FINALIZED 2017 Bracketology (11/26)

[trojansc]

I decided to do some extra research and see if the committee has ever done anything in consistency with their High Point decision. I couldn't find anyone with a similar resume who got in. Everyone else was left out. Here's some interesting history on teams with BETTER RPI's that got left out of the tournament in favor of teams with a WORSE RPI.

2016
----
47 Temple was left out for 48 Southern California.

2015
----

42 Baylor, 43 Boise State, 44 Wyoming, 47 Pittsburgh all left out of the tournament.
45 Northern Iowa, 46 Arizona, 48 Oregon, 49 TCU, 51 Kansas State, 54 Michigan State all made it into the tournament.

2014
----
42 SMU, 44 Ohio, and 45 CSUN were left out of the tournament.
46 Santa Clara, 47 Seton Hall, and 48 Michigan State got in.

2013
----
37 Tulsa (0-top 50 victories) was left out of the tournament.
43 Butler, 47 UCLA were also left ouf ot he tournament.

48 Colorado, 49 Arizona State, 51 Miami-Florida all got at-large bids.

2012
----
NCAA committe went straight by RPI. All had significant victories.
46 LMU as the cut.

2011
----
48 Ohio State and 49 Arizona jumped 47 Kansas with better victories.
All other at-larges had good victories.

2010
----

The committee went straight by RPI, but it made sense.
47 SMU didn't get in (0 top 50 wins) but everybody above them did, and all those teams had top 50 wins.

2009
----

46 Delaware/ 47 North Dakota State didn't get in (0 top-50 victories)
55 Washington State got in, 58 Clemson got in

Clemson had 0 top 25 victories, but 3 top 50 victories

2008
----
45 Creighton (1-top 50 win) didn't get in.
50 Tennessee and 51 Iowa State both got in.

2007
----

37 Tulane was left out with just 1 top 50 victory.
51 Santa Clara and 52 Illinois State both got in.

2006
----
All at-large teams had a Top 50 win except AQ's.

2005
----

40 Albany only had one top 50 victory, and got left out.
53 LMU, 59 Texas A&M, 62 Kentucky all made it into the tournament.

2004
----
41 Marquette and 44 Alabama were left out of the tournament. 0 top 50 wins
54 Kansas 56 Loyola Marymount, 58 UC Irvine made it into the tournament.
(LMU had 3 t50, UC Irvine had just two top 50)


2003
----

43 Wisconsin-Mliwaukee was left out of the tournament. 0 top 50 wins
50 Saint Mary's, 53 San Francisco, 63 Northwestern got at-large bids.


2002
----

The strange thing that occured this year was the biggest blunder probably in NCAA history. Eastern Washington, 27 RPI, left out of the tournament with 3 top 50 wins. Other teams got in with worse RPI's and just 1 or 2 top 50 wins.

2001
----

47 UConn was left out. 0 top 50 wins
49 San Diego, 51 Minnesota, 52 BYU, 60 Arkansas all got in with more wins.

[ProfessorPlum]

Let it go man! Let it go!

We all appreciate your work. It’s amazing...much love! But sometimes, life ain’t fair!

The entire system they use or propose to use is imperfect...so deviating from an imperfect system maybe inconsistent and it may be frustrating to some...but it’s still just imperfect. It’s also imperfect when you get them all right, or that they let 10 AQ teams in that have absolutely no chance of getting past 20 in any set.

[brybast]

Nov 29, 2017 21:41:53 GMT -5 trojansc said:

I decided to do some extra research and see if the committee has ever done anything in consistency with their High Point decision. I couldn't find anyone with a similar resume who got in. Everyone else was left out. Here's some interesting history on teams with BETTER RPI's that got left out of the tournament in favor of teams with a WORSE RPI.

Fascinating to see this history. Thanks for doing the research. Others might call you borderline-obsessive, but I call you informative

It just goes to show, different committees do different things. This year was one of those outlier data points in terms of letting in High Point.

So what was more egregious in your view, snubbing Eastern Washington in 2002 or letting in High Point in 2017?

[trollhunter]

I'm with you on this one Trojansc!
In a single elim tournament the most important thing is deciding who gets in. Not seeding, nor brackets, not who loses in what round.

North Texas, Maryland (and Dayton) not only got robbed of due recognition for their strong season, but also of the small chance of going on a Cinderella run. They all proved they can beat higher ranked teams and could do so again in NCAA tournament. HPU has not proven anything of that sort.

[ProfessorPlum]

Come on Trojan,
You laugh at me about LSU & UGA and you are going to let him slide Dayton in there. Dayton was 2-8 versus Top 100 with only 1 Top 50 Win. I don’t get the HP thing either but there are a handful of teams more qualified than Dayton this year imho.

[BeachbytheBay]

Nov 30, 2017 0:34:18 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Nov 30, 2017 0:28:37 GMT -5 ProfessorPlum said:

Come on Trojan,
You laugh at me about LSU & UGA and you are going to let him slide Dayton in there. Dayton was 2-8 versus Top 100 with only 1 Top 50 Win. I don’t get the HP thing either but there are a handful of teams more qualified than Dayton this year imho.

I would take LSU for sure ahead of Dayton. They both had the same best win, but LSU beat a lot of teams 51-100. Georgia vs. Dayton is a tough argument because Georgia lost to High Point while Dayton beat them, and Dayton had a better RPI. By NCAA Standards, Dayton the better at-large profile. I think Georgia is the better team via the eye-test. I fully expect Georgia to be an NCAA-team next year. I'm a big LMU fan - and that made me a big Tom Black fan. He's already had an immediate impact at Georgia.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Black @ USC in a couple years, if Haley hangs on for another year or two.