admit that if Tech is going to be shipped, this would be as good a place as any, but I would rather the first two games be on the home court. I will root for TCU against non-Big12 teams in the NCAA's, but in their conference tournament, I hope they lose quickly and messily. Louisiana Tech is another regional thorn in the side.

The Texas Tech subregional was the biggest money producer in the tournament last year. Even with the alumni base, lower ticket prices and a smaller facility would prevent TCU from producing as much profit. I hope the selection committee focuses on RPI, SOS, and top 25 record with an occasional side glance at the ole financial coffers.

[dem]

Would the Committee actually take a team with an RPI of 24, ranked 23/25 in the polls, 0-1 against top-30 teams, whose biggest wins of the season are over #31 Cincinnati and #33 Arkansas, and seed them ABOVE a team like Texas Tech that has an RPI of 11, is ranked 15/15 in the polls, and has a 4-6 record against top-16 teams?

I don't know the answer to this, I'm just asking. I don't think they've done anything like this the past two years. Would they now?

[schooner2]

I could just from the standpoint of conference record. I remember a couple years back - wasn't it LSU that really got robbed in they were left out of the NCAA Tourney because they were either .500 or below in the SEC. And that was a good LSU team with some quality wins. And we are just talking about hosting here - not getting into the NCAA Tourney. So, I can see the selection committee feeling that too many teams hosting from one conference is not a good thing. I disagree with it, but I can see it happen.

[swok34]

I think it was Florida that got robbed 2 years ago......they thought they did...they were even on the ESPN "seeding" show.

they had finished 17-12 in the regular season and 6-8 in conference play. That year, the committee put in Vanderbilt who also were 6-8 in conference play, but 20-12 overall.

Florida's rank at the time was 22 and SOS was 6. Vandy was up at #15 with SOS of 5. Basically that year, all Top 48 teams RPI-wise went to the NCAA's....the exceptions were Florida and Kentucky (both SEC)......
www.collegerpi.com (http://www.collegerpi.com) has history back to the 1999-2000 season and in the past 2 seasons, you can look back and see who went to the tourney and who didn't......pretty cool.

[JK]

I can certainly understand the concerns. I feel sort of in a similar situation with UT. Should we be one of the top four seeds in a region? Absolutely! But will we? That worries me. As far as Tech is concerned, it would be a terrible injustice should they get shafted out of hosting also. Tech has good wins over teams like Vandy, Baylor, ISU, Wisconsin, and UT. I just hope the selection committee looks at our conference and realizies the quality as it is reflected in the polls. For once, I feel like the polls are somewhat accurate. We stand at #13, which is right about where I feel we should be. I can't really argue much about who is ranked ahead or behind us either. Can we beat most of the teams ahead of us? Obviously, we can. However, we can easily lose to some teams ahead of us and behind us as well. I sure hope the selection committee recognizes the parity of the Big XII, and doesn't screw our conference out of the credit it deserves!!!

[Big12Bear]

JK, I was thinking about the same possibilities the other day when I saw collegerpi had Rice and UH included in their mythical bracket.

TCU and UH are 1-2 in CUSA. I think if Rice makes the WAC Finals vs LA Tech, they'll get it. That would likely involve beating Hawaii. UNT is 41-4 their last 4 years at home. They have quietly put together a good program. I expect them and SFA to each win their respective conference tourneys. UNT might just get in anyways.

8 teams would be an amazing feat. http://hoopscoop.net/ubb/smile.gif

[two cents]

dem,

I agree that there would be no merit to the decision, if it were made. To reduce the political heat of giving too many seeds to one conference, they might do it for the intangibles I cited. If they didn't think it would hurt Tech too much pragmatically, they might consider it a slight flip in seeds. Like you, I hope they stand fast to the principles that have been applied in the past. In Tech's case that would include an emphasis on the voluntary (non-conference) strength of schedule. Tech did not shy away from tough opponents. Some were not as tough as anticipated, but they were much tougher than what TCU chose to face, and were strong enough to leave Tech with a #2 SOS at season's end. On another thread, you mentioned Debbie Antonelli's remarks. I was happy to hear what she said and I will respond on that thread.

swok,

I think it happened to LSU once as well a little further back in years. But your point is well taken about Florida and Kentucky two years ago. I thought long and hard about the SEC and those teams two years ago when I was trying to guess the bracket in advance of the committee. These last couple of years, thanks in large part to Palm's site, I've started to get a handle on some of the things the committee does. On the "Seeds Sown" thread, I mentioned that other SEC teams have been able to benefit from the jacked up RPI's of Tennessee. Those two teams were prime examples of that. Tennessee earns their RPI with scheduling; other teams derive the mathematical benefit without doing anything to merit it. That particular year, Georgia boosted the others as well.

The details of the math are too complicated to mess with here, but one point is glaringly obvious. Tennessee's RPI that year was .7298. Connecticut's was .7099. That's a pretty big discrepancy for these types of calculations. Georgia's was .6939. Penn State was next in the ordinal ranking at .6580. That's a huge dropoff if you look at the remainder of the list. These numbers are essentially the tail of a bell curve. As good as UConn was that year (the best team in fact), their RPI got a nice boost from playing UT twice. This may be an unspoken reason for dropping one of the UConn games each year. If UT continues to schedule and win as they have done, they are virtually guaranteed a #1 RPI each year which will get them a #1 seed.

Florida was a #22 RPI that year, but they were 1-11 against top 25 opposition. Kentucky was a #31 RPI and only 2-10 against top 25 opposition. Their RPI's were grossly inflated by each having played four games against Tennessee and Georgia. The committee recognized the mathematical distortion and discounted the RPI's for UF and UK. I do not know, but I strongly suspect that the committee can have a team's RPI calculated with a filter (e.g. w/o Tennessee). If so, their RPI's probably didn't look so bright under the filtered light.

All of the Big12 teams this year earned their numbers legitimately. There are no wacky RPI outliers in our conference. All of the top 7 teams have decent to very good top 25 records. We should be in good shape from OU thru Tech if the committee follows its own analytical precedents, but will they. That's why on another thread I said I would have to construct two sets of seedings this year for comparison.

Originally, I wrote some of my observations on committee practices on the "Seeds Sown" thread in response to a good question by dem. I intended to elaborate further on that same thread. Now, I've spread my point of view onto several different threads instead of consolidating it. Oh well. I hope some of it is useful. I understand what fans of various schools are going through in attempting to understand committee machinations, as I've tried to figure out the same stuff for many years as it has related to Tech.

[This message has been edited by two cents (edited 02-27-2002).]

[JK]

You must have read my mind about the VOLUNTARY strength of schedule. Over the past few days, I've wondered if anybody takes into consideration the teams that you chose to play versus the ones that you have to play! If they do, there's no way we wouldn't get seven teams with top four seedings and hosting first round games. My question now is, which of us will get put in the same region and possibly face one another for a second, third, or maybe fourth time this year?!!!

[swok34]

I really appreciate your points, two cents......I wouldn't have a clue how to draw up a bracket and you sound as you've done some very knowledgeable research.....

[two cents]

JK,

In the past they have rewarded non-conference SOS. In fact, in their "defense of the brackets" to the media they have hammered home this point, "strength of schedule....strength of schedule...strength of schedule." They have tried to make coaches around the country understand its significance. Last year, just referring to our own conference the selection committee included Texas in the field with a losing conference record. Texas (7-9) was a full 3 games behind Missouri (10-6) in the conference standings, lost head to head, and had a comparable top 25 record to Mizzou. The committee awarded UT a higher seed than UM. The justification was the Longhorns' higher RPI (26 vs. 42) and SOS (11 vs. 56). In my mind this was wholly justifiable in their effort to urge conferences and teams around the country to become more competitive. They have been pretty stubborn about it, but this year will test their resolve. It also gives them an opportunity to prove they are very serious about it.

I also hope they keep the Big12 teams bracketed away from each other until the Elite Eight.

[This message has been edited by two cents (edited 02-27-2002).]

[mred]

Originally posted by two cents:
I also hope they keep the Big12 teams bracketed away from each other until the Elite Eight.



Seeding guidelines recommend this. I bet the only way that two Big XII teams could face off before the Elite Eight is if they have to (like if we have a #1 seed and all 4 #4 seeds, or if we have 5 total #2 and #3 seeds.)

Quoted from http://www.ncaa.org/library/handbooks/basketball/2002/2002_d1_w_basketball.pdfthe WBB Div I NCAA Tournament handbook</a>:

There shall be no restriction as to the number of teams selected from one conference on an at-large basis. The committee will attempt to place only one conference representative in each of the four sections within a region. In addition, the committee will attempt to format the bracket to prevent two teams from the same conference from competing against each other before a regional final game.