RE: Bubble Team discussion
Going with the gut is one thing, but the metrics do make a mess of some of these things. When your top 50 has a healthy share of programs with low counts against top tiers, but wins (probably on the road or on a neutral court) against a struggling major who gets big bumps for their conference schedule.
I’m not going to fault the committee for picks like Temple and St. John’s, even though the numbers didn’t look good for them compared to others. The quality wins were there. Not enough good work, too.
Honestly, as some people look at how badly Wofford and Buffalo translated to seeding, I look at Belmont and VCU and know the mid-majors could have had it worse. I actually thought VCU was toast with their early departure, coupled with Texas and Temple flaming out. But, you see games against other tournament teams in that schedule, and not just UVA or SJU, but Iona, Old Dominion, Gardner Webb, and near misses with scraps against Hofstra, CoC (the likely good teams of CAA), and Wichita State...VCU looks like a bid for an okay team who challenged themselves on paper, but their foes (many of them at least) failed to show. Not too impressive a schedule, weighed down by a bad A10, but good enough to pass a sight test where quality was harder to spot. It would have been easier to give the bids to the NCSU’s, Clemson’s, TCU’s, Indiana’s, etc....clearly, the committee had some different minds in the room this time.
|