Selection Process

[DawgieStyle]

A good read on what really goes on on during the NCAA tourney selection process:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=2758770&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos2

[Brave2001]

A good read on what really goes on on during the NCAA tourney selection process:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=2758770&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos2

Good article. But prepare for the people who will call BS on this...saying its not the way its done. Sighting the example of MSU last year ad nauseum.

This is actually kind of how I thought they did it...it's how I would do it. You have to break it down into manageable chunks. It's just too hard to evaluate 360 some teams with 5000 games between them straight up.

[IH8SIU]

The Omaha World-Herald's own Tom Shatel was the co-chair of this thing. He says he will have a column about it on Sunday. It will be interesting seeing what a "Missouri Valley" guy (though also Big 12) has to say about the process.

[Maggie]

It is an interesting article. Thanks for posting it Dawgie. I agree with Brave2001, the way the process is described is the only real manageable way to deal with the number of at-large candidates. However, even during this process I think there can be some bias. If it comes down to a team like Arizona and a team like Drake, Northern Iowa, MSU, etc. for one last spot I can't help but think Arizona would have an advantage due to name recognition and such – all thing being equal.
That being said, I do think the selection committee does a pretty good job. It is not flawless but it never will be.

[Brave2001]

It is an interesting article. Thanks for posting it Dawgie. I agree with Brave2001, the way the process is described is the only real manageable way to deal with the number of at-large candidates. However, even during this process I think there can be some bias. If it comes down to a team like Arizona and a team like Drake, Northern Iowa, MSU, etc. for one last spot I can't help but think Arizona would have an advantage due to name recognition and such – all thing being equal.
That being said, I do think the selection committee does a pretty good job. It is not flawless but it never will be.

As far as bias goes...it works both ways...there are plenty of midmajor conference chairs on that selection committee as well. I think both the big Six and Mids are well represented...maybe not quite even...but close.

[MVC Fan]

Thanks for posting, but not much new to me. In fact, articles similar to this come out every cpl yrs.

The things I buy are things I believed beforehand. I know they spend a lot of time debating teams, known that for years. I know the makeup of the committee. And I knew that some commentators are clueless on whether teams are 'for sure' in or out.

The things I didn't buy-that conference does not matter whatsoever, that they don't look at matchups, etc.-I still don't buy. They HAVE to look at matchups, their guidelines say so. Even when committee members have to leave the room when their teams/conferences come up, there has frequently been a you-scratch-my-back, I'll-scratch-yours element to the selections-see how certain conferences represented on the committee noticeably benefited last yr. And there are biases towards or against teams based on star power, big name, lack of recognition-whatever. That much was obvious w/the MVC last yr, that the committee refused to believe all the #s (not just RPI) that said they deserved 6 bids.

As a journalist, I'm also skeptical because I don't believe the NCAA would ever give a 100% look at what's happening. The fact that they guard so much of the selection process in secrecy as though they're hiding Bin Laden makes me skeptical anytime they claim to be shedding light on the situation. Especially in an instance like this, where everything is condensed much more than the actual process...they weren't allowed to play out the process as it actually does.

Bottom line is through the yrs they've established guidelines that they follow the large majority of the time, so if they'd just follow those guidelines ALL OF THE TIME, instead of changing something here or there, emphasizing this instead of that in some yrs over others...then the fans who understand this process (demonstrated by how quite a few can select/seed the field similarly to the committee) would be cool w/their decisions. But when they throw a change-up like last yr (suddenly, stats don't matter now) :no: then they're going to get grilled for it, and rightfully so.

[Nyghtewynd]

A few things:

To my surprise, there really is NO consideration given to the number of bids per conference. I'll be honest: I annually rolled my eyes when the selection committee chairman insisted that was the case. After going through the process I am a convert -- there simply is no time (and no real inclination) to stop and count teams. There is no tote board that says, "Big East four, Big 12 three, SEC five." It honestly never came up.

Right. Because it's not needed. The members don't have to keep track of how many teams get in from each conference because they just know what's going to happen if the MVC got more than the ACC or some other BCS conference.

At voting time, it usually came down to gut instinct -- and the guts were tested often when comparing, say, Missouri Valley teams with Big 12 teams.

Again, right. Because "gut instinct" is a good-enough reason to fit that eighth team from the Big 12 in over another MVC team. "Gut instinct" means that all of the concrete evidence says otherwise, but we're going to do what we want to do anyway.

[TrueBlueJay]

What I found interesting is they talked about not having a quota for conferences, but then they agonized over putting 4 Valley teams and 2 CAA teams in last year. I thought nobody was keeping track??????

[BearChief]

The conference quota thing is baloney. Why did Air Force and Utah State get in over MSU? Conference quotas. There's no logical explaination for the inclusion of SEVERAL teams at the expense of Missouri State unless they just absolutely would not put 5 MVC teams in the field. :ranting:

[tennis08tarheels]

Absolutely terrific articles by Katz and Forde. Thanks for posting this, DS.

[bcrawf]

What I found interesting is they talked about not having a quota for conferences, but then they agonized over putting 4 Valley teams and 2 CAA teams in last year. I thought nobody was keeping track??????

DING DING DING we have a winner...