Comitee bias

#1
Tennessee Vols Fan!!!!

Tennessee Vols Fan!!!!

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2021
Messages
223
Likes
534
#1
So the NCAA comes out today and says Tennessee is the 5th Best team in the nation, but they are somehow a 3 seed, not even the top 3 seed

My question is, can anything be done about this in the off-season? Can the committee be sued by Tennessee?

I know it sounds ridiculous but what occurred the other day was criminal
 
  • Like
Reactions: i2amavol and feathersax
#5
#5
Tennessee Vols Fan!!!! said:
So the NCAA comes out today and says Tennessee is the 5th Best team in the nation, but they are somehow a 3 seed, not even the top 3 seed

My question is, can anything be done about this in the off-season? Can the committee be sued by Tennessee?

I know it sounds ridiculous but what occurred the other day was criminal
Click to expand...
The polls aren’t the NCAA, not sure what you’re trying to say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: matt1107, kamoshika, Lankykong and 1 other person
#7
#7
I beleive the selection committee looks at the conference tournaments as adjusting for teams that wouldn’t have made the NCAA tournament unlesss they won their conference. That can already have a big affect on the field. If they had to adjust for those teams who wouldn’t have made it but for winning, as well as, moving teams up/down based on the results, it would be giving too much value to the conference tournament while also devaluing the regulars season.

Don’t get me wrong, I still believe we deserve the 2, but thinking about it more today, led me to this conclusion and why the selection committee did what it did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LibertyVol
#8
#8
Duke beat Gonzaga on a neutral site
KY pounded Kansas at Kansas.

They are simply putting more emphasis on that…..than virtually all other metrics combined.

Most “think” KY is still the second on 3rd best team in the country. While I think most know Duke is fairly weak (comparatively speaking) they also want to see Duke and coach K go as far as possible……makes for a good story line and $$.

Records, metrics, sos, sor, head to head and quality wins “should” be the majority factors……..the “eye” test and “who you think”…….is mostly bull stuff.

I mean really…..Rutgers passes the “eye test” they have beaten Purdue, Mich, Iowa, mich st, Ohio st, Indiana, Wisconsin and Illinois……….but their also 18-13, 4-10 road or neutral, 77th in the NET, and have 3 Q3 & Q4 losses.
 
#10
#10
AllThingsTN said:
I beleive the selection committee looks at the conference tournaments as adjusting for teams that wouldn’t have made the NCAA tournament unlesss they won their conference. That can already have a big affect on the field. If they had to adjust for those teams who wouldn’t have made it but for winning, as well as, moving teams up/down based on the results, it would be giving too much value to the conference tournament while also devaluing the regulars season.

Don’t get me wrong, I still believe we deserve the 2, but thinking about it more today, led me to this conclusion and why the selection committee did what it did.
Click to expand...
Problem is though,Lunardi and others were talking like Kentucky could have improved to a #1 seed if they beat Tennessee but for whatever reason a win for Tennessee over Kentucky did nothing for the Vols.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I4Vols, matt1107, BigDave and 9 others
#12
#12
If we were a 2 seed people would still complain that we weren't a 1 seed or that we should have been ranked ahead of some other 2 seed.

If we were a 1 seed people would complain about us having the toughest bracket of all the 1 seeds.

It really doesn't matter as some of yall are just waiting to be offended. I actually think we got a pretty good path which is something I care way more about than the actual seed itself. We aren't hanging banners for being a 2 seed so a 2 or 3 really doesn't matter that much. Us playing our best ball in March is what matters and that is exactly what we are doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HEAD-VOL, zascolia, VOLSanon and 1 other person
#13
#13
Kentucky got the best 2 seed. Duke got a 2 seed cause well it's K's farewell tour. I still like where we are and who we have in front of us. Kentucky's guard play may get them bounced, it's erratic at times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: feathersax
#14
#14
Then stop leading teams to think that they can improve their seeding by winning their conference tournaments. Let the committee go ahead and seed their selections after the regular season. Then arrange knockout games per conference to fill however many spots are available. Let the seeded teams stay at home to practice, study, and rest. Be transparent in the process. Stop roguish methods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VollyParton, zascolia, LibertyVol and 1 other person
#15
#15
Putbacks said:
Then stop leading teams to think that they can improve their seeding by winning their conference tournaments. Let the committee go ahead and seed their selections after the regular season. Then arrange knockout games per conference to fill however many spots are available. Let the seeded teams stay at home to practice, study, and rest. Be transparent in the process. Stop roguish methods.
Click to expand...
No one ever said winning the conference counted more than any other neutral win. Part of the problem is we beat Texas AM, who has a NET ranking of 43, 2 spots higher than UAB and 3 spots higher than North Texas. We beat an NIT team at a neutral site. Had Auburn been in the final and we beat them than we would have another high quality win at a neutral site.
 
#16
#16
TNBV said:
No one ever said winning the conference counted more than any other neutral win. Part of the problem is we beat Texas AM, who has a NET ranking of 43, 2 spots higher than UAB and 3 spots higher than North Texas. We beat an NIT team at a neutral site. Had Auburn been in the final and we beat them than we would have another high quality win at a neutral site.
Click to expand...

BS!
We beat Kentucky on a neutral site. Reward what is proven on the court and stop over sensationalizing what North Texas is ranked. We didn’t get the chance to beat Auburn on a neutral site because Auburn wasn’t good enough to beat Texas A&M on a neutral site. It’s a no-brainer!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tnphil, matt1107, BigDave and 7 others
#17
#17
Putbacks said:
BS!
We beat Kentucky on a neutral site. Reward what is proven on the court and stop over sensationalizing what North Texas is ranked. We didn’t get the chance to beat Auburn on a neutral site because Auburn wasn’t good enough to beat Texas A&M on a neutral site. It’s a no-brainer!
Click to expand...

Regardless, Texas A&M is not that great of a win, so why would that change the opinion of anyone? We beat a team we should beat. I agree the Kentucky win should have mattered but it still doesn't make our resume obviously better than Villanova. Duke has no business as a 2nd seed but us winning against TAM did not change anything. Duke was already ahead of Villanova in the eyes of the committee. Why I have no idea.
 
#18
#18
TNBV said:
No one ever said winning the conference counted more than any other neutral win. Part of the problem is we beat Texas AM, who has a NET ranking of 43, 2 spots higher than UAB and 3 spots higher than North Texas. We beat an NIT team at a neutral site. Had Auburn been in the final and we beat them than we would have another high quality win at a neutral site.
Click to expand...
If we had played and beaten Auburn in the SEC championship game, the committee would have only moved us up to the top 3-seed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ENGRVOL and Kungfuman2000
#19
#19
TNBV said:
No one ever said winning the conference counted more than any other neutral win. Part of the problem is we beat Texas AM, who has a NET ranking of 43, 2 spots higher than UAB and 3 spots higher than North Texas. We beat an NIT team at a neutral site. Had Auburn been in the final and we beat them than we would have another high quality win at a neutral site.
Click to expand...

Tennessee didn’t “need” another quality win.

Tennessee wins head to head
Tennessee higher Ken pom
Tennessee higher net
Tennessee more Q1 wins
Tennessee more Q1 a+ wins
Tennessee higher bpi
Tennessee higher rpi

In almost all of the ranking metrics Tennessee finished in the top 5 to 8.

Seriously almost every metric Tennessee is higher than Auburn……and Duke for that matter.


Auburn finished the season with 1 win vs a team that finished ranked.

The committee literally didn’t even count the last win for Tennessee. They finished early on Saturday. This is evident with Duke and Va Tech. With the win over Duke Tech “should” have been a seed higher……..and Duke a seed lower. Just look over the games played Saturday evening and Sunday those teams really didn’t move……however as stated Tennessee didn’t need anything added to their resume especially after the last Ky win on a neutral floor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: matt1107, BigDave, TennVols12 and 2 others
#20
#20
Listen, here is the crux of the issue to most folks. Reasonable folks would like to be able to follow the sport with some general set of guidelines to set expectations and goals for upcoming seasons. So one can set achievement markers for their teams as a season progresses. We reference the wording that has been used in seasons past as a way to evaluate how close their team is to achieving said goal. So when the NCAA committee makes the criteria set a "moving mark" by using whatever narrative fits the teams they want to include or seed highly this year, then all sense of rationale and reason is gone. I think that is the subtle reason folks are upset. The committee won't be honest and admit they are going to reward insiders and blue bloods......they simply suggest that this or that metric mattered more this year. And thus the frustration sets in. The blatant dishonesty of pretending to have metrics is what angers many I think
 
  • Like
Reactions: hillsborovol, zascolia, glv98 and 4 others
#21
#21
JoAllan said:
Duke beat Gonzaga on a neutral site
KY pounded Kansas at Kansas.

They are simply putting more emphasis on that…..than virtually all other metrics combined.

Most “think” KY is still the second on 3rd best team in the country. While I think most know Duke is fairly weak (comparatively speaking) they also want to see Duke and coach K go as far as possible……makes for a good story line and $$.

Records, metrics, sos, sor, head to head and quality wins “should” be the majority factors……..the “eye” test and “who you think”…….is mostly bull stuff.

I mean really…..Rutgers passes the “eye test” they have beaten Purdue, Mich, Iowa, mich st, Ohio st, Indiana, Wisconsin and Illinois……….but their also 18-13, 4-10 road or neutral, 77th in the NET, and have 3 Q3 & Q4 losses.
Click to expand...
Vols won 3 of 4 games against teams ranked in the top 5 at the end of the regular season and played the toughest schedule in the nation. Name one other team that has credentials like that. Hope this adds motivation to prove the selection committee was completely off the reservation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigDave and feathersax
#22
#22
LAVol1 said:
Vols won 3 of 4 games against teams ranked in the top 5 at the end of the regular season and played the toughest schedule in the nation. Name one other team that has credentials like that. Hope this adds motivation to prove the selection committee was completely off the reservation.
Click to expand...

im sure that’s basically what I was stating. But I’m just not saying “best” resume in the country because it’s not.

Tennessee did win 4 games vs teams that finished in the top 8.

They certainly have one of the best SOS in the country. Ken Pom has it at 5th, team rankings has it as #1……it’s real good regardless.

They definitely had a resume to get the highest or second highest 2 seed.

But since your asking:
Kansas is 12-5 in Q1, where Tennessee is 11-7

Kansas is 12-5 on the road or neutral, where Tennessee is 10-7

Kansas beat a 3 seed twice and a 1 seed and won 10 games vs tournament teams.

And better in most of the ranking systems.

but again, I was stating that Tennessee “should” definitely had been seeded higher.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNBV
#24
#24
The committee changes what it considers important every year and often it seems mid-stream. Used to what a team in conference tourneys mattered a lot, now they don’t seem to get considered at all (unless a team wins that wasn’t getting otherwise). that thinking allows teams just to tank the first game and reat.
in the past they also stated they would adjust a seed up or down to make a better matchup or a favorable location (we get Indianapolis as a 3 rather than maybe go to west coast as a 2.
Worst part to me, is we beat AZ who is #1 seed in our bracket. This kind of takes away incen for scheduling top teams in regular season.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top