After the TX A&M snub, all SEC men's basketball teams should put an A&M logo on their uniform to show solidarity to the SEC and the favoritism
- Thread starter TN-Gamecock
- Start date
I didn't follow the selections all that closely. ND and A&M had essentially equivalent records, with ND's a touch better (23-10 vs 24-12). ND had a considerably better conference record at 15-5 vs A&M's 9-9. I don't know why there is a specific comparison to ND, but if you go 23-10 (15-5) in the ACC, you're getting in.
But this happens ever year. It's part of what makes the tournament fun. Every year there's a coach who is irate that his team, who clearly deserved to be in the tournament, was snubbed. Someone says it's criminal. The coach says he was given no explanation. Calls the process arbitrary. Etc. It's all a part of March Madness.
If, in this case, A&M got in and ND was left out, you'd have the ND coach and ACC/ND fans doing the same thing as the A&M coach and SEC/A&M fans are doing.
A better case could be made for asking why IU got in and A&M did not. IU was 20-13 (9-11). Equal number of Quad 1 wins with A&M having fewer losses outside Quad 1.
But this is just what happens. It's part of the game. When you have that many teams vying for 64 spots, there's always going to be someone on right on the line who gets left out. Always. When you get down to those last few teams in, it's really just a roll of the dice.
But this happens ever year. It's part of what makes the tournament fun. Every year there's a coach who is irate that his team, who clearly deserved to be in the tournament, was snubbed. Someone says it's criminal. The coach says he was given no explanation. Calls the process arbitrary. Etc. It's all a part of March Madness.
If, in this case, A&M got in and ND was left out, you'd have the ND coach and ACC/ND fans doing the same thing as the A&M coach and SEC/A&M fans are doing.
A better case could be made for asking why IU got in and A&M did not. IU was 20-13 (9-11). Equal number of Quad 1 wins with A&M having fewer losses outside Quad 1.
But this is just what happens. It's part of the game. When you have that many teams vying for 64 spots, there's always going to be someone on right on the line who gets left out. Always. When you get down to those last few teams in, it's really just a roll of the dice.
Last edited:
In the metrics that the NCAA claims they care about for the tournament they were the overall better team. A&M had played a tougher schedule than Notre Dame. They also beaten Notre Dame head to head. A&M has twice the amount of Quad 1 wins and has won 40% of their Quad 1 wins compared to ND only 25%. ND actually had a Quad 4 loss something that A&M didn't have any even we didn't have one of those. A&M beaten 5 NCAA tournament teams to ND 3. A&M has a NET ranking that was 10 points higher than ND. There is no logical reason A&M should have missed the tournament if ND got in, they have every right to be pissed.
I honestly don’t think A&M got screwed any worse than we did in 2016. I’m positive they didn’t get a text message saying they had made the tournament only to find out they didn’t later. It’s crazy we followed up that debacle with a Final Four run.
A&M should’ve been in. But at the same time, this is why you can’t put yourself on the bubble.
A&M should’ve been in. But at the same time, this is why you can’t put yourself on the bubble.
I don't understand the focus on ND...except for the obvious misplaced football hate. I'd be much more upset about IU. Either way, when you're down to deciding on the last few teams, someone deserving is gonna get left out. Not every team who deserves to get it can get in.
It's kind of funny that this thing happens every single year, but every single year fans act like it's a totally novel occurrence.
This is the thing. When you've got 2 spots left and you're deciding between 3 or 4 deserving teams, someone deserving is gonna get left out.
As I clearly noted earlier A&M is the better team by all the metrics that the NCAA claims they care about and it's not particularly close either.
As for Indiana, I don't get your point, Indiana has a better Net Ranking than both teams, more Quad 1 wins and no Quad 4 losses and a better strength of schedule. Indiana absolutely deserves their spot.
IU and A&M have the same number of Quad 1 wins.
And I didn't say IU didn't deserve spot.
ND, IU and A&M all deserved a spot somewhere in the tournament. Someone deserving always gets left out. A&M isn't even close to the most deserving team to ever get left out. You obviously haven't been paying attention to March Madness before this year.
Last edited:
Looks as though the site I used still gave credit to Indiana for Ohio State who fell 1 spot from being a Quad 1 win. My sentiment is still the same though, of the 3 schools ND is the clear cut worst team and shouldn't have been a given a bid over A&M. I definitely think there's a bias as it pertains to popularity and TV viewership that's involved, but the committee aren't willing to admit.
I dunno. For as long as I've followed March Madness, there's at least one team every year who has a very legitimate beef for being left out. And it always seems completely egregious.
A&M was certainly deserving.
A&M was certainly deserving.
My ND football "hate" is more geared to the ACC who admitted them to the league while allowing them to compete in football as an independent and "compromised" by having them schedule 5 ACC members per year in football.
That, IMO, is BS. If you join a conference, and the conference sponsors a championship in a sport you sponsor at the level you compete in (I mention level, because, as an example, Johns Hopkins University competes in DIII in all sports except Lacrosse, where they compete in DI), you need to be competing for the conference championship.
The man is posturing to curry favor with his fanbase and players. They can't come up with a system that won't leave somebody incensed. Well, they could give every Div. 1 team with a winning record a spot in the tournament. But that would be both cumbersome and ludicrous.
Michigan has no business being in the tournament. They are 17-14 overall with a mediocre finish to the season which included a first round loss in the B10 tournament after leading by 17 points. On top of that, their coach attacked an opposing coach and the players started a brawl to back up their thug coach's attack. Michigan had mediocre record and their actions and behavior should not have been rewarded with a bid, as you can't even make an argument that the players deserved it. ND, IU, and aTm all deserved to be in over Michigan, even without their childish, violent behavior.
The team that got screwed the most is Tennessee. There is literally nothing that suggests they should be seeded lower than Kentucky and Duke. Nothing. Yet they are a 3 instead of a 2. Some may say it doesn’t matter, but it does. Tennessee just won the SEC, and beat Kentucky convincingly two times this month. You take the names off these resumes, and Tennessee is a 2.
Pro tip to all coaches wanting to make the tourney - win more games. If you finish tied for fifth place in your conference with four other schools, then you might not make the tourney. And really, who cares if you do (besides your own fans)? Bitching about not being recognized as the 40th best team in the country is more sad than anything. Buzz is sad.
I guess this is why I feel strongly about the issue, what is the point of having metrics if we aren't going to follow them. We were told in 2016 we didn't get in because our SOS was weak and we ended the regular season not that strong. A&M finishes the season strong and has a good SOS with quality wins and yet still is denied.
If no one speaks out on it nothing will ever change. Sure it's A&M this time but it could easily be us again next time. Making the tournament is huge, no matter if you're a 1 seed of a 12seed and could have huge implications when it comes to recruiting. Who knows maybe if went to the tournament in 2016 along with 2017 more recruits wouldn't see it as a fluke. If you put in the work you should be rewarded and the name on the jersey shouldn't factor in more than the results on the floor.
If no one speaks out on it nothing will ever change. Sure it's A&M this time but it could easily be us again next time. Making the tournament is huge, no matter if you're a 1 seed of a 12seed and could have huge implications when it comes to recruiting. Who knows maybe if went to the tournament in 2016 along with 2017 more recruits wouldn't see it as a fluke. If you put in the work you should be rewarded and the name on the jersey shouldn't factor in more than the results on the floor.
Ranking is 43 in the NET. Michigan, the team most bitched about, is 34. That is the main metric. Evidently the committee is using it.
NCAA used to use the RPI. Every March there was someone left on the outside looking in who voiced loud complaints about the arbitrary nature of the selection process.
They switched from the RPI to the NET. Every March there is someone left on the outside looking in who voices loud complaints about the arbitrary nature of the selection process.
sooooo...
If you don't want your selection to boil down to the NET and the committee's opinion, then, yup, win more games.
My issue wasn't with Michigan which has the wins although their total record doesn't look good but they meet the metrics. Again my point is what is the reasoning on how ND gets in over A&M, outside of national branding nothing makes the least but sense of how they got in. They have a net of 53, 10 behind A&M.
Yes they changed the math on how they select teams but yet they still aren't following that metrics they claim are important . That's still the issue no matter what we're calling the standard of evaluating teams
I dunno. Anytime there's a cutoff, there is going to be someone left out who feels they were deserving.
This happens every year. Literally every year.
There is absolutely no objective way of picking the entire field. It can't be done.
C'mon, the ACC coaches lobbied for years for teams in their conference to make the tourney....Jim Valvano before he passed, I remember him at a Duke game holding a sign let's go Duke...
Conference pride needs to come in to play as we lobby to get more of our teams in...the Kentucky coach said, UF, A&M, and Carolina should be in the tourney...
I'm about getting as many teams in the SEC as possible (those that deserve it)...
Conference pride needs to come in to play as we lobby to get more of our teams in...the Kentucky coach said, UF, A&M, and Carolina should be in the tourney...
I'm about getting as many teams in the SEC as possible (those that deserve it)...
Valvano would have help up such a sign for any ACC member.....whether or not said school was located in NC.
But we had such a bad attitude in 1971, that the whole league pulled against us in the Dance.
So, they must have used other metrics to justify them. Overall winning percentage is all I can come up with (.677 versus .647) - and that barely. And, yes, they are Notre Dame, and this situation typifies why I never pull for them in anything.
Last edited:
Changing the subject. I was able to watch the last couple of innings of the Michigan - Vanderbilt baseball game Tuesday evening and Vandy's "miracle comeback" to beat the Wolverines. Hope you enjoyed it.
Last edited:
Michigan can't lose enough to suit me - they, Notre Dame, UPC (Clemson to the uninitiated), UNC, Tennessee, or Texas. I despise them all.
Notre Dame is a cooler school and has a better basketball history. A&M has never even made an elite 8, Notre Dame has a final four team.
This is all part of the tournament.
There has always been controversy about omissions, seeding, and geographic brackets.
Arizona who is a #1 seed got sent to the South bracket. Doesn't make much sense does it ?
There has always been controversy about omissions, seeding, and geographic brackets.
Arizona who is a #1 seed got sent to the South bracket. Doesn't make much sense does it ?
There's been no geographical sense to it in almost 50 years.
Exactly, Only the women's tournament is geographically based and that's really only for the top seeds when possible.
But that's the issue. They're not following their own metrics and schools that don't have the history like USC will continue to be left out. Our 2016 snub wouldn't occurred if jerseys had a different name on them.
Exactly, just like with the CFP, which shouldn't be touched. The controversy is part of the fun.
To me, the fun is seeing outstanding plays by players on teams who, during the regular season, get almost no publicity,
Everybody wants to be included, even if it is to only get in the way.
Humans doing it, human nature will influence it. If no-name school and Duke or Kansas or North Carolina have the same or similar resume. the basketball power is getting in.
Get unlimited access today.