long read ..but good
long read ..but good
im defnitely not trying to instigate..but winning a game does not justify getting in over a more deserving team.
food for thought
Sleeper Teams
March 17, 2009
By Bruce Marshall
The Gold Sheet
Let?s call it the year of the ?soft? bubble.
The annual announcement of the NCAA?s field of 65 teams for its hoop extravaganza was not without the usual controversies on Sunday. As ESPN?s Dick Vitale (when not sparring with ex-Dookie Jay Bilas) reminded everyone on Sunday?s Bracket Review show, there is going to be controversy every year no matter how many teams make the Big Dance. Expand the tourney to 68 teams, Dickie V. reminded us, and team number 69 will feel snubbed. Expand it to 128 teams, and number 129 will feel jilted. Although none other than Vitale?s new colleague at ESPN, Bob Knight, seems to believe 128 teams might indeed be a proper number to invite. And ?The General? might have a point, because that number would only require one more round of games, which could be played at home courts of the higher-seeded teams. We suspect, however, that the resultant confusion might cause all of talking heads on TV to collectively implode. Imagine breaking down an almost ceaseless succession of first-round games such as Central Florida vs. Minnesota, with the winner to face the survivor of the Richmond vs. Texas battle.
No thanks, 65 teams is just fine by us.
But in comparison to past years, we don?t think there was quite the controversy regarding the final at-large selections as there has been in most recent years. And that?s because there were some unique characteristics about the just-completed regular-season and conference tourney schedules that differed from past seasons. The proverbial ?bubble? was a soft one this season, with the final teams at the cut line having more flaws that we can recall in the recent past. Part of the reason was the fact that a normal power conference such as the SEC endured something of a down campaign, with fewer Big Dance-worthy entries than usual (although we?ll talk more about the SEC?s plight in a moment). Also, it was not a terribly deep year for the mid-major conferences. In particular, the Missouri Valley Conference, which a few years ago had numerous teams in contention for NCAA at-large berths, ended up with no at-large reps for the second year running. The Mountain West (which bristles at being classified as a mid-major loop) was probably the best of the mid to upper-mid level leagues this season, but in the end could land no more than one at-large team. For the second straight year, the WAC was a one-bid conference. The WCC, a 3-bid league in 2008, was a single-bid loop in 2009.
When the dust settled on Selection Sunday, only four at-large bids (Xavier, Dayton, Butler, and BYU) had been awarded to mid-major conferences, and even that number was inflated due to upsets in the Atlantic 10 and Horizon Tourneys. It also reflects the continuation of what we believe is a troubling pattern wherein the mid-majors are collectively losing their influence with the Selection Committee. Since 2003, the number of mid-major at-large reps in the Dance has gone from 10 to 12 in 2004, but then on an unmistakable downward path (9, 8, 6, and 6 the four previous years to 2009). The at-large playing court continued to tilt toward the major, BCS schools for the fifth straight year.
It was also a year in which more ?bid thieves? than usual stole spots in the Big Dance via conference tourney action, knocking some teams off the bubble in the process. There were an inordinate number (four) this season, with upsets in the Horizon (Cleveland State), Pac-10 (Southern Cal), Atlantic 10 (Temple), and SEC (Mississippi State) effectively KO?ing the tourney hopes of four other bubblers. A couple such upsets are usually expected each season, but by any measure, four is a big number.
The main controversy on Selection Sunday, and one in which Vitale and Bilas argued vigorously on ESPN, was the inclusion of 19-13 Arizona into the Big Dance field, apparently at the exclusion of 26-6 Saint Mary?s. There?s no reason to rehash the details of that debate, which was officially settled when the Selection Committee chose to overlook the Wildcats? so-so 9-9 Pac-10 conference mark, poor 2-9 mark on the road, and 5 losses in their last 6 games because of UA?s strong non-conference schedule that included home-state wins over eventual protected seeds Gonzaga and Kansas. Losses vs. UAB, Texas A&M, & UNLV apparently didn?t hurt the Wildcats. Regardless, we don?t have a real problem with Arizona getting what appears to be the final Big Dance bid.
But we might be the only ones who remain a bit perplexed at the favored treatment the Wildcat program appears to occasionally receive from the NCAA. And, not to sound conspiratorial about the whole thing, but Arizona has gotten the benefit of the doubt before, and we?re still trying to figure out what sway the Wildcats seem to have with the Selection Committee.
Indeed, UA?s inclusion as one of the last at-large teams into the 2009 Dance isn?t as curious as its invitation a year ago, when in-state rival Arizona State was bypassed from the Big Dance entirely despite having finished with better overall and conference records than the Wildcats, not to mention beating UA in both regular-season meetings. Although the Committee wouldn?t comment specifically that Arizona received a bid at its most-hated rival?s expense last season, try convincing that to Sun Devil HC Herb Sendek or any ASU fan, still livid that their Sun Devils didn?t get their named called on last year?s Selection Sunday, while a less-deserving Arizona made the final cut. (The Sun Devils, by the way, still apparently steamed about last year?s snub, did their best to keep the Wildcats out of this year?s Dance by beating them all three meetings, including what appeared to be a do-or-die game for UA?s NCAA hopes in the first round of last week?s Pac-10 Tourney.)
But we also recall back to 1996 during the height of Lute Olson?s powers in Tucson. That year, the Wildcats finished behind defending national champion UCLA in the Pac-10 standings and lost twice to the Bruins, yet UA was still rewarded a far-more preferable NCAA assignment (a 3 seed in the West Region and the nearby Tempe sub-regional) than UCLA, which could do no better than a 4 in the Southeast Region and shipped to the Indianapolis sub-regional, where Jim Harrick?s last Bruin team was famously upset by Pete Carril?s last Princeton team, 43-41.
What troubled us then were rumors we occasionally heard in previous years from west coast sources that Arizona was always going to receive ?favorable? treatment from the NCAA as long as Olson was coaching the Cats and Dick Schultz was executive director of the NCAA. Schultz, if you recall, preceded Olson as Iowa?s basketball coach in the early ?70s, and the supposed ?word? out west was that Lute knew where the skeletons were buried on Schultz? watch in Iowa City, and that Schultz would always treat Arizona kindly. Schultz eventually resigned from his NCAA post in 1993 (well before the 1996 Big Dance) when allegations of improprieties were brought to light from Schultz? days as Virginia?s AD, but his successor at the NCAA in ?93 was none other than...Cedric Dempsey, who just happened to move from Arizona?s AD chair straight into the executive director?s post at the NCAA.
Now, we?re not going to infer that there were improprieties in the Arizona basketball program that were overlooked because of the connection Olson and the Wildcats had within the corridors of power in the NCAA, or that there was anything sinister about the preferential treatment Arizona has occasionally received from the Selection Committee (Dempsey, after all, retired from his NCAA post in 2002). So, we?re just going to assume that it?s a coincidence the Wildcats continue to get the benefit of the doubt from the Selection Committee.
As for the composition of this year?s field, it didn?t surprise us too much. In our final ?bracketology? update on Sunday morning, we hit all but two teams into the Dance, putting Saint Mary?s and Kansas State into the field and leaving out Arizona and Wisconsin. We had backed away from some of our earlier projections that had us favoring Providence and as many as five SEC reps making the final cut. Once the bubble began to shrink with the conference tourney upsets, we knew the Friars were in trouble, and upon further inspection of SEC candidates South Carolina and Florida, we concluded that their shallow non-conference marks would probably prevent their inclusion into the field. Although we still believe the Gamecocks, Gators, and Auburn (which we had as a provisional choice, to be bumped if Mississippi State won the SEC Tourney, which the Maroon did) are better than some of the eventual at-large entries, including many from the Big Ten. Bob Knight, by the way, apparently shares that view with us about Auburn, as he said the Tigers and his own preferred choice, Penn State, were both better teams at the end of the year than several at-large qualifiers. And we also maintain that the SEC was collectively downgraded more than necessary. Although not every team played a robust non-league schedule, SEC reps nonetheless scored some impressive wins outside of conference play (Kentucky beating West Virginia, SEC West cellar-dweller Arkansas bouncing Oklahoma, Tennessee beating full strength Marquette, as well as toppling Georgetown when the Hoyas were a ranked team) that were rarely mentioned by anyone observing the evaluation process. Indeed, those non-conference wins actually compared rather favorably with the Big East, as we mentioned in one of our cover stories in early February. And we indeed think Auburn, South Carolina, and Florida are all better than some of the at-large entries, although we reluctantly understand the rationale that kept all three out of the Big Dance field.
Nonetheless, we stand by our belief that the Big Ten got way too much respect from the Selection Committee with its seven bids, and are comforted by the fact that none other than Bob Knight shares our view. ?As I?ve watched Big Ten basketball this year,? said The General when taping the Survive and Advance Show in Las Vegas with Billy Packer Sunday night, ?I don?t think they?re anywhere close to the Big East or the Atlantic Coast Conference. I think they?re a long way from both of those conferences.? We?d agree.
