Zags/Sha tweets

[Hall Is Life]

If you don’t mind, Hall is Life, can you share/recap what the UNC committee member said? As to Virginia, let’s face it. No matter how much they didn’t deserve to be in, there was no way that these people on the committee were going to keep the 3rd place ACC team out of the tournament.

One of the CBS Sports analysts (don’t know his name) questioned why the Big East only got 3 teams in when statistically being the 2nd best conference in the country and committee member gave the answer you’d expect. Said something along the lines of “yea, good question, tough decision. We felt that other teams had deserving resumes and that’s unfortunately what happens with so many bid stealers.”

Then the same analyst asked what does the committee look for when analyzing resumes. What is the most important factor? And the committee member literally could not answer the question. Said different members look for different things and with a revolving board, it’s impossible to know what each member looks for.

He had a script. He had a plan. He’s a politician and a dirty one. They all are. What happened tonight was fraudulent on so many levels.

 

[sussexcopirate]

One of the CBS Sports analysts (don’t know his name) questioned why the Big East only got 3 teams in when statistically being the 2nd best conference in the country and committee member gave the answer you’d expect. Said something along the lines of “yea, good question, tough decision. We felt that other teams had deserving resumes and that’s unfortunately what happens with so many bid stealers.”

Then the same analyst asked what does the committee look for when analyzing resumes. What is the most important factor? And the committee member literally could not answer the question. Said different members look for different things and with a revolving board, it’s impossible to know what each member looks for.

He had a script. He had a plan. He’s a politician and a dirty one. They all are. What happened tonight was fraudulent on so many levels.

It' obvious they didn't have a criteria when select teams with glaring deficiencies on the resume were selected.

 

[hallwins]

This isn't the reason Seton Hall was left out. NET doesn't determine selection, only seeding. Try not losing to USC, Iowa, Rutgers, and Providence (two of those at home) next time, Sha.

Not true. It determines Quad wins which goes into selection. We neat Nova and it was a Q1 win. The next day, their NET dropped and it became a Quad 2.

Nothing really matters if UVA can have such a poor Quad 1 - 2 record and get in over us.
Michigan St, Dayton and FAU seed lines are a joke.

UConn top seed and has 4 conference champions in its region.

 

[SHU90s]

One of the CBS Sports analysts (don’t know his name) questioned why the Big East only got 3 teams in when statistically being the 2nd best conference in the country and committee member gave the answer you’d expect. Said something along the lines of “yea, good question, tough decision. We felt that other teams had deserving resumes and that’s unfortunately what happens with so many bid stealers.”

Then the same analyst asked what does the committee look for when analyzing resumes. What is the most important factor? And the committee member literally could not answer the question. Said different members look for different things and with a revolving board, it’s impossible to know what each member looks for.

He had a script. He had a plan. He’s a politician and a dirty one. They all are. What happened tonight was fraudulent on so many levels.

Thanks, Hall is Life. Disappointing but not surprising to read.

 

[SHUisNJsTeam]

But human bias in favor of high profile teams must not be underestimated.

We’re not some mid major and we’re not in a mid major conference! We’re a P6 school and people know who the hell Seton Hall is!

 

[catholicman]

Seton Hall also didn't have a single win against a tournament team away from Newark. That is no bueno and a major red flag for any committee.

We’re not some mid major and we’re not in a mid major conference! We’re a P6 school and people know who the hell Seton Hall is!

Not to the same extent as huge land grant colleges and other high profile schools from the Big 10, ACC, etc.

 

[SHU90s]

.

This board is in rare form tonight. Everyone is out to get Seton Hall! It's an agenda! Should have grabbed my popcorn.

Don’t hurt yourself, knocking down that straw man, SHU09! Most of the posters I’ve read here tonight are not complaining that everyone is out to get Seton Hall or that it’s an agenda against Seton Hall. Rather, they are making some very fair points about the resumes of the last few teams got in, and how - in a number of respects - those resumes were inferior to Seton Hall’s.

 

[walshtrips]

This isn't the reason Seton Hall was left out. NET doesn't determine selection, only seeding. Try not losing to USC, Iowa, Rutgers, and Providence (two of those at home) next time, Sha.

Read what you just stated. "NET doesn't determine selection, only seeding". The NET is the only reason why we weren't selected. Our Quad 1 wins were higher than 60 percent of the 68 teams. We finished 1 game behind Creighton and Marquette.

 

[garyshu71]

Seton Hall also didn't have a single win against a tournament team away from Newark (0-4). That is no bueno and a major red flag for any committee. Seven losses to non-NCAA teams is also pretty weak.

Yes and it’s not like Seton Hall has been rewarding the committee with great games when picked. We really have been putrid in the tournament lately. Like you said over and over just play a little better without the coasting in some games especially on the road.

 

[Single Seat]

Seton Hall has no one to blame but themselves. Don’t put yourself in the position to be on the bubble and have to rely on conference tournament results.

Don’t lose to Rutgers, USC, and lose every other major OOC game outside of putrid Missouri. It was a senior laden team, so no excuses there. The amount of blowouts they suffered throughout the year tanked their NET. And then, at the end of the year they had opportunities to cement their tournament status at UConn and Creighton but got blown out both times. Finally, the performance against SJU in the BET was horrible.

Quite frankly, there are zero sympathies. The results speak from themselves, and they can enjoy being in the NIT. It’s a losers bracket, and doesn’t matter whatsoever.

 

[catholicman]

Seton Hall has no one to blame but themselves. Don’t put yourself in the position to be on the bubble and have to rely on conference tournament results.

Don’t lose to Rutgers, USC, and lose every other major OOC game outside of putrid Missouri. It was a senior laden team, so no excuses there. The amount of blowouts they suffered throughout the year tanked their NET. And then, at the end of the year they had opportunities to cement their tournament status at UConn and Creighton but got blown out both times. Finally, the performance against SJU in the BET was horrible.

Quite frankly, there are zero sympathies. The results speak from themselves, and they can enjoy being in the NIT. It’s a losers bracket, and doesn’t matter whatsoever.

Thank you for that. We had a better case for inclusion in the tourney than at least 4 other teams. That's the troubling thing. Nobody would dispute that we could have done better in the non conference. But that we did well enough to get into the tournament is now beyond doubt. So your point is really a non-sequitor...

 

[TheHall87]

Not true. It determines Quad wins which goes into selection. We neat Nova and it was a Q1 win. The next day, their NET dropped and it became a Quad 2.

Nothing really matters if UVA can have such a poor Quad 1 - 2 record and get in over us.
Michigan St, Dayton and FAU seed lines are a joke.

UConn top seed and has 4 conference champions in its region.

Virginia's Q1/2 record was 10-10. Seton Hall's was 9-11.

 

[Single Seat]

It’s not beyond a doubt as they’re not in the tournament. Be upset all you want, but don’t result to calling me a troll just because you disagree.

At the end of the day, we all wanted SHU in the tournament, but it was a flawed team who set themselves up to be put in this position.

 

[dehere23]

It’s funny how 09 comes out when we have bad news . rarely hear from him after all of the great wins. What’s that about?

He posts here literally everyday, win, lose or draw. 09 isn’t like that at all. He just tends IMO to be more objective than most and isn’t a biased kool-aid guzzler.

 

[hallwins]

Virginia's Q1/2 record was 10-10. Seton Hall's was 9-11.

My oversight - UVA has 2 Quad 1 wins. We had how many?

 

[CL82]

Seton Hall also didn't have a single win against a tournament team away from Newark (0-4). That is no bueno and a major red flag for any committee. Seven losses to non-NCAA teams is also pretty weak.

The section committee chairman said "the tournament is not played at home" Still, it seemed like they completely ignored quad 1 wins. It seems like the optimized formula at least for this year is to play bad quad two teams on the road.

That said, I get the feeling that a lot of what this guy said was rationalization. For whatever reason, there was a decision made that unranked Big East teams don't matter.

 

[hbkmyr]

The section committee chairman said "the tournament is not played at home" Still, it seemed like they completely ignored quad 1 wins. It seems like the optimized formula at least for this year is to play bad quad two teams on the road.

That said, I get the feeling that a lot of what this guy said was rationalization. For whatever reason, there was a decision made that unranked Big East teams don't matter.

They ignored Quad 1 records only for the teams that they wanted in the tournament. They ignored Michigans States 3-9 Quad 1 record, but for St Johns, 4-10 is what held them back.

 

[hinson32]

View embedded media

How does Sha not know that?

 

[hinson32]

Read what you just stated. "NET doesn't determine selection, only seeding". The NET is the only reason why we weren't selected. Our Quad 1 wins were higher than 60 percent of the 68 teams. We finished 1 game behind Creighton and Marquette.

Not the only reason, your OOC performance was terrible.

 

[hallwins]

Frustration is for some teams

The section committee chairman said "the tournament is not played at home" Still, it seemed like they completely ignored quad 1 wins. It seems like the optimized formula at least for this year is to play bad quad two teams on the road.

That said, I get the feeling that a lot of what this guy said was rationalization. For whatever reason, there was a decision made that unranked Big East teams don't matter.

They ignored Quad 1 records only for the teams that they wanted in the tournament. They ignored Michigans States 3-9 Quad 1 record, but for St Johns, 4-10 is what held them back.

View embedded media

And then gave FAU an 8 seed with 2 Q1 wind.

Posters want to defend the Committee, fine. But, don't tell me the Committee was consistent in applying any of the criteria. The criteria are used to justify an outcome.

You can't say St John's flaw was lack of Q1 wins and then let in UVA and others.

 

[SHallguy2]

But human bias in favor of high profile teams must not be underestimated.

Bang you got it, high profile big name recognition. All the BS we heard was exactly that, no other explanation other than human bias.

 

[sussexcopirate]

What are you talking about? You say they didn't have a tournament worthy resume, but their resume is better than multiple teams that made the tournament.

St. Johns
20-12
4-10 Q1
10-12 Q1/Q2
5-6 road

Michigan St.
19-14
3-9 Q1
9-14 Q1/Q2
3-7 road record

You're lost, St. Johns resume is BETTER. The funniest part is that Michigan St isn't a fringe team, they got a 9 seed.

@shu09 Since you're talking in circles defending the committee, care to answer the comparison between St. Johns and Michigan St?

You said St. Johns resume isn't tournament worthy, Michigan State is? State got a 9 seed for this garbage.

FYI our resume is better than both, that's a fact.

 

[NYShoreGuy]

Frustration is for some teams



And then gave FAU an 8 seed with 2 Q1 wind.

Posters want to defend the Committee, fine. But, don't tell me the Committee was consistent in applying any of the criteria. The criteria are used to justify an outcome.

You can't say St John's flaw was lack of Q1 wins and then let in UVA and others.

There was nothing consistent about defined criteria and seed lines

 

[Bud Boomer]

Read what you just stated. "NET doesn't determine selection, only seeding". The NET is the only reason why we weren't selected. Our Quad 1 wins were higher than 60 percent of the 68 teams. We finished 1 game behind Creighton and Marquette.

If NET were a determining factor, why was Virginia (NET 54) chosen over St. John’s (NET 32)?

NET is not a deciding factor. In fact, nothing is. There are too many criteria to the point of having no criteria. The committee can do whatever they want.

 

[Bud Boomer]

Thank you troll. We had a better case for inclusion in the tourney than at least 4 other teams. That's the troubling thing. Nobody would dispute that we could have done better in the non conference. But that we did well enough to get into the tournament is now beyond doubt. So your point is really a non-sequitor...

Very few others seemed to think so. Out of the 200 bracketologists on bracketmatix, a grand total of 9 projected us to be in the field on Sunday. Board favorite Brad Wachtel got 67/68 teams correct and projected SHU out of the field.

It seems only people on this board think Seton Hall got screwed. I wonder why that is?

 

[sussexcopirate]

Very few others seemed to think so. Out of the 200 bracketologists on bracketmatix, a grand total of 9 projected us to be in the field on Sunday. Board favorite Brad Wachtel got 67/68 teams correct and projected SHU out of the field.

It seems only people on this board think Seton Hall got screwed. I wonder why that is?

How about you look at the numbers yourself instead of calling the people that did homers?

 

[hbkmyr]

@shu09 Since you're talking in circles defending the committee, care to answer the comparison between St. Johns and Michigan St?

You said St. Johns resume isn't tournament worthy, Michigan State is? State got a 9 seed for this garbage.

FYI our resume is better than both, that's a fact.

Yea. The mind boggling thing if you consider the seed lines is that they (SJU and MSU) weren’t event really that close in the eyes of the committee.

 

[hallwins]

Very few others seemed to think so. Out of the 200 bracketologists on bracketmatix, a grand total of 9 projected us to be in the field on Sunday. Board favorite Brad Wachtel got 67/68 teams correct and projected SHU out of the field.

It seems only people on this board think Seton Hall got screwed. I wonder why that is?

Seth Davis had us in and he was sitting at the desk announcing the brackets.

 

[catholicman]

Very few others seemed to think so. Out of the 200 bracketologists on bracketmatix, a grand total of 9 projected us to be in the field on Sunday. Board favorite Brad Wachtel got 67/68 teams correct and projected SHU out of the field.

It seems only people on this board think Seton Hall got screwed. I wonder why that is?

When looking at the actual metrics of certain teams like Dayton or Virginia or Texas A & M or FAU or Colorado, it became clear that we stacked up really well against those teams, better in fact. So people are now wondering what the secret ingredient was to put those teams in over us. It all points to two things: human bias and NET/KenPom.

 

[Pirate Russ]

I am sorry, a team that was a bad call (in Creighton game) from finishing 2nd in Big East (2nd best conference per metrics) deserves a bid. I think that is what everyone is upset about. We were a bad foul from finishing 2nd in the Big East (A conference that has the overall 1 seed, a 2 seed and a 3 seed). And it is not like the 2 and 3 seeds went unscathed in the league.

While i may be biased, I don't think i have listened to committee members that sounded more clueless. It was almost embarrassing. Every answer they gave was....that is a good question, and we gave the Big East serious consideration. At the end of the day.....just be consistent on how you select the teams.

And maybe this is done (and i don't realize), but these guys should provide documentation on why the last 5-10 teams were left out.

 

[TrueBlue1989]

View embedded media

In future years, we unfortunately have no choice but to run up the score.

 

[Halldan1]

View embedded media

That comment is a blight on college BB.

What has the game become?

 

[sussexcopirate]

That comment is a blight on college BB.

What has the game become?

It's all of college sports. A 13-0 undefeated power 5 champ that had beaten a preseason favorite from the mighty SEC was told they werent good enough to prove it on the field. Imagine winning 13 games in the Big East and being told you're not even worthy of an invite. Disgusting.

 

[Pirate Russ]

Fanta tweeted that that transfer portal opens up today. Is there literally anything the NCAA board does well. They have literally ruined college sports.

Is it nice that the players are getting financially awarded....yes.....but it is not like they weren't getting a 150k+ education for free along with all other types of freebies. I might be naive, but i find it hard to believe that people with a lick of common sense couldn't come up with something better.

And allowing the 2nd transfer without sitting out is ridiculous. I can see allowing someone to transfer the first time. And i think you can make exception for a 2nd transfer if a coach leaves, but that is it. If you want to transfer again, you need to sit out. You make your bed, you need to sleep in it.

 

[shupat08]

Fanta tweeted that that transfer portal opens up today. Is there literally anything the NCAA board does well. They have literally ruined college sports.

Is it nice that the players are getting financially awarded....yes.....but it is not like they weren't getting a 150k+ education for free along with all other types of freebies. I might be naive, but i find it hard to believe that people with a lick of common sense couldn't come up with something better.

And allowing the 2nd transfer without sitting out is ridiculous. I can see allowing someone to transfer the first time. And i think you can make exception for a 2nd transfer if a coach leaves, but that is it. If you want to transfer again, you need to sit out. You make your bed, you need to sleep in it.

NIL was SCOTUS not the NCAA board...

 

[LeftCoastPirates]

A few things after finally getting to read all these responses.

1. Yes you can make a case for SHU over a handful of teams to get IN. I especially agree that the two teams that come into question are UVA / MSU. I also feel that there were plenty of team misplaced on seed lines.

2. While being objective you can’t ignore that Seton Hall had some worts on their resume also. The OOC performance was one of the worst of teams being considered on the bubble. I have heard all the excuses of teams having to gel because of NIL, etc etc. but the reality is that was a part of our resume. Should our good outweigh the bad enough to put us over the top? That where subjectivity comes in.

3. 09’ is getting unfairly beat up here. He is just pointing out the other perspective here and it doesn’t make him a troll.

4. The committee gets stuff wrong every year, this won’t be the first and it won’t be the last. It’s never going to be 100% transparent and it’s never going to have the perfect criteria. When you have the chance to control your own destiny you have to take care of your own business and take it out of the hands of the committee. There were opportunities left on the table.

 

[HallB]

A few things after finally getting to read all these responses.

1. Yes you can make a case for SHU over a handful of teams to get IN. I especially agree that the two teams that come into question are UVA / MSU. I also feel that there were plenty of team misplaced on seed lines.

2. While being objective you can’t ignore that Seton Hall had some worts on their resume also. The OOC performance was one of the worst of teams being considered on the bubble. I have heard all the excuses of teams having to gel because of NIL, etc etc. but the reality is that was a part of our resume. Should our good outweigh the bad enough to put us over the top? That where subjectivity comes in.

3. 09’ is getting unfairly beat up here. He is just pointing out the other perspective here and it doesn’t make him a troll.

4. The committee gets stuff wrong every year, this won’t be the first and it won’t be the last. It’s never going to be 100% transparent and it’s never going to have the perfect criteria. When you have the chance to control your own destiny you have to take care of your own business and take it out of the hands of the committee. There were opportunities left on the table.

All fair points, but you left out one glaring issue...the Big East got 3 bids. If there are upsets in a conference tournament, then perhaps that conference should take the hit, see Colorado. Also, MWC with 6 teams, and Big East (2nd best conference re: metrics) gets half as many? These things just don't add up. Virginia, look at their record, beat no one in a lousy ACC.

 

[PirateFan94]

This isn't the reason Seton Hall was left out. NET doesn't determine selection, only seeding. Try not losing to USC, Iowa, Rutgers, and Providence (two of those at home) next time, Sha.

It is absolutely why they didn't get in. Net is a garbage stat. These committe members are lazy. They look at the NET and determine a cut line. Record is secondary.

 

[LeftCoastPirates]

All fair points, but you left out one glaring issue...the Big East got 3 bids. If there are upsets in a conference tournament, then perhaps that conference should take the hit, see Colorado. Also, MWC with 6 teams, and Big East (2nd best conference re: metrics) gets half as many? These things just don't add up. Virginia, look at their record, beat no one in a lousy ACC.

I am not defending the committees decision.

And of course (bias) believe the Big East should have gotten more respect.

But the MWC technically had 5 teams tournament worth, New Mexico based on their 11 seed goes down as the 5th bid stealer thus year, while Colorado St ends up in Dayton.

And as much as it sucks to not reward the 2nd best conference based on metrics (which everyone here says they are BS anyway), there is no such thing as the committee need to allow X number of teams per conference based on anything.

 

[Hall Is Life]

A few things after finally getting to read all these responses.

1. Yes you can make a case for SHU over a handful of teams to get IN. I especially agree that the two teams that come into question are UVA / MSU. I also feel that there were plenty of team misplaced on seed lines.

2. While being objective you can’t ignore that Seton Hall had some worts on their resume also. The OOC performance was one of the worst of teams being considered on the bubble. I have heard all the excuses of teams having to gel because of NIL, etc etc. but the reality is that was a part of our resume. Should our good outweigh the bad enough to put us over the top? That where subjectivity comes in.

3. 09’ is getting unfairly beat up here. He is just pointing out the other perspective here and it doesn’t make him a troll.

4. The committee gets stuff wrong every year, this won’t be the first and it won’t be the last. It’s never going to be 100% transparent and it’s never going to have the perfect criteria. When you have the chance to control your own destiny you have to take care of your own business and take it out of the hands of the committee. There were opportunities left on the table.

#4 has me scratching my head. Did Michigan State, Virginia, FAU, and Dayton take care of business? The answer is no, they didn’t. Yet all of them except for UVA were criminally overseeded. So much so that there is a national outrage over it. The committee can’t even answer the questions. What are we supposed to think?