• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

NCAA Selection Process and Bubble Team

S

socaldeac

Well-known member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
99
Although the Deacons did not make the NCAA field, I’m looking forward to seeing how a lot of the bubble teams, Big Ten teams, and ACC teams do in the tournament. In my opinion, the Deacs definitely pass the eye test as an NCAA team, and I’m surprised how poorly the ACC is perceived in 2022 from a historical context. I believe Wake has the highest winning percentage in the ACC since the field expanded to 64 not to make the tournament. It bewilders me that Michigan made the tournament. We had one common opponent UNC. UNC beat them by 20 and we beat UNC by 20. A team with a 17-14 record and head coach that punched another coach is in the tournament was selected. When looking at their schedule, it seems lots of Big Ten teams were ranked early in the season in the Top 25 and all played each other and lost and won to each other. I look forward to seeing how many of those 9 teams move on. I’m willing to bet the ACC gets as many teams into the Sweet 16, Great 8, and Final 4 as the Big Ten. Also, if you look at Va Tech’s road to the Sweet 16 it is brutal. Almost unfair. Lastly, it will be interesting to see if all the metrics used to say the ACC was not good, and other bubble teams were better than Wake prove to be right.
 
I'm gonna hold off on weighing in until Bud starts a thread with his thoughts
 
Kenpom.com and Barttorvik.com indicate which teams made the Dance in their present rankings. It makes analysis simple but unpleasant for our fanbase. Rutgers is simple the worse selection by any measure.
 
socaldeac said:
Although the Deacons did not make the NCAA field, I’m looking forward to seeing how a lot of the bubble teams, Big Ten teams, and ACC teams do in the tournament. In my opinion, the Deacs definitely pass the eye test as an NCAA team, and I’m surprised how poorly the ACC is perceived in 2022 from a historical context. I believe Wake has the highest winning percentage in the ACC since the field expanded to 64 not to make the tournament. It bewilders me that Michigan made the tournament. We had one common opponent UNC. UNC beat them by 20 and we beat UNC by 20. A team with a 17-14 record and head coach that punched another coach is in the tournament was selected. When looking at their schedule, it seems lots of Big Ten teams were ranked early in the season in the Top 25 and all played each other and lost and won to each other. I look forward to seeing how many of those 9 teams move on. I’m willing to bet the ACC gets as many teams into the Sweet 16, Great 8, and Final 4 as the Big Ten. Also, if you look at Va Tech’s road to the Sweet 16 it is brutal. Almost unfair. Lastly, it will be interesting to see if all the metrics used to say the ACC was not good, and other bubble teams were better than Wake prove to be right.
Click to expand...

my balls, they itch
 
BlackjackMc said:
Kenpom.com and Barttorvik.com indicate which teams made the Dance in their present rankings. It makes analysis simple but unpleasant for our fanbase. Rutgers is simple the worse selection by any measure.
Click to expand...

Metrically yes. By quality wins they certainly aren't
 
I don't think there's a hill of beans of difference between the 10 seeds and about the first 8 teams left out, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. Maybe MI didn't deserve a bid or Rutgers, but that doesn't mean we did.

The problem with playing in a down ACC is we had fewer chances for a quality win. We basically had two shots in conference, both vs. Duke. LSU was a quality OOC game, also a loss. That's why we needed to do better in the ACCT, to give ourselves a chance for quality wins.
 
oklahoma and tamu should be pissed about rutgers for real
 
socaldeac said:
Although the Deacons did not make the NCAA field, I’m looking forward to seeing how a lot of the bubble teams, Big Ten teams, and ACC teams do in the tournament. In my opinion, the Deacs definitely pass the eye test as an NCAA team, and I’m surprised how poorly the ACC is perceived in 2022 from a historical context. I believe Wake has the highest winning percentage in the ACC since the field expanded to 64 not to make the tournament. It bewilders me that Michigan made the tournament. We had one common opponent UNC. UNC beat them by 20 and we beat UNC by 20. A team with a 17-14 record and head coach that punched another coach is in the tournament was selected. When looking at their schedule, it seems lots of Big Ten teams were ranked early in the season in the Top 25 and all played each other and lost and won to each other. I look forward to seeing how many of those 9 teams move on. I’m willing to bet the ACC gets as many teams into the Sweet 16, Great 8, and Final 4 as the Big Ten. Also, if you look at Va Tech’s road to the Sweet 16 it is brutal. Almost unfair. Lastly, it will be interesting to see if all the metrics used to say the ACC was not good, and other bubble teams were better than Wake prove to be right.
Click to expand...

ACC-BIG Challenge results say hello.
 
bcobbdeacs said:
ACC-BIG Challenge results say hello.
Click to expand...

Big Ten / ACC Challenge - 8 to 6 Big Ten wins challenge over ACC

Big Ten 9 teams in NCAA
ACC 5 teams in NCAA


Hard to swallow several teams with 17 wins and 14 losses or below 500 in their league get in over Wake.
 
Our fan base needs to absolutely stop referencing COY and POY when stating why WFU should be in the tourney. COY and POY have nothing to do with selection criteria. Nothing.
 
Dkin said:
Our fan base needs to absolutely stop referencing COY and POY when stating why WFU should be in the tourney. COY and POY have nothing to do with selection criteria. Nothing.
Click to expand...

Agree. It’s just making other fanbases say they shouldn’t have won those honors. I’m thinking Alondes is probably feeling bad enough at the moment. Hope he doesn’t have to continue to listen to that also.
 
Last edited:
wsc8521s said:
Metrically yes. By quality wins they certainly aren't
Click to expand...

Rutgers was ranked #77 on NET, which factors in quality wins, bad losses, strength of schedule. That is the point of reference for the committee and is by far the worst of any at large team. That is in line with Kenpom (#74), Torvick (#76) and BPI (#74). Sagarin (#57) and SOR (#54) were little better. 9-10 in Quad 1/2, with 2 Quad 3 losses and a Quad 4 loss at home against mighty Lafayette. The committee goofed on Rutgers.
 
The committee cares more about a team’s ability to beat good teams than about whether they lost to bad teams. That makes sense when their job is to plan a tournament of good teams. And if Rutgers losses to a bad team (low major auto bid) then that’s a Cinderella story.
 
Last edited:
But, would the NCAAT Committee keep out a certain shade of blue team with our same top third finish ACC 13-7 record?! :mad:
 
morrison2951 said:
But, would the NCAAT Committee keep out a certain shade of blue team with our same top third finish ACC 13-7 record?! :mad:
Click to expand...

NO. But those teams bring eyeballs for the networks that foot the bill for the NCAA. You either need to be a big dog or a Cinderella.
 
Notre Dame takes down Rutgers. ACC#2 beats BIG 10 #5. Ridiculous that Michigan with its terrible record and Indiana sub 500 in league play got in over Wake. As tourney unfolds, I look forward to Big Ten not performing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top