Top teams left out of the NCAA Tournament

[Da Coach]

Top RPIs left out of the NCAA tournament in the past 5 years

2009: San Diego State (34), Creighton (40), UAB (46)
2008: Dayton (32), Illinois State (33), UMass (42)
2007: Air Force (30), Missouri State (36), Bradley (38 )
2006: Missouri State (21), Hofstra (30), Creighton (39)
2005: Miami-Ohio (39), Wichita State (45), Buffalo (46)

What I notice immediately is how many MVC teams have been screwed. At least 1 MVC team every year is in the top 3 teams left out, and 7 MVC teams in the past 5 years are in the top 3 left out.


Just when it was being said that the MVC had "cracked the code" of the NCAA RPI formula!

[BradleyBrave]

Top RPIs left out of the NCAA tournament in the past 5 years

2009: San Diego State (34), Creighton (40), UAB (46)
2008: Dayton (32), Illinois State (33), UMass (42)
2007: Air Force (30), Missouri State (36), Bradley (38 )
2006: Missouri State (21), Hofstra (30), Creighton (39)
2005: Miami-Ohio (39), Wichita State (45), Buffalo (46)

What I notice immediately is how many MVC teams have been screwed. At least 1 MVC team every year is in the top 3 teams left out, and 7 MVC teams in the past 5 years are in the top 3 left out.


Just when it was being said that the MVC had "cracked the code" of the NCAA RPI formula!

I'd like like see this compared to the highest BCS teams ever left out. My guess is that it really doesn't compare favorably.

[TheAsianSensation]

Here are the #s for the BCS conferences in the past few years.

2009: Florida (54), Baylor (56), South Carolina (57)
2008: Ole Miss (48 ), Ohio St (49), Virginia Tech (52)
2007: Florida St (41), Clemson (46), Alabama (48 )
2006: Cincinnati (40), Michigan (47), Maryland (49)
2005: Maryland (57), Indiana (61), Arizona St (68 ) *DePaul was 53 in the old CUSA and left out

[TheAsianSensation]

The bigger smoking gun is this:

In the past 5 years:

2005: Of the teams who missed the NCAA tournament, the Top 5 RPIs belonged to non-BCS teams.
2006: That number reduced to 3.
2007: That number stayed at 3.
2008: That number rose to 4.
2009: That number rose to EIGHT.

[Bravesfan]

The bigger smoking gun is this:

In the past 5 years:

2005: Of the teams who missed the NCAA tournament, the Top 5 RPIs belonged to non-BCS teams.
2006: That number reduced to 3.
2007: That number stayed at 3.
2008: That number rose to 4.
2009: That number rose to EIGHT.

And the "experts" have the nerve to say that there aren't many "quality" mid-majors this year! Amazing!

[pfunk880]

Note that prior to 2005, no team had ever been excluded that had an RPI of 64 or less! In the past 5 years, all the teams above had better RPIs than that.

Are you sure about that? Doesn't seem possible since there are always the autobids with RPI's worse than that.

[TheAsianSensation]

Are you sure about that? Doesn't seem possible since there are always the autobids with RPI's worse than that.

That's obviously some kind of typo.

Anyways, in '04, LSU couldn't get in with a 38 RPI, and 9 of the next 10 teams with the highest RPI left out of the tournament were BCS teams. Whoa.

Something definitely changed from '04 to '05.

[Bravesfan]

That's obviously some kind of typo.

Anyways, in '04, LSU couldn't get in with a 38 RPI, and 9 of the next 10 teams with the highest RPI left out of the tournament were BCS teams. Whoa.

Something definitely changed from '04 to '05.

Yeah. Amazing we still got four teams in in '06 because of that!

[TheAsianSensation]

Yeah. Amazing we still got four teams in in '06 because of that!

2004 was a relatively good year.


2005 was the year of the massive screwjob the committee gave the MAC.

2006 was the year the road/home split factor in the RPI came into play, and the top 50 was littered with mid majors and no one had any idea what was going on. 19 non-BCS and 31 BCS in the top 50, which is a pretty incredible split.


Basically, the BCS teams needed a couple years to adjust their RPI for the home/road splits.

[BradleyBrave]

Something definitely changed from '04 to '05.

The NCAA can opt out of the CBS contract after next year if they want. If one plays 'connect the dots' it might explain why this continues to trend the way it is trending.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29654186

[TheAsianSensation]

The NCAA can opt out of the CBS contract after next year if they want. If one plays 'connect the dots' it might explain why this continues to trend the way it is trending.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29654186

I still don't generally buy the theory that CBS directly impacts the selection of the 34 at-large teams, but.....

[Da Coach]

Are you sure about that? Doesn't seem possible since there are always the autobids with RPI's worse than that.

Sorry, I had a typo there. It should have read:

Note that prior to 2005, no team had ever been excluded that had an RPI of 46 or less.

[pfunk880]

OK but Texas' coach Rick Barnes flatly said otherwise....and he'd have no reason to lie about it as he is among the BCS-boys who benefit from this action...

Note he specifically says it IS CBS who wants to engineer who gets to the Sweet Sixteen.
http://bradleyfans.com/vb/showthread.php?t=11602

I think that's a bit of a reach. The idea is that CBS would obviously prefer the big boys making it through, but they aren't going to influence things and "engineer" who wins the games, as you claim.

And when you use wording like "note he specifically says" when he clearly says nothing of the sort (I suppose you could argue that it is implied, but it is certainly never said), it is quite a misquote and unfair to Barnes.

[TheAsianSensation]

OK but Texas' coach Rick Barnes flatly said otherwise....and he'd have no reason to lie about it as he is among the BCS-boys who benefit from this action...

Note he specifically says it IS CBS who wants to engineer who gets to the Sweet Sixteen.
http://bradleyfans.com/vb/showthread.php?t=11602

I think it's more speculating by Barnes, although I'd love to know his reasons for believing it.

[BradleyBrave]

well I think he DEFINITELY did say something of the sort...

Here is more of what Barnes said if you actually go read the quotes in those articles...

"Barnes...dropping explosive comments all around ...

The bean counters in the league office...
???Well, they like the money,??? Barnes said

.... NCAA Tournament.....it??™s owned by CBS and CBS isn??™t going to change it. They like it the way it is.

???When they paid 6 billion dollars, believe me, whether the NCAA wants to admit it, it??™s all about CBS.

???They like the three-week format. They like the Cinderella teams coming in early. They just want ??™em gone by the Round of 16.???

clearly it is Barnes' opinion that since CBS has paid plenty, that they "own" the NCAA tournament, and they want the Cinderella teams gone by the Sweet Sixteen.
I guess you could read that differently...but I think it means CBS does have a say in how things go because after all, they own it!!

With the NCAA having an opt-out clause after next year, I would say that they maintain some 'ownership' of their tournament. However, in this economic climate the NCAA may not have the leverage they might have once had as far as possible exercising that clause.