PSU a 16 seed

[EverettGriz]

8 schools in the tourney had a lower RPI than PSU.

One, Winthrop, got a 13 seed. Another, Georgia, got a 14 seed.

Pretty easy to see why Winthrop was seeded higher than PSU. Take a look at their schedule. They beat Georgia Tech, Old Dominion, #19 Miami. Add the fact they have NCAA appearances in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, it is pretty easy to see why the committee seeded them higher.

Agreed. But with 8 teams having lower RPIs, you really wouldn't expect a 16.

 

[Grizbacker1]

8 schools in the tourney had a lower RPI than PSU.

One, Winthrop, got a 13 seed. Another, Georgia, got a 14 seed.

Pretty easy to see why Winthrop was seeded higher than PSU. Take a look at their schedule. They beat Georgia Tech, Old Dominion, #19 Miami. Add the fact they have NCAA appearances in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, it is pretty easy to see why the committee seeded them higher.

Agreed. But with 8 teams having lower RPIs, you really wouldn't expect a 16.

Perhaps, but history of appearances combined with OOC wins makes a big difference. Also, most of the time there are more committee members from East of the Mississippi and although they deny it, there is some geographical bias.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Wow, is our Conference really this bad? I think PSU is much better than 16 seed.

3-23 in the dance since 1985? Yes. The BSC is not a conference that deserves much respect. Wasn't Weber the last team to win more than one game? In like 1996? Show? Harold the? Anyone?

 

[Hells bells]

Wow, is our Conference really this bad? I think PSU is much better than 16 seed.

3-23 in the dance since 1985? Yes. The BSC is not a conference that deserves much respect. Wasn't Weber the last team to win more than one game? In like 1996? Show? Harold the? Anyone?

i think that might have been either 1999 or 2000 :twocents:

1996 msu went to the big dance :twocents:

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Wow, is our Conference really this bad? I think PSU is much better than 16 seed.

3-23 in the dance since 1985? Yes. The BSC is not a conference that deserves much respect. Wasn't Weber the last team to win more than one game? In like 1996? Show? Harold the? Anyone?

i think that might have been either 1999 or 2000 :twocents:

1996 msu went to the big dance :twocents:

Thanks Hells. That's right. Syracuse, right? Or was it Umass? Were those the Danny Sprinkle days?

 

[Hells bells]

Wow, is our Conference really this bad? I think PSU is much better than 16 seed.

3-23 in the dance since 1985? Yes. The BSC is not a conference that deserves much respect. Wasn't Weber the last team to win more than one game? In like 1996? Show? Harold the? Anyone?

i think that might have been either 1999 or 2000 :twocents:

1996 msu went to the big dance :twocents:

Thanks Hells. That's right. Syracuse, right? Or was it Umass? Were those the Danny Sprinkle days?

yup he, holmstadt and henery were freshmen and it was syracuse. I belive syracuse made it to the final 4 that year. dissapointing game sprincle could not make a basket

 

[WyomingGrizFan]

Since 1995, according to Sportline:

2007 - #15 Weber St lost to #2 UCLA, 70 - 42 in the West Regional;
2006 - #12 Montana defeated #5 Nevada, 87 - 79 but lost to #4 Boston College, 69 - 56 in the Minneapolis Regional;
2005 - #16 Montana lost to #1 Washington, 88 - 77 in the Albuquerque Regional;
2004 - #15 Eastern Washington lost to #2 Oklahoma St., 75 - 56 in the East Rutherford Regional;
2003 - #12 Weber St lost to #5 Wisconsin, 81 - 74 in the Midwest Regional;
2002 - #15 Montana lost to #2 Oregon, 81 - 62 in the Midwest Regional;
2001 - #13 Cal. St-Northridge lost to #4 Kansas, 99 - 75 in the Midwest;
2000 - #15 NAU lost to #2 St. John's, 61 - 56 in the Western;
1999- #14 Weber St defeated #3 North Carolina, 76 - 74 then lost in overtime to #6 Florida 82 - 74 in the West Regional;
1998 - #15 NAU lost to #2 Cincinnati, 65 - 62 in the West Regional;
1997 - #16 Montana lost to #1 Kentucky, 92 - 64 in the West Regional;
1996 - #13 Montana St lost to #4 Syracuse, 88 - 55 in the West Regional;
1995 - #14 Weber St. defeated #3 Michigan St, 79 - 72 then lost to #6 Georgetown, 53 - 51 in the Southeastern Regional;

 

[grizindabox]

The RPI is a misleading system. Take for example Kentucky, they went to Vandy and lost a game by 40 but moved up 10-12 spots in the RPI. I believe it is based 50% on your record, 25% on your opponents record and 25% on their opponents record. The system fails to put weight into what teams you beat and what teams you lose to. Wintrop has more quality wins than the entire Big Sky by thimselves.

 

[PSUVikings]

1 word explains the PSU Board right now.....

Invasion.

 

[Grizbacker1]

The committee said they don't really look at RPI, then will cite RPI as a reason for omitting a team. Funny thing, teams with RPI's in the 30's were left out, while teams with RPI's in the high 50's were given an at large. Obviously RPI means jack.

The school that got srewed the worst was Arizona State. They had a better record than Arizona in the PAC 10, and beat them twice. Arizona got the nod because of their reputation and past history in the NCAA's.

 

[GrizBBIsKing]

for one thing, rpi isn't used for ranking. Mostly used when they are considering two teams and all other criteria used couldn't determine which order. When all other criteria considered didn't decide which order these two teams should be in, then they use RPI to use it. (that is supposedly how it works).

 

[Grizbacker1]

for one thing, rpi isn't used for ranking. Mostly used when they are considering two teams and all other criteria used couldn't determine which order. When all other criteria considered didn't decide which order these two teams should be in, then they use RPI to use it. (that is supposedly how it works).

They say they don't, so they really shouldn't cite it when they try and defend why they omit someone. They lose a lot of credibility that way. I do think this year was pretty easy, because the bubble teams were pretty soft anyway.

 

[dbackjon]

The committee said they don't really look at RPI, then will cite RPI as a reason for omitting a team. Funny thing, teams with RPI's in the 30's were left out, while teams with RPI's in the high 50's were given an at large. Obviously RPI means jack.

that is actually my bigger beef - they use the RPI as a defense when it suits their needs, but ignore it otherwise.

They also claim that past history (team or conference) has no bearing on whether or not a team is picked, or how it is seeded.

That is obviously a load of BS as well.

 

[dbackjon]

8 schools in the tourney had a lower RPI than PSU.

One, Winthrop, got a 13 seed. Another, Georgia, got a 14 seed.

Pretty easy to see why Winthrop was seeded higher than PSU. Take a look at their schedule. They beat Georgia Tech, Old Dominion, #19 Miami. Add the fact they have NCAA appearances in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, it is pretty easy to see why the committee seeded them higher.

The committee is not supposed to look at past history...

Beating the BCS schools helps - even if Ga Tech's RPI is the same as IUPUI, a team Portland State beat. The Miami win was big. ODU, not a high quality win - RPI not even in the top third.

 

[Grizbacker1]

8 schools in the tourney had a lower RPI than PSU.

One, Winthrop, got a 13 seed. Another, Georgia, got a 14 seed.

Pretty easy to see why Winthrop was seeded higher than PSU. Take a look at their schedule. They beat Georgia Tech, Old Dominion, #19 Miami. Add the fact they have NCAA appearances in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, it is pretty easy to see why the committee seeded them higher.

The committee is not supposed to look at past history...

Beating the BCS schools helps - even if Ga Tech's RPI is the same as IUPUI, a team Portland State beat. The Miami win was big. ODU, not a high quality win - RPI not even in the top third.

They are not supposed to do a lot of things, the problem is they can do anything they want inside that room. I don't really have much of a problem with the at large picks this year though. There have been far worse years.

 

[mporter]

8 schools in the tourney had a lower RPI than PSU.

One, Winthrop, got a 13 seed. Another, Georgia, got a 14 seed.

Pretty easy to see why Winthrop was seeded higher than PSU. Take a look at their schedule. They beat Georgia Tech, Old Dominion, #19 Miami. Add the fact they have NCAA appearances in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, it is pretty easy to see why the committee seeded them higher.

The committee is not supposed to look at past history...

Beating the BCS schools helps - even if Ga Tech's RPI is the same as IUPUI, a team Portland State beat. The Miami win was big. ODU, not a high quality win - RPI not even in the top third.

They are not supposed to do a lot of things, the problem is they can do anything they want inside that room. I don't really have much of a problem with the at large picks this year though. There have been far worse years.

The committee is similar to BSC officials. The bad call that you just saw is not as bad as some in the past, and there will be worse calls in the future. Given time, everyone will get the shaft at some point.

The at large selections this year aren't too bad. Oregon in the 9 spot is a head scratcher. :-\

 

[Grizbacker1]

Pretty easy to see why Winthrop was seeded higher than PSU. Take a look at their schedule. They beat Georgia Tech, Old Dominion, #19 Miami. Add the fact they have NCAA appearances in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, it is pretty easy to see why the committee seeded them higher.

The committee is not supposed to look at past history...

Beating the BCS schools helps - even if Ga Tech's RPI is the same as IUPUI, a team Portland State beat. The Miami win was big. ODU, not a high quality win - RPI not even in the top third.

They are not supposed to do a lot of things, the problem is they can do anything they want inside that room. I don't really have much of a problem with the at large picks this year though. There have been far worse years.

The committee is similar to BSC officials. The bad call that you just saw is not as bad as some in the past, and there will be worse calls in the future. Given time, everyone will get the shaft at some point.

The at large selections this year aren't too bad. Oregon in the 9 spot is a head scratcher. :-\

Good analogy. I am looking forward to seeing how Kansas decides to play Dominguez. I imagine their guards are athletic enough to stick with him, although I think he will open some eyes. Good luck!

 

[Turd Ferguson]

At first I was a little surprised to hear PSU got a 16 seed, but the more I think about it the more it's hard for me to think that they deserved much more than a 15 at very best. They were 5-7 in non-conference against D-1 schools with wins against IUPUI, Akron, Portland, UVSU, and Cal Poly.

It's tough to argue that PSU should be ranked higher than UMBC, the 15 seed in the Midwest, who are 24-8 with a solid win over fellow 15 seed American.

Dominating the Big Sky will get a team respect in places like Missoula, Flagstaff, or Bozeman, but to the rest of the country it's clear that a team will have to do more than that. Especially when the projected top two teams in the conference, WSU and UM, fold like a lawn chair.

 

[Grizbacker1]

At first I was a little surprised to hear PSU got a 16 seed, but the more I think about it the more it's hard for me to think that they deserved much more than a 15 at very best. They were 5-7 in non-conference against D-1 schools with wins against IUPUI, Akron, Portland, UVSU, and Cal Poly.

It's tough to argue that PSU should be ranked higher than UMBC, the 15 seed in the Midwest, who are 24-8 with a solid win over fellow 15 seed American.

Dominating the Big Sky will get a team respect in places like Missoula, Flagstaff, or Bozeman, but to the rest of the country it's clear that a team will have to do more than that. Especially when the projected top two teams in the conference, WSU and UM, fold like a lawn chair.

and the folding lawn chair you refer to beat Colorado State by 26 points and PSU lost to them.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

At first I was a little surprised to hear PSU got a 16 seed, but the more I think about it the more it's hard for me to think that they deserved much more than a 15 at very best. They were 5-7 in non-conference against D-1 schools with wins against IUPUI, Akron, Portland, UVSU, and Cal Poly.

It's tough to argue that PSU should be ranked higher than UMBC, the 15 seed in the Midwest, who are 24-8 with a solid win over fellow 15 seed American.

Dominating the Big Sky will get a team respect in places like Missoula, Flagstaff, or Bozeman, but to the rest of the country it's clear that a team will have to do more than that. Especially when the projected top two teams in the conference, WSU and UM, fold like a lawn chair.

and the folding lawn chair you refer to beat Colorado State by 26 points and PSU lost to them.

When a pre-season favorite peaks in week 1 of the season then I consider that a pretty big fold-job.