The NC State AD is PISSED for getting left out; does she have a case?

[Franisdaman]

NET is part of the selection & seeding process.

NC State is a notable snub. Who else has a case for being pissed?

Take a look at this:

NOTABLE SNUBS
#33 NET, NC State, 22-11
#35 NET, Clemson, 19-13

SHOULD THESE TEAMS BE IN THE NCAA TOURNAMENT?
#57 NET / 38 Tourney rank, Seton Hall, 20-13
#61 NET / 39 Tourney rank, Minnesota, 21-13
#73 NET/ 47 Tourney rank, St Johns 21-12



The 68 teams:

NET...Tourney
Rank/ Rank
3 / 1 Duke
1 / 2 Virginia
7 / 3 N Carolina
2 / 4 Gonzaga
5 / 5 Tennessee
8 / 6 Michigan State
6 / 7 Kentucky
9 / 8 Michigan
4 / 9 Houston
10 / 10 Texas Tech
14 / 11 LSU
12 / 12 Purdue
20 / 13 Kansas
16 / 14 Florida State
24 / 15 Kansas State
11 / 16 Virginia Tech
28 / 17 Marquette
18 / 18 Auburn
17 / 19 Wisconsin
19 / 20 Miss State
26 / 21 Villanova
27 / 22 Maryland
15 / 23 Buffalo
21 / 24 Iowa State
22 / 25 Louisville
23 / 26 Nevada
25 / 27 Cincinnati
13 / 28 Wofford
34 / 29 VCU
42 / 30 Syracuse
36 / 31 Ole Mis
29 / 32 Utah State
45 / 33 Washington
30 / 34 UCF
39 / 35 Baylor
37 / 36 Oklahoma
43 / 37 IOWA
57 / 38 Seton Hall
61 / 39 Minnesota
31 / 40 Florida
55 / 41 Ohio State
47 / 42 Belmont
56 / 43 Temple
32 / 44 St Marys
63 / 45 Arizona St
44 / 46 Murray St
73 / 47 St Johns
51 / 48 Oregon
40 / 49 New Mexico St
58 / 50 Liberty
68 / 51 UC Irivine
71 / 52 Vermont
103 / 53 St Louis
78 / 54 Northeastern
86 / 55 Yale
100 / 56 Old Dominion
121 / 57 Georgia St
115 / 58 N Kentucky
124 / 59 Montana
132 / 60 Colgate
176 / 61 Bradley
154 / 62 Abilene Christian
173 / 63 Gardner Webb
202 / 64 IONA
205 / 65 Prairie View
203 / 66 Farileigh Dickinson
222 / 67 North Dakota State
302 / 68 NC Central

 

[grayhair81]

He should be pissed at Gonzaga for rolling over in their tourney to ensure a second team from their conference got in.

 

[StormHawk42]

They weren’t even one of the last 4 out.

There’s a lesson to be learned here. Don’t handicap yourself by scheduling a dog sh!t OOC. Iowa’s noncon was still pretty bad this year but better than other recent years. I get nervous with how we tend to schedule.

Meanwhile, Oklahoma has no business being a 9 seed. However, they played a grand total of 0 Q4 games. That’s a huge leg up and gives you additional cushion for a mediocre season.

 

[TheTruthTheWholeTruth]

Meh, they beat 2 tournament teams, lost to Wake and GA Tech, and had an NCOS of 353..........

 

[Franisdaman]

They weren’t even one of the last 4 out.

There’s a lesson to be learned here. Don’t handicap yourself by scheduling a dog sh!t OOC. Iowa’s noncon was still pretty bad this year but better than other recent years. I get nervous with how we tend to schedule.

Meanwhile, Oklahoma has no business being a 9 seed. However, they played a grand total of 0 Q4 games. That’s a huge leg up and gives you additional cushion for a mediocre season.

I thought NET was supposed to incorporate a bad nonconf schedule. Apparently not. And the Committee definitely punished NC State. Gary Barta, I hope you are paying attention.

FROM ESPN:


Dreadful nonconference schedules

We're looking at you, NC State. The committee made a clear statement about the Wolfpack's nonconference schedule, not even including them among the first four teams left out of the field. NC State had the No. 353-ranked nonconference strength of schedule, last in the country. The Wolfpack looked like they would overcome the poor non-league slate earlier in the season, but combine it with a lack of impressive wins and a 9-9 ACC record, and Kevin Keatts' team was left out.

This isn't a first for the committee. Time and time again, it has sent messages by leaving out teams that played weak nonconference schedules. Despite NC State's impressive NET -- it was the highest-ranked team in the NET not to make the field -- it did not hear its name called on Selection Sunday.

 

[Hawksfor3]

I hope he doesn't call the committee "cheaters". We know how that worked out.

 

[Underscore2]

The AD has a case, but I have a hard time taking a team seriously that became a national joke. Only scoring 24 points in a game? You better make up for that in a huge way, and they really didn't.

 

[hawkedoff]

Doesn't really matter...next year they will judge things differently.

 

[TheTruthTheWholeTruth]

Take away one of Iowa’s wins against a tourney team, even against Oregon, add in a loss to Illinois, and we would have been in the same situation.

 

[L. Wade Childress]

Iowa tried to play a good schedule.

NC State did not. Their average win was 50 spots worse than ours, and overall SOS was 100 spots worse.

 

[Franisdaman]

Iowa tried to play a good schedule.

NC State did not. Their average win was 50 spots worse than ours, and overall SOS was 100 spots worse.

thank gawd our nonconf SOS was not in the 300's; we might have been in trouble!

 

[sbhawk64]

They played themselves into the selection committee making a decision. Winning more solves that problem

 

[Franisdaman]

They played themselves into the selection committee making a decision. Winning more solves that problem

To play devil's advocate, I can see why they think they belong over Minny and St John's (especially).


#33 NET, NC State, 22-11

vs

#61 NET / 39 Tourney rank, Minnesota, 21-13

or

#73 NET / 47 Tourney rank, St Johns 21-12

 

[HawkAlum2002]

thank gawd our nonconf SOS was not in the 300's; we might have been in trouble!

Our nonconf SOS still finished at 302 even with Oregon's late rally, but NC State finished 353 out of 353.

 

[Franisdaman]

Our nonconf SOS still finished at 302 even with Oregon's late rally, but NC State finished 353 out of 353.

yikes; 302? seems like we were playing with fire

what if we had not pulled off the N'western and Rutgers miracles? we would be 20-13 and likely out?

I know; a couple of what if's.

interesting discussion and just glad we are IN

 

[Hawkeyegrad2006]

I thought NET was supposed to incorporate a bad nonconf schedule. Apparently not. And the Committee definitely punished NC State. Gary Barta, I hope you are paying attention.

FROM ESPN:


Dreadful nonconference schedules

We're looking at you, NC State. The committee made a clear statement about the Wolfpack's nonconference schedule, not even including them among the first four teams left out of the field. NC State had the No. 353-ranked nonconference strength of schedule, last in the country. The Wolfpack looked like they would overcome the poor non-league slate earlier in the season, but combine it with a lack of impressive wins and a 9-9 ACC record, and Kevin Keatts' team was left out.

This isn't a first for the committee. Time and time again, it has sent messages by leaving out teams that played weak nonconference schedules. Despite NC State's impressive NET -- it was the highest-ranked team in the NET not to make the field -- it did not hear its name called on Selection Sunday.

The committee chairman cited their numerous chances but lack of success in Quad 1 games. He also said too many losses for some teams mattered as much or more than having several quality wins (I immediately think of Indiana and TCU here). Conversely, VCU and Utah State earned 8 seeds despite scarce wins against tourney teams. This applies to Washington as well, a team that had a solid record but didn’t beat one team that earned an at-large bid.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

Take away one of Iowa’s wins against a tourney team, even against Oregon, add in a loss to Illinois, and we would have been in the same situation.

Or if Iowa would've won all their games, then we'd be a 2 seed behind Michigan State..........same difference.

 

[TheTruthTheWholeTruth]

Or if Iowa would've won all their games, then we'd be a 2 seed behind Michigan State..........same difference.

We would have been the first undefeated 7 seed

 

[anon_bb9wlf9kj42py]

Anybody on the bubble this year has no complaints. It’s charmin soft and every resume is incredibly flawed for the last 4.

 

[Hawkfan_08]

We would have been the first undefeated 7 seed

We didn't play in the ACC so we don't get a 1 seed no matter what

 

[Hawksfor3]

We didn't play in the ACC so we don't get a 1 seed no matter what

We DID get one seed.

 

[grayhair81]

They weren’t even one of the last 4 out.

There’s a lesson to be learned here. Don’t handicap yourself by scheduling a dog sh!t OOC. Iowa’s noncon was still pretty bad this year but better than other recent years. I get nervous with how we tend to schedule.

Meanwhile, Oklahoma has no business being a 9 seed. However, they played a grand total of 0 Q4 games. That’s a huge leg up and gives you additional cushion for a mediocre season.

Iowa's OOC schedule was rated 305th. It is why they are a 10 seed instead of an 8 (which would normally be a good thing but not so much in this case).

 

[Hawkeyegrad2006]

Iowa's OOC schedule was rated 305th. It is why they are a 10 seed instead of an 8 (which would normally be a good thing but not so much in this case).

What perplexes me about SOS is the significant variance between different metrics while the underlying rankings are pretty consistent.

I wonder if NET more highly weights non-conference SOS vis-a-vis conference SOS as our SOS per KenPom is 28 (non conf 332), 26 per BPI (non conf 159) while NET has us at 85 (302)....That gap is gigantic.

Assuming my hypothesis is correct, might this be a way for disproportionally punishing/rewarding teams for the scheduling they can control (non conference) vs what they can’t control (conference, both what conference they are in and their conference schedule)??

 

[HaydenHawk8]

thank gawd our nonconf SOS was not in the 300's; we might have been in trouble!

Wasn’t ours like 290 or something? We got lucky because ours was still pretty bad outside of the ny2k, ISU, and PITT. Can’t be scheduling teams that are 300+ in the NeT. Need to find a little better competition.

 

[Clifford C. Clavin]

What I don't understand is why the committee would separately be looking at nonconference SOS. The SOS component of the NET would already be factoring this in, so they are essentially being punished twice. Yes, it was an awful schedule, but despite that, NET still had them in the top 35. I would agree with the AD and think he has every right to be upset. While there are head-scratchers every year, this year seems like no other.

 

[83Hawk]

The committee chairman cited their numerous chances but lack of success in Quad 1 games. He also said too many losses for some teams mattered as much or more than having several quality wins (I immediately think of Indiana and TCU here). Conversely, VCU and Utah State earned 8 seeds despite scarce wins against tourney teams. This applies to Washington as well, a team that had a solid record but didn’t beat one team that earned an at-large bid.

Next year the committee will give different reasons.

They do this every year. They give whatever reasons they want for teams getting in/out that are inconsistent from year-to-year, and even within the selections from the same year.

 

[MitchLL]

Somebody gets screwed EVERY year. It just so happens NCST is this year's victim.

 

[anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba]

He also said too many losses for some teams mattered as much or more than having several quality wins

Iowa State lost six of its last eight regular season games. But apparently several quality wins meant more for ISU than its many (often blowout) losses--including at home--at least based on its seed.

NC State didn't earn a bid. Cry all you want, but the AD controls the non-con schedule, so maybe he should look in the mirror. Don't play the absolute weakest schedule in the country next time.

 

[Hawkeyegrad2006]

Iowa State lost six of its last eight regular season games. But apparently several quality wins meant more for ISU than its many (often blowout) losses--including at home--at least based on its seed.

NC State didn't earn a bid. Cry all you want, but the AD controls the non-con schedule, so maybe he should look in the mirror. Don't play the absolute weakest schedule in the country next time.

No sympathy for nc state here

 

[IowaNiceHawk]

yikes; 302? seems like we were playing with fire

what if we had not pulled off the N'western and Rutgers miracles? we would be 20-13 and likely out?

I know; a couple of what if's.

interesting discussion and just glad we are IN

But then again, we were within a bucket of beating Maryland.

GO HAWKS

 

[Tylerl_28]

NC State didn't earn a bid. Cry all you want, but the AD controls the non-con schedule, so maybe he should look in the mirror. Don't play the absolute weakest schedule in the country next time.

When did she take over the scheduling? That hasn’t always been the case.

 

[Franisdaman]

I hope he doesn't call the committee "cheaters". We know how that worked out.

my bad! The AD is a she!! Since when did women make good ADs?????????????

ooops.......

 

[Franisdaman]

Meh, they beat 2 tournament teams, lost to Wake and GA Tech, and had an NCOS of 353..........

But I followed the rules!!!

 

[Franisdaman]

What I don't understand is why the committee would separately be looking at nonconference SOS. The SOS component of the NET would already be factoring this in, so they are essentially being punished twice. Yes, it was an awful schedule, but despite that, NET still had them in the top 35. I would agree with the AD and think he has every right to be upset. While there are head-scratchers every year, this year seems like no other.

I agree with you; NET was supposed to incorporate all the metrics, including strength of schedule. And that horrible offensive game? That was factored into their NET ranking too. And they still came out at #33. And #73 St John's got in, instead? I would have left St John's out and put NC State in because of this 40 ranking difference (I mean, come on; they are 40 slots apart!)

NC State had a great NET but the Committee chose to focus on the nonconf part of their NET ranking? Well, I am sure you could nit pick a component of St John's NET ranking, too. St Johns is not #73 by accident; they obviously are a flawed team.

NET was supposed to make things more fair in the selection process. This is why they scrapped the RPI in favor of NET. But did it make things more fair?

 

[TheTruthTheWholeTruth]

Maybe the NCAA will tweak the NET some in the offseason and add in quality of opponent to their efficiency numbers. NC St padded their stats, so to speak, by beating up on those tin cans early in the season thus bolstering their efficiency ratings.

Although if they do make that adjustment it would negatively impact the mid majors as well since their overall SOS is normally quite a bit lower than your typical power team.

One thing is for certain. The committee does not seem to have a uniform way that they choose the at large teams. They pick and choose when to use NET for seeding, when Q1-Q2 wins matter more than NET rating for seeding, or if a team is automatic disqualified for the tournament because of number of losses while another team with a similar resume and losses gets a 10 seed. It’s truly baffling. Hell, even Delphi scored a 341 this year (normally in the 350’s) on bracketmatrix because of the inconsistencies.

 

[mtdew_fever]

Sorry NC State...maybe if you scheduled anyone in the non-conference you would have been taken seriously.

I am glad they were left out.

The ACC had many good teams at the top, but their bottom tier was terrible.

NET is part of the selection & seeding process.

NC State is a notable snub. Who else has a case for being pissed?

Take a look at this:

NOTABLE SNUBS
#33 NET, NC State, 22-11
#35 NET, Clemson, 19-13

SHOULD THESE TEAMS BE IN THE NCAA TOURNAMENT?
#57 NET / 38 Tourney rank, Seton Hall, 20-13
#61 NET / 39 Tourney rank, Minnesota, 21-13
#73 NET/ 47 Tourney rank, St Johns 21-12



The 68 teams:

NET...Tourney
Rank/ Rank
3 / 1 Duke
1 / 2 Virginia
7 / 3 N Carolina
2 / 4 Gonzaga
5 / 5 Tennessee
8 / 6 Michigan State
6 / 7 Kentucky
9 / 8 Michigan
4 / 9 Houston
10 / 10 Texas Tech
14 / 11 LSU
12 / 12 Purdue
20 / 13 Kansas
16 / 14 Florida State
24 / 15 Kansas State
11 / 16 Virginia Tech
28 / 17 Marquette
18 / 18 Auburn
17 / 19 Wisconsin
19 / 20 Miss State
26 / 21 Villanova
27 / 22 Maryland
15 / 23 Buffalo
21 / 24 Iowa State
22 / 25 Louisville
23 / 26 Nevada
25 / 27 Cincinnati
13 / 28 Wofford
34 / 29 VCU
42 / 30 Syracuse
36 / 31 Ole Mis
29 / 32 Utah State
45 / 33 Washington
30 / 34 UCF
39 / 35 Baylor
37 / 36 Oklahoma
43 / 37 IOWA
57 / 38 Seton Hall
61 / 39 Minnesota
31 / 40 Florida
55 / 41 Ohio State
47 / 42 Belmont
56 / 43 Temple
32 / 44 St Marys
63 / 45 Arizona St
44 / 46 Murray St
73 / 47 St Johns
51 / 48 Oregon
40 / 49 New Mexico St
58 / 50 Liberty
68 / 51 UC Irivine
71 / 52 Vermont
103 / 53 St Louis
78 / 54 Northeastern
86 / 55 Yale
100 / 56 Old Dominion
121 / 57 Georgia St
115 / 58 N Kentucky
124 / 59 Montana
132 / 60 Colgate
176 / 61 Bradley
154 / 62 Abilene Christian
173 / 63 Gardner Webb
202 / 64 IONA
205 / 65 Prairie View
203 / 66 Farileigh Dickinson
222 / 67 North Dakota State
302 / 68 NC Central

 

[DodgerHawki]

I agree with you; NET was supposed to incorporate all the metrics, including strength of schedule. And that horrible offensive game? That was factored into their NET ranking too. And they still came out at #33. And #73 St John's got in, instead? I would have left St John's out and put NC State in because of this 40 ranking difference (I mean, come on; they are 40 slots apart!)

NC State had a great NET but the Committee chose to focus on the nonconf part of their NET ranking? Well, I am sure you could nit pick a component of St John's NET ranking, too. St Johns is not #73 by accident; they obviously are a flawed team.

NET was supposed to make things more fair in the selection process. This is why they scrapped the RPI in favor of NET. But did it make things more fair?

The NET is a step in the right direction, but it is still flawed as they incorporated some separate things and mashed them together. For example, it's really good that efficiency margin is a part of the metric. But it's bad that they don't adjust efficiency margin for strength of schedule. A 10-point win in a 65 possession game against a terrible is the same from an efficiency margin as a 10-point win over a good team. And why cut off the margin of victory at 10 points? Beating a team by 25 points is better than beating the same team by 10. I know the reason is to "not run up the score." But come on, it's Division 1 sports. If you don't want to get blown out, play better.
They still have the adjusted winning percentage which gives weight to road wins counting as 1.4 vs a home win being a 0.6. I would really prefer they go with adjusted efficiency margin and record. Let the road/home/neutral records, as well as the quadrant wins be part of the team sheet.

 

[SpartanJD]

Meh, they beat 2 tournament teams, lost to Wake and GA Tech, and had an NCOS of 353..........

Yup and Clemson went like 1-11 in Quad1 games

 

[SDHawkDoc]

yikes; 302? seems like we were playing with fire

what if we had not pulled off the N'western and Rutgers miracles? we would be 20-13 and likely out?

I know; a couple of what if's.

interesting discussion and just glad we are IN

Yes, Iowa's non con was once again garbage. Although not bad enough to hurt them apparently.

If the committee punished nc state for that atrocious non con, then it at least did its job in that instance to make up for a significant system flaw.

The NET, just like every other iteration before it, has significant flaws. I'm fine with the human element being involved with the decisions on the margins. The likelihood that the ultimate national championship would have been one of the teams that got left out of the tourney is quite small.

 

[HawkRugged17]