2023-2024 College Basketball

[Pelado]

How do we still not have a thread for this?

With just under 10 minutes to play, Kansas State had a 20-point lead over West Virginia (70-50). With just under 3 minutes to play, the game was tied at 74.

K-State pulled out the victory.

Baylor wins at TCU.

[BlueK]

Fortunately this isn't relevant to BYU this year, but I think the NIT's new format is stupid.


For the 2024 NIT, conference regular season champions that do not win their conference tournament or are not otherwise selected to the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Championship will not receive an automatic bid to the NIT. Instead, the NIT will guarantee two teams (based on the NET rankings) from each of six conferences (Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and Southeastern). The top two teams in the NET rankings not qualifying for the NCAA men’s basketball tournament from each conference, regardless of won-loss record, will be selected. Additionally, the 12 teams automatically selected will be guaranteed the opportunity to host a game in the first round of the NIT.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2023-10-27/nit-board-announces-changes-nit-and-use-experimental-rules

[Lost Student]

Yeah, really dumb to give favoritism to certain conferences. The NET already favors teams from strong conferences so it's a double whammy against anybody outside the 6.

[myboynoah]

Dang, ISU dismantling Houston. XII basketball is nuts.

[byufan4ever]

Just for fun, I like to play Selection Committe and put in my own field of 68 teams. All conference tournament champs get auto bids. I use the composite Massey rankings, which has 30 combined ranking systems, to determine at-large bids, and seeding order. I gave some bonus points for P6 regular season champs and any team that did the double (reg season and conf tourney champs). For region placement, I took each group of seeds, and in order placed them in the closest Eilte 8 region to their university. I made sure no conference teams would meet in the first two rounds. In this scenario BYU would be a 5 seed in the West region playing 12 seed Charleston.

My Last Four In:
Boise St
Northwestern
Pittsburgh
Oklahoma

First Four Out:
Texas A&M
Cincinnait
Ohio St
Wake Forest

Multi-bid Conferences:
B12 - 9
SEC - 7
Big Ten - 6
ACC - 5
MWC - 5
PAC-12 - 4
AAC - 2
MVC - 2
WCC - 2

MM Scenario 1.png

[Pelado]

Just for fun, I like to play Selection Committe and put in my own field of 68 teams. All conference tournament champs get auto bids. I use the composite Massey rankings, which has 30 combined ranking systems, to determine at-large bids, and seeding order. I gave some bonus points for P6 regular season champs and any team that did the double (reg season and conf tourney champs). For region placement, I took each group of seeds, and in order placed them in the closest Eilte 8 region to their university. I made sure no conference teams would meet in the first two rounds. In this scenario BYU would be a 5 seed in the West region playing 12 seed Charleston.

My Last Four In:
Boise St
Northwestern
Pittsburgh
Oklahoma

First Four Out:
Texas A&M
Cincinnait
Ohio St
Wake Forest

Multi-bid Conferences:
B12 - 9
SEC - 7
Big Ten - 6
ACC - 5
MWC - 5
PAC-12 - 4
AAC - 2
MVC - 2
WCC - 2

MM Scenario 1.png

Isn't the Big East also multi-bid in your projection?

[byufan4ever]

Good catch, I have 4 Big East teams in!

[Pelado]

The committee should have figured out a way to get Pittsburgh and another Big East team into the tournament rather than six freaking MWC teams. At least let in Pitt ahead of Virginia, that made no sense to me.

Pittsburgh:
vs q1: 4-6
vs q2: 5-3
vs q3: 6-2
vs q4: 7-0
non conference SOS: 343

Virginia:
vs q1: 2-7
vs q2: 8-3
vs q3: 7-0
vs q4: 6-0
non conference SOS: 161


Pitt was better vs q1 but two q3 losses is costly. The other thing that killed them was that their OOC SOS is close to dead last in all of D1. The committee seems to think it's really important and have been consistent about rewarding or penalizing over it for years. There are at least a dozen examples of it in this year's bracket. You can disagree with their emphasis on it, but it's clearly there. Plus they have said it's important to them. It seems to be what tips the scales when they see two teams as being close. The reasoning is that teams control their OOC schedule and those who risk more deserve some credit for it. Also, good teams scheduling other good teams outside of their conference is just better for the sport, so the emphasis on it by the committee promotes that.

Virginia was ranked lower in the Net ratings (54 vs 40 for Pitt), and, for what it was worth, Pitt actually beat Virginia.

Pitt vs Virginia.png

[Pelado]

Virginia's advantages over Pitt seem to be the following:

No Quad3 or Quad4 losses
Better nonconference SOS
Better strength of record
Better KPI rank

Pitt has better predictive rankings (kenpom, BPI, etc.), more Quad1 wins and a better Quad1 win percentage.

[BlueK]

Virginia's advantages over Pitt seem to be the following:

No Quad3 or Quad4 losses
Better nonconference SOS
Better strength of record
Better KPI rank

Pitt has better predictive rankings (kenpom, BPI, etc.), more Quad1 wins and a better Quad1 win percentage.

The non conference SOS thing has consistently been a big one for the committee for years. Pitt literally had one of the very weakest possible in D1. Maybe theoretically they are a better team and no one is saying they are a bad team. Knowing how often the committee talks about the part of the schedule the schools are able to control, and still letting them in when they're on the bubble with a blatantly awful OOC schedule makes the committee look bad like a ref who is wildly inconsistent. The answer back to Pitt would be to schedule a little better or win a few more quality games so you don't find yourself on the bubble. Then you don't have to worry about it.

[Pelado]

The non conference SOS thing has consistently been a big one for the committee for years. Pitt literally had one of the very weakest possible in D1. Maybe theoretically they are a better team and no one is saying they are a bad team. Knowing how often the committee talks about the part of the schedule the schools are able to control, and still letting them in when they're on the bubble with a blatantly awful OOC schedule makes the committee look bad like a ref who is wildly inconsistent. The answer back to Pitt would be to schedule a little better or win a few more quality games so you don't find yourself on the bubble. Then you don't have to worry about it.

Yeah, I think there are just 362 total Division 1 teams, so Pitt having a OOC SOS rank of 343 is pretty close to the weakest possible OOC schedule. The best NET rank for any of their OOC opponents was #29 Florida (to whom they lost). The next best was #156 West Virginia and #157 Purdue...Fort Wayne.

[Clark Addison]

Nate Silver's model has UConn with a 23% chance to win it all. I don't remember where his top team has been in the past, but 23% seems really high to me.

FWIW he has BYU at 0.48%, which would rank them as the 22nd most likely to win (Disrespect!!!).

[BigPiney]

Lol, Virginia sucked so bad last night. I still can't believe how bad they were.

[byufan4ever]

The thing with OOC SOS is that if you put too much emphasis on it then everyone goes crazy scheuduling just top 35 teams or just P6 teams and then the mid majors or bubble teams are still left out.

[Moliere]

The beauty of the NCAA basketball tournament is that people are fighting over whether or not Pitt or Virginia should have been in the tourney. Neither of them would have a shot at winning much at all, which is why the tournament is great. If someone like Pitt gets left out, it really doesn't have much of an impact on who will actually win the thing. It's also why keeping the tournament at 64 (or 68) teams is best since it takes a decent season to get in but not a perfect season. Getting in is still an accomplishment.