Selection Sunday with reactions

[WTSooner]

Maybe, but Virginia/FAU/Colorado/Dayton all played more Q3 and Q4 games than OU. There's no consistency in the selection process, and that's the point.

That's not how it works.

Good Lord!

 

[IndySooner]

That's not how it works.

Good Lord!

No one knows how it works. That's the point.

 

[TINY]

That's not how it works.

Good Lord!

It works however the committee wants it to work. They went completely off the rails this year.

A committee is the only form of life with multiple bellies and no brain.

 

[Maverick008]

Cool, so two bubble teams, one with 20 and one with 19. Like I said, win more than 20 if you want off the bubble.

Legit question, are 9's considered bubble teams? I would think that Mich St and A&M would have been 10's if that far onto the bubble? It almost seems like those 3 were comfortably in with the seedings they had and they all had similar records to OU with potentially worse losses. Not trying to start an argument just trying to figure out how the committee viewed those 3 teams vs OU.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Legit question, are 9's considered bubble teams? I would think that Mich St and A&M would have been 10's if that far onto the bubble? It almost seems like those 3 were comfortably in with the seedings they had and they all had similar records to OU with potentially worse losses. Not trying to start an argument just trying to figure out how the committee viewed those 3 teams vs OU.

I think that this year, because of bid thieves, the 9 seeds were closer to the bubble than usual. They still had a little buffer since there are essentially six 10-seeds this year, but I think both probably would have been in at least a little trouble if they lost in the first round of their tourneys, like we did.

 

[WTSooner]

I think that this year, because of bid thieves, the 9 seeds were closer to the bubble than usual. They still had a little buffer since there are essentially six 10-seeds this year, but I think both probably would have been in at least a little trouble if they lost in the first round of their tourneys, like we did.

This.

 

[TEvans4Three]

Legit question, are 9's considered bubble teams? I would think that Mich St and A&M would have been 10's if that far onto the bubble? It almost seems like those 3 were comfortably in with the seedings they had and they all had similar records to OU with potentially worse losses. Not trying to start an argument just trying to figure out how the committee viewed those 3 teams vs OU.

'It depends' is the answer.

Bubble teams would be the teams that are LAST FOUR BYES, LAST FOUR IN, FIRST FOUR OUT, LAST FOUR OUT. Those are the bubble teams.

So, according to the committee the FOR SURE bubble teams were:

(IN)
-Drake (10-seed)
-Nevada (10-seed)
-Colorado St (Play-In) (10)
-Virginia (Play-In) (10)
-Boise St (Play-In) (10)
-Colorado (Play-In) (10)
------------------------------
(OUT)
-Oklahoma
-Seton Hall
-Indiana St
-Pittsburgh


We can't make any assumptions about 9-seeds bc we just don't know which 2 are bubble and which 2 are safe at-large additions. (Unless it is posted somewhere, please correct me if so)

TCU, Mich St, Northwestern, and Texas A&M are the 9 seeds. Two of them were bubble selections on the LAST FOUR BYES and two were ahead. So 2 mysterious 9-seeds are official bubblers.

 

[MJSooner]

'It depends' is the answer.

Bubble teams would be the teams that are LAST FOUR BYES, LAST FOUR IN, FIRST FOUR OUT, LAST FOUR OUT. Those are the bubble teams.

So, according to the committee the FOR SURE bubble teams were:

(IN)
-Drake (10-seed)
-Nevada (10-seed)
-Colorado St (Play-In) (10)
-Virginia (Play-In) (10)
-Boise St (Play-In) (10)
-Colorado (Play-In) (10)
------------------------------
(OUT)
-Oklahoma
-Seton Hall
-Indiana St
-Pittsburgh


We can't make any assumptions about 9-seeds bc we just don't know which 2 are bubble and which 2 are safe at-large additions. (Unless it is posted somewhere, please correct me if so)

TCU, Mich St, Northwestern, and Texas A&M are the 9 seeds. Two of them were bubble selections on the LAST FOUR BYES and two were ahead. So 2 mysterious 9-seeds are official bubblers.

From the NCAA 1-68 seeding, I believe the order of #9 seeds would be MSU, A&M, TCU, and Northwestern. Ten seeds would be Nevada, Boise St, Colorado, Drake, Virginia, New Mexico, (Oregon), and Colorado St. Not sure why Boise got a play in game over Drake as they are #38 vs Drake's #40 overall seeding.

 

[WichitaSooner]

From the NCAA 1-68 seeding, I believe the order of #9 seeds would be MSU, A&M, TCU, and Northwestern. Ten seeds would be Nevada, Boise St, Colorado, Drake, Virginia, New Mexico, (Oregon), and Colorado St. Not sure why Boise got a play in game over Drake as they are #38 vs Drake's #40 overall seeding.

Drake can't be in the play-in because they are an AQ. Only the AQs on the 16 line are eligible for play-in games.

 

[TEvans4Three]

Drake can't be in the play-in because they are an AQ. Only the AQs on the 16 line are eligible for play-in games.

Thanks for that correction on my missed research.

 

[lmg088]

Hate to revive this thread, but looking at Alabama's schedule and results makes me question all of this selection nonsense.

They are very similar in record (21-11), lost basically all their ranked games, were blown out in games, very similar Quad 1 record (4-10) and finished pretty poorly (not as bad as us, but they basically gave up playing defense). They just have a lot higher SOS for playing some top ranked games early ( all losses) and not having the extreme low ranked teams before conference play that drag SOS down. Their best win was beating Auburn.

I'll admit I hadn't really watched them for the "eye test" but how are they ranked 19 and received a 4 seed?

 

[WichitaSooner]

Hate to revive this thread, but looking at Alabama's schedule and results makes me question all of this selection nonsense.

They are very similar in record (21-11), lost basically all their ranked games, were blown out in games, very similar Quad 1 record (4-10) and finished pretty poorly (not as bad as us, but they basically gave up playing defense). They just have a lot higher SOS for playing some top ranked games early ( all losses) and not having the extreme low ranked teams before conference play that drag SOS down. Their best win was beating Auburn.

I'll admit I hadn't really watched them for the "eye test" but how are they ranked 19 and received a 4 seed?

Their resume isn’t that similar to ours at all. They have 7 wins against the field, while we had 2. They also played an unreal noncon. Their NET is 9 to our 46. KenPom 15 to 43. Third best offense in the country.