2015 NCAA Tourney

Congrats to Gonzaga and BYU for earning spots this year!  

GU earned the #2 seed, and will play an essentially home game in Key Arena in Seattle on Friday vs. N Dakota St.

BYU earned an 11 seed, but will have to play in a play-in game against fellow 11 seed Ole Miss in Dayton, OH on Tuesday.  The winner gets #6 Xavier in Jacksonville, FL.  

The Moda Center will host games on Thursday: #7 VCU vs. #10 Ohio State, #2 Arizona vs. #15 Texas Southern, #5 Utah vs. #12 SF Austin, #4 Georgetown vs. #13 Eastern Washington.  This is a lucky break for EWU, as I have to think the crowd will certainly be pulling for the Eagles!

A couple teams left out to comment on. Murray St at 27-5 was left out. Who knows, a certain loss in December may have made a difference. PilotRam's Colorado St finished 27-6 and was left out. A big disrespect to the Mtn West conference.

A couple thoughts. First, it would seem that RPI no longer matters. CSU had an RPI of 29 or something like that. Some have accused CSU of "gaming" the RPI system. Well, I'm not sure how you can "game" an equation. Anyways, I know there's a lot of discussion of RPI on PN, so something to remember in the future. More here:
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/csu/mens-basketball/2015/03/15/colorado-state-ncaa-tournament-rpi/24829067/
Second, I don' think it's coincidence that the excluded teams were apparently replaced with questionable P5 teams. I feel like this is turning into the BCS or the CFP.
http://deadspin.com/the-selection-committee-loves-brand-name-schools-1691649636
And finally, I get the MWC disrespect. The conference has been playing worse bball the last few years, and have performed poorly in the NCAA tourney. Still....regular season champs BSU in a play-in game vs. Dayton on their home court? Ouch.

Agree, CSU should be IN!!

I haven't read the linked articles, but the only issue I see for not picking CSU might be strength of schedule....112 based upon RPIs.

KenPom ranked CSU at #68 with a SOS rating #150 overall and #225 non-conference only.

Hey, they've got a bracket in their name in the NIT.....win it all, Rams!

Ok St got in after finishing tied for 6th (3 way) in their conference with a losing conference record. "We're all strong and we all play each other, so we all have a strong strength of schedule". Texas and Indiana are another couple schools that don't need to be in it.

Is the B12 really such a good conference that one could have a losing in-conference record and still be invited? With rare exception, they should prohibit anyone with a losing conference record.

Additionally, in a system with 300+ teams logging 30 games a year each, a mathematical analysis is completely appropriate to determine good from bad. What that analysis entails can be debated. But it should remain transparent and should not be changed on selection sunday.

I got your mathematical analysis right here:
College Athletics Revenue
#1 Texas
#22 OK State
#34 Indiana
#69 Colorado State

A number of PilotNation regulars were up early this morning:

BYU just coughed up a hairball 2nd half after leading Ol' Miss by 17(!) at halftime.  Lost 94-90.  No idea why after a couple minutes, they let anyone besides Haws take a shot in the 2nd half.

up7587 wrote:BYU just coughed up a hairball 2nd half after leading Ol' Miss by 17(!) at halftime.

Yeah, mixed emotions about this one.  

A BYU win would have resulted in more "$ units" for the WCC to share and it would have certainly added to the creditability of the conference.  But I find it very difficult (but short of impossible) to root for BYU.

Interesting how many basketball fans I've spoken to over the last couple of months who think the same way.

All I know is if the rest of the tournament is like that game its going to be one heck of a ride.

That Mississippi play of driving the lane, drawing 3 defenders, and dishing off to a wide open big for a slam dunk, seems like a pretty good one.

DoubleDipper wrote:

Interesting how many basketball fans I've spoken to over the last couple of months who think the same way.

The echos from old MWC fans reverberate....

DoubleDipper wrote:So, 5 WCC teams in postseason play: GU and BYU to the NCAA; SMC to the NIT; PU to the CBI; and UP to the CIT.

Can the WCC go 5-0 in the first round?

Um, next question.

Can the WCC go 4-1 in the first round?

Pepperdine lost at Seattle U tonight, and Saint Mary's lost at home to Vanderbilt in the NIT. The WCC is 0-4 in the post-season.

NoPoNeighbor wrote:Pepperdine lost at Seattle U tonight, and Saint Mary's lost at home to Vanderbilt in the NIT. The WCC is 0-4 in the post-season.

Yeah, very disappointing from a conference standpoint.

Any chance at prestige is gone, and the naysayers (and GU fans) will be talking about the WCC being a one team conference....but WCC backers don't currently have much to refute that attitude.

From a $$$$ standpoint for the WCC and the sharing teams, it is important that GU go deep into tournament play, otherwise this will be a VERY disappointing season for the WCC and its fans.

DoubleDipper wrote:Agree, CSU should be IN!!
Hey, they've got a bracket in their name in the NIT.....win it all, Rams!

Well, that didn't go as planned, and Boise St. also lost tonight....but at least they were in the game until the last shot; CSU just never got it together tonight in their loss.

Possible the bracket makers knew what they were doing?

Guess I'll root for ASU in the NIT the rest of the way....they just got by last year's NCAA Champion, UConn, and they did beat Arizona this year, as I recall.

up7587 wrote:Northeastern had the ball with 20 seconds to go, down 2, and couldn't get a shot off?? pale

BTW, they were only in that position due to a bad ELOB from ND! Is it a Holy Cross thing?

Purdue blew a lead and ended up in OT with Cincinnati due to a bad ELOB play. Maybe it's an Indiana thing!

Day 1 results for major conferences:
Big 12 0-3
Big 10 1-1
ACC    2-1
SEC    2-2
Pac 12  3-0
Big East  4-0

Only 4 games were between 2 major conference teams.  Not all the Power 5 +1 did so well today.

Upsets seeds were a #10, 11 and (2) #14s.  Both of the 8/9 games were decided by one point, and the #9s both lost leads at the end.

Having the ability to record every NCAA Tournament game, I watched way too much basketball today, but from my perspective, a few things stood out:

1. The mistakes and missed opportunities that we often criticize UP's players for are also made by each and every team in the tournament.  But because the elite teams have many elite players, teammates are able to pick up the slack for those who are slumping or playing relatively poorly.  Missed free-throws, errant entry passes, off-balance shots, and turnovers were made by all the teams at a rate that exceeded most of UP's games, but a number of players made plays that most UP players are not capable of making with any regularity.

2. The court and game awareness and resulting decision making made by UP players is as good or better than the majority of teams I watched today.  However, UP players cannot come close to matching the skill level of the Tournament teams. UP's basketball IQ is as good as most, but the team's athleticism is not.

3. It might just have been a coincidence or a confluence of events, but some of the calls by some of the refs who are regulars in the WCC were often questioned by the announcers of the games.  I'm not sure the term, "make-up call" was ever used, but it was certainly inferred after one strange call was made shortly after another on a few occasions.

DoubleDipper wrote:Having the ability to record every NCAA Tournament game, I watched way too much basketball today, but from my perspective, a few things stood out:

1. The mistakes and missed opportunities that we often criticize UP's players for are also made by each and every team in the tournament.  But because the elite teams have many elite players, teammates are able to pick up the slack for those who are slumping or playing relatively poorly.  Missed free-throws, errant entry passes, off-balance shots, and turnovers were made by all the teams at a rate that exceeded most of UP's games, but a number of players made plays that most UP players are not capable of making with any regularity.

2. The court and game awareness and resulting decision making made by UP players is as good or better than the majority of teams I watched today.  However, UP players cannot come close to matching the skill level of the Tournament teams. UP's basketball IQ is as good as most, but the team's athleticism is not.

3. It might just have been a coincidence or a confluence of events, but some of the calls by some of the refs who are regulars in the WCC were often questioned by the announcers of the games.  I'm not sure the term, "make-up call" was ever used, but it was certainly inferred after one strange call was made shortly after another on a few occasions.

So, superior athletes make coaches look smarter?  Who knew.

Just watched UC Irvine fail to get a good shot to take a last second lead in a tie game, and then make a poor foul to lose the lead and the game.  Coach must be an idiot.

up7587 wrote:So, superior athletes make coaches look smarter?  Who knew.

Just watched UC Irvine fail to get a good shot to take a last second lead in a tie game, and then make a poor foul to lose the lead and the game.  Coach must be an idiot.

Haha, yeah, but it's got to be Coach Mike Montgomery's fault....the UCI coach and Coach Reveno were both assistants to Montgomery at Stanford at the same time!

They have cleared their Sweet Sixteen jinx.  Good for them, as three #1 or #2 seeds have gone down: Villanova, Virginia, and Kansas.  Several #3 and #4 seeds are also gone.  No region had all four top seeds make it through. Only the West region had 3 of the top 4 make it through.  The other 3 regions each have two lower than #4 seeds in the SS.  GU gets #11 UCLA next, who is the lowest (worst) seeded team remaining in the tournament.

The Sweet Sixteen includes the following number of each level of seeding:
#1 - 3
#2 - 2
#3 - 2
#4 - 2
#5 - 2
#6 - 1
#7 - 2
#8 - 1
#11 - 1