Bubble Watch: Did the Committee get it Right?

Every year there on Selection Sunday there are gripes and compliments, displeasure and happiness, and the annual they got it wrong or they did a great job. How you choose to interpret it is mainly built on what team you choose to support and if you are able to separate your feelings for teams that have good players, stories or the like. Everyone has different opinions for most years, which makes you think that if there are unanimous opinions then the committee might have really suffered a fateful misstep in their process.

This year there appears to have been a glaring mistake that took away the a bid from other teams that are more deserving, but before I go into that everything I say should be prefaced with the following: despite my words that this mistake resulted in one team not being in that in my opinion, should have, the teams on the bubble popped their own bubble. Teams all control their own destiny and by losing games you shouldn’t have, not challenging themselves out of conference, not winning against good teams, not winning on the road, or having low standing on metrics. These are all things that teams can control and THEY cost themselves, the committee may have erred by not having them in, but they were in that situation due to their poor play, scheduling, or both that should leave them thinking what they could have done, not what they tournament did.

With that being said the most glaring issue in this tournament is the fact Tulsa is in the field. The Golden Hurricanes had a case to be in the tournament had they won their opening round game and won their second round game in the American Athletic Conference Tournament, but instead they followed a regular season loss to lowly Memphis, with an absolute drubbing at the hands of the Tigers. That alone gave Tulsa two losses to sub 100 RPI teams and when you throw in a loss to Oral Roberts in the non-conference that gives them three such losses. Now many will point to the fact others on the bubble have bad losses like that as well, but how does Tulsa deserve a bid over say Monmouth or San Diego State?

Monmouth and San Diego State had better cases point blank. You want quality wins? Monmouth beat Notre Dame, USC, and Iona, while San Diego State beat Cal and Fresno State (I know San Diego State is lacking a tad in this area, but they make up for it in other areas). How about non-conference strength of schedule? Monmouth was 129 while Tulsa was 110, and San Diego was 5th. Monmouth also could have had a stronger strength of schedule had perennial powers Georgetown and UCLA not collapsed and shriveled up into nothingness. Both Monmouth and San Diego State were also both better when playing on the road or in neutral site games with San Diego State going 12-5 and  Monmouth possessing an impressive 17-6 record. Meanwhile, Tulsa was just 8-8.

Or maybe the committee prefers how you finish. Monmouth and San Diego State both made it to their respective conference tournament finals with teams that both have RPI’s below 100 (Iona at 88, Fresno State at 69)and they each posted 10-2 and 9-3 record respectively in their last 12 games. Meanwhile, Tulsa lost their first round AAC tournament game to Memphis who has an RPI of 136 and finished their final 12 games at 7-5.

The more you look the more you realize Tulsa is not as deserving as those two schools and this sends a dangerous message to the “little guys” or mid-majors. You can schedule whoever you want, wherever you want, but if you lose more than once or twice in your inferiors conference, have fun in the NIT. Monmouth went out of their way to challenge themselves and picked up impressive wins along the way.

Teams should be rewarded when they beat good teams out of conference and Tulsa’s best non-conference win came against a Wichita State team that didn’t have their star point guard Fred Van Vleet, and their next best win out of conference was against Ohio. While Monmouth has the aforementioned games against Notre Dame and USC, and San Diego State has the Cal win.

There is no reasonable way to explain the selection of Tulsa and unlike other years where days or weeks later the process is understandable, this will sting for a long time for both San Diego State and Monmouth, especially for those seniors.

There is no way to change these picks and even if by some minor miracle Tulsa makes it to the elite eight, that does nothing to prove their standing. Their standing is based on what they did prior to the tournament and even if they win those games they still don’t belong there.

The disappointment will be there for a while and this message that was sent to the mid-majors is awfully sad. No matter what this is a “big boy” or power five tournament only.

For future mid-majors, don’t hold your breath for that invite to the dance if you don’t win your automatic qualifier. You might be holding it for a long time.

Other disappointments:

• Michigan State not being a number one seed was surprising and just ridiculous. Michigan State won the conference tournament of one of the toughest leagues, came in second in the regular season and have a win against top overall seed Kansas on a neutral court. Virginia is a very good team, but they didn’t win their regular season title nor the conference tournament. Had they won the conference tournament you could make an argument for them, but Michigan State, led by player of the year candidate Denzel Valentine, are the better choice.
• Why is Vanderbilt in? This is not as an egregious error as having Tulsa in, but it is still a head scratcher. The Commodores had a good non-conference strength of schedule which probably helped them a good deal, but they didn’t win against any of the tough non-conference teams they played. Their best non-conference win was against Stony Brook. They also have a 2-7 record vs the RPI top 50 and 9-13 record vs the RPI top 150. Driving the point home, they were just 5-11 on neutral courts and road games. Not a good look for the committee this year.
• Kentucky as a four seed was questionable, but the committee must have taken into account the fact the SEC was just okay once again. However, one has to wonder why Texas A&M was seeded over Kentucky when Kentucky won the conference tournament and had a stronger non-conference strength of schedule. Not a huge error, but a curious call.

ATTN Dynasty Commissioners: Do you want to do something cool for your league? How about a 1-hour live show dedicated to YOUR league? Team-by-team breakdowns, rankings, and more. For details and to book a show, visit: GoingFor2.com/plp.