ballcoach15 wrote:The Kentucky coach was 100 percent correct in his comments. I have never been a KY fan but I loved what he said. The Syracuse COACH begged all week and wad rewarded. He kept saying They had 2 wins over top 20 teams. Heck Virginia Tech beat 2 top 10 teams. They did not get a bid.
The committee has integrity problem. They say one thing and do another. If anyone not believe this listen to what Kentucky coach said in interview.
Needs to be more transparency and a concrete set of criteria that doesn't change for each team or seed or year to year. Need basketball people on the committee, not a bunch of administrators without a background in basketball because the current committee is clueless.
How is a team supposed to schedule non-conference to increase their chances at an at-large bid when they have no clue what they are going to be judged on every year?
Also need people who understand the kind of world the mid majors operate in. According to Pomeroy, winning on the road against the #200 team is as difficult as defeating the #75 team at home. Committee keeps sighting Monmouth's three losses on the road to teams ranked below 200. So Monmouth was supposed to go 16-1 in their conference to get an at large? Only three teams in the entire country finished with less than two losses within conference. That's not the least bit reasonable of an expectation. And their non-conference loss at Army, in that game Army was actually the favorite going into the game based on the Pomeroy metrics. So they're getting punished for losing a game they were supposed to lose and not being nearly flawless in conference in the regular season.
--Fumble (1961-2009), RIP
(Id throw the headshaker in as well if I could find it)
- By Purple Haize
- By ATrain
- By TH Spangler
- By thepostman