If Middle Tennessee gets at an large bid. The Tourney system should be blown up.
- Thread starter PennStateNate
- Start date
Mister Anti-Penn State.
You do realize you are on a Penn State board, right. Of course we think they should be in the field. They are better then most of these bubble teams.
I guess the difference is that I can look at Penn State objectively (and don't need to put down every other program). I agree that we are better than a lot of these bubble teams. Unfortunately, we don't have a better resume than most of them, and thus we'll most likely play next Tuesday or Wednesday night in the NIT. I can wish all I want, but it won't change the fact that we've got an RPI of 80 and the rest of the resume won't be enough to overcome it.
No you are anti-Penn State. You can’t be objective on the other end. Oklahoma and MTSU don’t deserve to be in the field over them.
Back to the lair for you
Back to the lair for you
In the last few days, you've told us that Penn State deserves to go over Oklahoma, Notre Dame, St Bonnies, Middle Tennessee, and Louisville. You're being such a fan-boy that you completely have lost the ability to think rationally about it.
One way to test out which of us is being rational is to check with Palm, Lunardi, TheAthletic, Howie Schwab, etc, and see which of us aligns more with those who are trying to objectively predict what will happen with the committee. Or we can check back on Sunday and see if PSU gets in over all of those other teams, since that's a pretty objective group of 10.
Sorry that my lack of being a complete homer means that I belong on a Pitt board.
Here is what I know for sure...many many teams don't want to see MTSU in their bracket. That is a really good basketball team...very athletic, good defense. Last night they blew it.
With that said, I also feel PSU should get an at large bid. They could make some noise. I am obviously biased as PSU alum and fan but they are a good team and I would love to see what they could do in the tourney.
With that said, I also feel PSU should get an at large bid. They could make some noise. I am obviously biased as PSU alum and fan but they are a good team and I would love to see what they could do in the tourney.
While I think PSU could also make some noise in the tourney I don't see us getting an at large bid. I think the injury to Watkins will hurt any chances we have.
Many posters on here are being biased toward Penn State, but many of the talking heads (and I will add committee members) are biased against Penn State because of the lack of basketball tradition. I would guess that when a third party is looking at a Penn State vs Louisville situation (for example) they will automatically lean toward Louisville because of tradition. To me that’s equally as wrong as being biased due to being a Penn State fan.
Unfortunately, since it's the primary tool that the committee uses, it's still very relevant.
Can you cite examples of your claim that many of the committee members are biased towards Penn State?
so excited to see MTSU lose!! It means Marshall is 2 wins away from an NCAA bid!! I almost posted as much in the bracketology thread yesterday. When things like this happens it really effects the other 'at large' teams. If MU gets in, they could go all the way!!
If you acknowledge the fact the committee uses it you should understand why people cite it without criticizing it. We all get the criticism but that doesn't make it irrelevant. I have no idea if MTSU gets in or not but Bracketology (at least ESPN) as them as the last four in. We actually dropped a spot yesterday because they lost. The real issue this year is the Big Ten isn't considered to be a good conference. When a team goes 13-5 in the Big Ten and is out you know how the conference is perceived IMO
Lots of people who talk about the NCAA tourney and how 'bad' a specific mid major is obviously dont watch much basketball or at least down understand it. The difference between the 5th-8th place team in almost every power 5 vs a 1st/2nd place in a mid major is negligible. Would they have great record in conference, no but they would be better than some here think. Some years though, they would be a top 3 team in a power 5. They are teams loaded with seniors who play with poise and do all the intangibles well (screen, blockout, ball fakes, take charges). I'm fine with them getting in over the 5th and 6th place teams from P5 conferences. They deserve it more than a 9th place Oklahoma in the Big 12, no mater how many Quad 1 wins they have.
personally I think that without a 500 conference record, you shouldnt get in unless you win your conference tourney.
personally I think that without a 500 conference record, you shouldnt get in unless you win your conference tourney.
I think he is just a realist. Nobody has us in. You can be a fan and still realize this.
This. The reason Middle Tennessee State's resume doesn't look all that impressive to the casual fan and they don't have huge wins over Power 5 schools is that no Power 5 program in their right mind wants to schedule them and play them. You gain very little by beating them and if you play them at a neutral court or at their place there's a very real chance you may lose.
Interestingly enough, 5dimes put up a line this morning on Middle Tennessee to make the tourney. Yes/No is -175/+135, so an implied probability of 59.9% of getting in (though only $200 limits, so take it with a few grains of salt).
The one that surprises me is Nebraska being left out according to some metrics--and they are 13-5 in the conference.
They are the textbook example of why the committee doesn't care much about conference record. Their schedule gives new meaning to "unbalanced" when you look at how it broke for them.
These specific committee members? Of course not, since we haven't been in contention.
Beyond that, in the past 20 years, we've been left out 18 times as expected. Once, we were a 10 seed when many feared we might be in a play-in game. The other time, most thought we'd be near the bubble and we landed as a 7 seed.
Hard to prove a negative. But I assumed that if you'd accuse them of being biased against us, you'd have something to back it up.
The beginning and end of Penn State's argument to be in is Ohio State. 3 wins vs them and nothing else. There were 3 opportunities to win their way into the tournament. 1. Be impressive in the non-conference.. best win vs Montana.. not NCAA tournament worthy. 2. Be impressive in conference.. 9-9 in a down Big ten.. not NCAA tournament worthy. 3. Win the conference tournament.. nice semi-final appearance.. no auto bid. NIT is where we belong. If MTSU or Oklahoma or any of the other bubble teams get in, there's nobody to blame but ourselves for not being able to distinguish ourselves from those teams. The opportunities were there but not taken advantage of.
It shouldn't matter if they only beat Ohio State.. Ohio State was ranked in the top 13 all 3 times, so those 3 wins IMO are more impressive then St Bonaventure's top 3 wins or Arizona State's top 3 wins, or Middle Tennessee top 3 wins.
Why do you think only the most important/impressive 3 wins matter? Our resume isn't even close. CBS doesn't even have us a bubble team. The sooner you accept this the less times people will have to explain it to you.
2009...bubble team ended up in the NIT. 10-8 in the Big and didn’t make it. Penn State finished 4th in the conference and seven teams from the Big made it but Penn State wasn’t one of them. Two teams with worse Conference records made it. Hmm...I wonder why but perception has nothing to do with it I’m sure. And it’s not just about bias against Penn State, it’s bias against teams without basketball history vs teams that do have basketball history. Identical seasons with identical records who gets in Penn State or Michigan State? How about Kentucky or Vanderbilt? Kansas or Iowa State? If you don’t think bias plays a role than you’re naive. It’s called human nature and until computers pick 100% of the teams there will always be bias.
What’s funny is you think there’s no bias in anything in college football, yet you complain about college football not having a true playoff system. Any time you have people picking who goes to the playoffs, there will be bias for and against all teams. You can’t have it both ways. If these committees are so spot on, then you should be happy with the way college sports are right now.
The same thing could be said about every bubble team, hence them being on the bubble.
San Diego State is destroying Nevada....looks like the MWC is going to get a second bid now. Not good for a lot of teams
Almost everyone had us in the NIT in 2009 (me included). RPI of 70 and non-conference SOS of 298. We had a lot better case than we had this year, but to attribute it to a bias isn't living in reality.
Sure.. I don't think any team that gets left out really has an argument. They all put themselves at the mercy of a group trying to pick out the teams with less blemishes. It's not like college football where there's so few teams that the teams left out had a legit chance to win a national title.
Unless you’re in the room, on the committee then you have no idea what’s going on in their heads. But I’ll say it again, until computers pick all the teams, there will always be some level of bias for or against teams.
I'd say it started even earlier. We dug ourselves a hole with our crappy non-conference schedule. It meant that we were likely to have to go 10-8 or better in conference to even be considered for a bid. Lot's of people saw our OOC as a problem before the season even started.
What that proves is what I and several others on this board have pointed out on multiple occasions. The committee does not look at conference record, they look at a team's overall resume. I would counter your argument by pointing out that we got a bid in 2001 despite only being 7-9 in conference. That year we had a superb OOC schedule and that's what got us in.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Football Four thoughts on Penn State's 2025 Schedule, Who's The Whiteout?
- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley
