Stanford Proves the Selection Committee was WRONG

[tornado]

Stanford is one of the at-large teams that nobody yet has come up with a good reason why they should be in the NCAA ahead of Bradley or Syracuse.

Well-- don't look now, but the facts are playing themselves out to prove how absolutely crappy the NCAA Selection Committee was when they made some of these picks.

Midway through the 2nd half, Louisville is murdering Stanford 60-29.

Here was Stanford's resume..
18-12, 10-8 in conf.
Lost in the first game of their conference tourney,
lost 7 of their last 11 games,
Lost every single road game in the last 6 weeks,
RPI was 65,
NON-conference SOS was 116,
Lost to Santa Clara, eight of their wins came over teams with RPI over 175! Lost FIVE times at home, including two nonconference games.

So, anyone want to explain how this team got into the NCAA.
Does someone at Stanford have pictures of Gary Walters' wife....

[numbr_9]

couldn't agree with you more. Stanford getting in was a complete joke. they had no business in the NIT, let alone the big dance. I have to think that missouri state or BU would have put on a better showing.

[tornado]

Louisville's been playing the deep subs and the waterboy for most of the 2nd half and is still cruising with a nearly 30 point lead.

Hey-- Louisville has a guy named Willie Scott!!
(a transfer kid from Cornell who virtually never plays except when they get pitted against Stanford!)
He's a 13th man kind of player and is in the game!!

Actually, all Louisville's deep, deep subs have played a lot.
Sub Earl Clark for Louisville has 12 points....

How the HE** did Stanford get an 11 seed ??????? !!!!!!!

[dogsrus]

Two of the teams many thought should have got in were beat 1st round NIT.

I don't think either of the three loses proves or disproves anything other than its always going to be a controversy around the last 6-8 picks.

[Lakeview Brave]

Two of the teams many thought should have got in were beat 1st round NIT.

I don't think either of the three loses proves or disproves anything other than its always going to be a controversy around the last 6-8 picks.

Exactly! Did MSU and Drexal losing prove the the committe right?

[pfunk880]

Stanford was just a laughable selection. Even worse than Arkansas, Purdue, or Texas Tech.

This is also a team that got crushed by Air Force at home.

[DannyCooksey]

Stanford was just a laughable selection. Even worse than Arkansas, Purdue, or Texas Tech.

This is also a team that got crushed by Air Force at home.

I couldn't agree more. In all my life watching the tournament I can't ever remember a worse, less deserving, at-large selection. They had as much business in this tournament as Illinois Wesleyan.

I was very angry when they were announced and it was proven today they had no business being anything other than spectators at this tourney.

Come to think of it, with how they performed maybe they were spectators. The selection committee screwed the pooch on this pick big-time and I hope someone points it out on TV tonight.

[mike radigan]

So what were the criteria the committee used to select Stanford?

Tourney champ? gone in first round, nope
Number of wins? 18, nope
Strong finish? lost 7 of last 11, nope
Road warriors? no road wins in last 6 weeks, nope
RPI? 65, nope
Non-con SOS? 116, nope

Someone, anyone, please explain.

[Lakeview Brave]

Dont get me wrong, I think it is an absolute joke that Stanford was invited. They were behind at least 5 teams IMO but I dont think you can use the fact that they lost as the proof. Just like people were complaining that Bradley got in last year, had we lost by 20 to Kansas we still deserved to be in.

[thefish7]

Dont get me wrong, I think it is an absolute joke that Stanford was invited. They were behind at least 5 teams IMO but I dont think you can use the fact that they lost as the proof. Just like people were complaining that Bradley got in last year, had we lost by 20 to Kansas we still deserved to be in.

That's true... I don't think Drexel's loss in the NIT means they didn't belong in the NCAA. The difference between Drexel or us last year and Stanford, is that Drexel and Bradley had the resume for it. Stanford in no reasonable term deserves to have been invited to the tournament AND they got beat.

[real fan]

How the he-- does a team like Stanford get in with that resume other than the head of the committee was from Princeton so maybe it was an academic resume which is about the only thing that makes sense; Texas Tech was not deserving and Arkansas should not have been included .

[Lakeview Brave]

Dont get me wrong, I think it is an absolute joke that Stanford was invited. They were behind at least 5 teams IMO but I dont think you can use the fact that they lost as the proof. Just like people were complaining that Bradley got in last year, had we lost by 20 to Kansas we still deserved to be in.

That's true... I don't think Drexel's loss in the NIT means they didn't belong in the NCAA. The difference between Drexel or us last year and Stanford, is that Drexel and Bradley had the resume for it. Stanford in no reasonable term deserves to have been invited to the tournament AND they got beat.

Agree

[tornado]

Too bad the NCAA Selection Committee engineered the matchups and seeds so that so many of the mid-majors had to play each other no the first round.

Example Butler and Old Dominion.
Both are very good teams, and both could well have knocked off a Maryland, an Indiana, or certainly a Stanford.

But they had a knock down and drag out battle with Butler winning.

The real story in this game though....

AJ Graves MISSED a FREE THROW!
he was 5 for 6 from the FT line, and now has missed a grand total of only seven of 149 FTs on the season (96%)
(Graves hadbn't previously missed one in 5 games.)

[tornado]

Well...it's happening again already...

In the first game played today, UNLV is running out to a huge early lead over Georgia Tech...

Georgia Tech is another of the At Large teams that certainly raised eyebrows.

Georgia Tech is 20-11, 8-8 in conference, RPI 52, non-con SOS 160!!
They finished 7th in the conference lost in the first round of their conference tourney.
and didn't play well down the stretch losing 7 of their final 14 games, and packing their early schedule with cupcakes like Elon, Jackson State, Georgia State, Penn State, Centenary, Troy, St. Francis of PA, Winston Salem State, etc.
They did not beat a single NCAA team on the road, and infact had an overall road record of 1-8!!!

Again, I argue, what good is the system, the RPI, the strength of schedule, the argument about road wins, quality wins, tough non-conference opponents, signature wins, etc...if all this goes out the window and Georgia Tech gets a bid just because they are ACC and the ACC deserves SEVEN bids come hell or high water!!