Saturday, March 12, 2011

Lawrence Welk is calling

This is still a NCAA tournament team.  The committee might see it otherwise, but they have never left a major conference team with 21 wins, sub-40 RPI and SOS and a winning record in conference out.  LSU in 2004 was the highest major conference team left out at 37, but they had a SOS in the 40s, 18 wins and were below .500 in conference after losing thier opening round SEC tournament game to South Carolina by a bundle. 

Looking around, Michigan State probably has gotten in with the win over Purdue.  I am not as convinced about Colorado, but think they have a shot.  Clemson and Michigan probably have to win one more to feel good about their chances. 

Looking at it differently, look at these three teams:

Team A Team B Team C
W-L 22-10 21-11 20-12
Conf* 13-6 10-8 10-8
RPI  43 39 46
SOS 45 39 36
Qual win 7 5 7
Bad loss 2 0 1
*Conf records include conference tournaments

Maybe conference record means that much.  Team A is UCLA and is on everyone's lock list.  Team B is Georgia and is generally regarded to be bubbly.  Team C is Boston College, another very bubbly team.  All three lost to teams 'below' them in the NCAA pecking order in their respective conference tourneys.  UCLA in the first round of the Pac-10, picking up their second bad loss in a 17 point loss to 15-17 Oregon.  Boston College to Clemson, who is now in the discussion with an RPI of 60 and 21 wins.  Oh, BC got pwn'ed by 23 and was never in it.  

I am trying really hard to be objective.  I will freely admit that if Georgia doesn't make the tournament, there are reasons to leave them out.  However, I say there are more reasons to include them than to leave them out.  Looking at the teams that are bubble teams, Georgia is at or near the top of the heap.  I realize it there is more to this than simply looking at these three teams, but if it comes down to these three for two spots, I like Georgia's chances.  Same goes for Georgia vs. Colorado, Clemson, Michigan, Cleveland State or Colorado State.

Am I nervous? Of course.  Do I think I'll write a post on Sunday night about Georgia getting screwed? No.   Regretfully, the team has left it to a committee of the NCAA to decide, instead of locking it up. 


  1. From what all the radio talking heads have been saying for the last few weeks is that the selection committee doesn't look at conference records. I'm not sure why or would even know where to look to verify it, but would think that it plays slightly in our favor.

  2. I think they look at the following stats in no particular order of importance: win-loss, good wins, bad losses, rpi, and sos. I only added the conference records to illustrate that those teams didn't have a better argument for having more wins while playing in a tougher conference.

    Clearly, the Alabama thing demonstrated that as well.

    Appreciate you bringing that up.