ADVERTISEMENT

North Carolina AD Bubba Cunningham under fire for controversial March Madness pick as contract incentives revealed

This shit has been happening for decades. Either incompetent admins or ones with major financial incentives to pick a certain way. There should be no sniff of impropriety, no admins picking teams who may have agendas or conflicts.

How hard would it be to get an independent committee with a clear selection process. The committee should release their top 100 at-large schools for the tournament once a month starting in January so teams have an idea where they stand and what's being valued.
 
This shit has been happening for decades. Either incompetent admins or ones with major financial incentives to pick a certain way. There should be no sniff of impropriety, no admins picking teams who may have agendas or conflicts.

How hard would it be to get an independent committee with a clear selection process. The committee should release their top 100 at-large schools for the tournament once a month starting in January so teams have an idea where they stand and what's being valued.
I guess we now know how 5 at large from the mvc happened in 2006
 
Which reminds me how useless the butler ad was for us as he sat on last years committee...
What was he going to say, they beat UConn in December? Literally the only thing he could say is the big east should get 4 teams and everyone elses response would be a few weeks ago they only lost to Nova by 25. They only lost to Creighton by 20 and UConn by 30 2 weeks ago. They only lost SJU by 19 3 days ago. Their NET is 59. My bet is if those games are somewhat competitive our efficiency numbers are better making our NET better and giving us a real shot. My guess is he picked his battles and it was battling for the seeds of the teams who got in.
 
What was he going to say, they beat UConn in December? Literally the only thing he could say is the big east should get 4 teams and everyone elses response would be a few weeks ago they only lost to Nova by 25. They only lost to Creighton by 20 and UConn by 30 2 weeks ago. They only lost SJU by 19 3 days ago. Their NET is 59. My bet is if those games are somewhat competitive our efficiency numbers are better making our NET better and giving us a real shot. My guess is he picked his battles and it was battling for the seeds of the teams who got in.
My guess is the guy was an empty suit.
 
I guess we now know how 5 at large from the mvc happened in 2006
Maybe your anti cynicism posts about this are without some merit. They should not even have the appearance of these conflicts in the selection process. Not a good look for the committee and the NCAA.
 
Maybe your anti cynicism posts about this are without some merit. They should not even have the appearance of these conflicts in the selection process. Not a good look for the committee and the NCAA.
The very selection committee is made up of AD and Commissioners from P4 and then mid major conf...like forever
 
The committees consist of one member selected from each of the five autonomy conferences and three members selected from the seven highest-ranked nonautonomy conferences based on basketball success. The remaining four members are selected from the 20 other conferences. All appointments are for five years.
 
My guess is the guy was an empty suit.
Might have been but he needed something to stand on other than we had a big win 3 months earlier and we finished 4th in the conference. Nothing in the final 60 days of the season that said we’re playing good basketball. We beat a lot of non tournament teams. 4 gigantic blowout losses, 2 of them to non tournament teams. Maybe he could’ve said the other teams are equally mediocre but if that’s the best you got, it’s not good.
 
The committees consist of one member selected from each of the five autonomy conferences and three members selected from the seven highest-ranked nonautonomy conferences based on basketball success. The remaining four members are selected from the 20 other conferences. All appointments are for five years.
That doesn't mean that they don't have inherit conflicts of interests or they don't have an agenda. The lack of Q1 wins don't matter for UNC it is the Q2 wins that count. Oh wait Texas had 5 Q2 losses and were sub .500 in conference and Q2.

I can't believe everyone here is not saying what is your point?
 
Last edited:
Morrisey, the West Virginia governor wants answers on the process and if there was any misdeeds by the UNC AD to get his team chosen.

As a result, Morrisey said he has directed McCuskey to investigate whether any “backyard deals, backroom dealings, corruption, bribes or any nefarious activities” influenced the selection process, promising to “leave no stone unturned” in the inquiry.

“I’ve watched what the NCAA has done over a prolong period of time and I have seen the arrogance of the institution and that has been disturbing to me,” Morrisey said.

 
Might have been but he needed something to stand on other than we had a big win 3 months earlier and we finished 4th in the conference. Nothing in the final 60 days of the season that said we’re playing good basketball. We beat a lot of non tournament teams. 4 gigantic blowout losses, 2 of them to non tournament teams. Maybe he could’ve said the other teams are equally mediocre but if that’s the best you got, it’s not good.
They didn’t mention any of that and perhaps was used by people against us who wanted other teams - those many blowouts shown up in NET - but what they did state publicly was our non-conference. It was atrocious. We had 0 quality wins, a bad Q3 home loss (Rutgers) and our NET during the non-con was about 115.

We shocked everyone with the 13-7 BE season and 6 Q1 wins.

Ultimately we were the 2nd team out after 5 Conference Week upsets too. We didn’t do enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Section112
That doesn't mean that they don't have inherit conflicts of interests or they don't have an agenda. The lack of Q1 wins don't matter for UNC it is the Q2 wins that count. Oh wait Texas had 5 Q2 losses and were sub .500 in conference and Q2.

I can't believe everyone here is not saying what is your point?
Delusion lives in an walks of life. Many here want an identical forumula year over year as the utopian answer for at large admission. There are so many variances for that to be an impossible task. I don't agree with all the seed lines or locstion pod placement but it is a group that did the best effort they could and are ultimately not perfect.

In my time of following this event I have seen a 17 win team get an at large I have seen a 16 win team with 14 losses get an at large. I have seen the merit of a "20 win season" fall from grace.

What I do know is that expansion of this field would not be for best quality of play.

There may be those here who very well disagree with this assessment and that is fine however I promise that commish and AD that are part of this and other sport championship committees do not have preset thoughts assemblied to seek how anyone school will be screwed over or to appease any other school to make the field.

In the last 36 hours the platforming of such extreme conspiracy lunacies continues to be alarming. The gov and ag of West Virginia have larger scale issues to consider vs their marginal P4 big state school not making the field of 68.
 
When Dickie V complains about it something is wrong. He’s usually so positive and a shill for the ACC. One Quad 1 win? Wow!

This is further proof that the big conferences and blue bloods own things and almost a blatant decision saying to everyone else that they do.

And what a wimpy interview by CBS again.
 
Delusion lives in an walks of life. Many here want an identical forumula year over year as the utopian answer for at large admission. There are so many variances for that to be an impossible task. I don't agree with all the seed lines or locstion pod placement but it is a group that did the best effort they could and are ultimately not perfect.

In my time of following this event I have seen a 17 win team get an at large I have seen a 16 win team with 14 losses get an at large. I have seen the merit of a "20 win season" fall from grace.

What I do know is that expansion of this field would not be for best quality of play.

There may be those here who very well disagree with this assessment and that is fine however I promise that commish and AD that are part of this and other sport championship committees do not have preset thoughts assemblied to seek how anyone school will be screwed over or to appease any other school to make the field.

In the last 36 hours the platforming of such extreme conspiracy lunacies continues to be alarming. The gov and ag of West Virginia have larger scale issues to consider vs their marginal P4 big state school not making the field of 68.
A long winded post about nothing and nobody here is advocating for expansion with more teams. At least SHU Hoops has some points about the Butler guy pointing out the SHU blow outs and beating UConn. Then the committee flip flopped on that with UNC this year.
 
They also added a new metric this year and that helped UNC. Be nice if they said X metric affects this much of the grade and Y metric affects this much of the grade and that way teams and coaches know going into the year. Instead the subjectivity continues year after year.

Funny though how the big conferences always end up with the NCAA credits when a bubble team is decided upon.
 
They also added a new metric this year and that helped UNC. Be nice if they said X metric affects this much of the grade and Y metric affects this much of the grade and that way teams and coaches know going into the year. Instead the subjectivity continues year after year.

Funny though how the big conferences always end up with the NCAA credits when a bubble team is decided upon.
That is the shape of the selection committee

The committees consist of one member selected from each of the five autonomy conferences and three members selected from the seven highest-ranked nonautonomy conferences based on basketball success.
 
They didn’t mention any of that and perhaps was used by people against us who wanted other teams - those many blowouts shown up in NET - but what they did state publicly was our non-conference. It was atrocious. We had 0 quality wins, a bad Q3 home loss (Rutgers) and our NET during the non-con was about 115.

We shocked everyone with the 13-7 BE season and 6 Q1 wins.

Ultimately we were the 2nd team out after 5 Conference Week upsets too. We didn’t do enough.
Well, it seems that “doing enough” is a moving target. The fact is SHU was in the bracket as a 10/11 seed. They fell out of the bracket due to an unprecedented 5 bid stealers. This year there was one. The average is between 1.7 and 2.4 depending on how the analysis is conducted. So, IMHO last year’s SHU team “did enough” but fell victim to an unprecedented situation.
 
UNC's NET is 36. While we know the Selection Committee doesn't rely solely on that metric, 36 is certainly within the realm of consideration. As a reminder, we were 67 last year which would have been one of the highest ranks included in the field since the NET was established (RU at 77 in 2022 is the answer to that trivia question).

I am not here to defend UNC's inclusion but their profile is fairly similar to Xavier (NET 44).

Both have one Q1 win and eight Q2 wins. UNC is 9-12 against Q1/2 while X is 9-11. One selling point for UNC is their 10 wins at road/neutral sites. The Selection Committee has often prioritized success in non-home games because there are no home games in the tournament.
 
UNC's NET is 36. While we know the Selection Committee doesn't rely solely on that metric, 36 is certainly within the realm of consideration. As a reminder, we were 67 last year which would have been one of the highest ranks included in the field since the NET was established (RU at 77 in 2022 is the answer to that trivia question).

I am not here to defend UNC's inclusion but their profile is fairly similar to Xavier (NET 44).

Both have one Q1 win and eight Q2 wins. UNC is 9-12 against Q1/2 while X is 9-11. One selling point for UNC is their 10 wins at road/neutral sites. The Selection Committee has often prioritized success in non-home games because there are no home games in the tournament.
As a grassy knoll theorist I prefer to focus on their 1-12 against Q1. For added measure I recall their academic scandals a few years ago. When in doubt I mix in Roy Williams. Final piece is the general arrogance of large and powerful state university ADs
 
UNC's NET is 36. While we know the Selection Committee doesn't rely solely on that metric, 36 is certainly within the realm of consideration. As a reminder, we were 67 last year which would have been one of the highest ranks included in the field since the NET was established (RU at 77 in 2022 is the answer to that trivia question).

I am not here to defend UNC's inclusion but their profile is fairly similar to Xavier (NET 44).

Both have one Q1 win and eight Q2 wins. UNC is 9-12 against Q1/2 while X is 9-11. One selling point for UNC is their 10 wins at road/neutral sites. The Selection Committee has often prioritized success in non-home games because there are no home games in the tournament.
You forgot to mention the Quad 3 UNC loss and that Xavier has none.....
 
Bet no one picked this up ! north carolina gets an extra day rest. First four Tuesday teams always plays the Thursday first round games..
North Carolina plays Friday
Byu is a 6th seed...they have to play Thursday Saturday. Perhaps that impacted pod placement and region placement.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT