SMC's Bennett: "They Won't Tell You How They Keep Score"

[RenoZag]

From ESPN: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...nament-chances

"Look at the season that Saint Mary's had," he added. "They were in the top 20 a week ago. I think people would rather watch both of us in Dayton than two Power 5 teams that finished seventh or eighth in their leagues."

"One hundred percent," Bennett said about the quadrant system hurting mid-majors. "Explain to me how the quadrant system is scored? There's the problem. I don't know why they do anything. I will tell you that they won't tell you how they keep score."

[bartruff1]

They should have beat BYU....One of the talking heads said that the Gaels turned down games with Creighton and Rhode Island.....if that is true.... and the circumstances would have allowed it.....well....they have no one to blame but themselves and Trey Young....

Go win the NIT.....

[scrooner]

St Mary's plan to prove that they can beat tournament teams.....is to avoid playing tournament teams.

[thickman1]

Bennett/SMC getting absolutely skewered on twitter tonight. Destroyed.

[webspinnre]

I know many here don't like Saint Mary's, which is fine, but objectively, they're a deserving team.

[Zagceo]

CBS and Turner Sports didn’t pay billions of dollars so a college with half the enrollment of a Houston high school could be on their airwaves (or whatever we’re calling them these days). The NCAA’s “corporate champions” (because calling them what they are, corporate sponsors, would only make the argument for paying players easier) aren’t creating ads dripping with Americana to run between stretches of a bunch of Australians running roughshod over a good, hearty, land-grant university from the Eastern time zone.
No, the NCAA wants Syracuse — everyone knows Syracuse. It wants Florida State — you know them from their football team. It wants past champions Florida and North Carolina State — they surely have some nice mini-documentaries on both schools they can run at halftime.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03/11/ncaa-tournament-bracket-selection-saint-marys-snub-college-basketball/

[gu03alum]

I know many here don't like Saint Mary's, which is fine, but objectively, they're a deserving team.

by what objectives? They have one good win. They didn't try to play good teams. They shouldn't be rewarded for running up the score against little sisters of the poor.

[bartruff1]

by what objectives? They have one good win. They didn't try to play good teams. They shouldn't be rewarded for running up the score against little sisters of the poor.

03 are you still planning on going to the Regional in Boise ??? What a great slate of games.....I am even thinking of coming down off my mountain....

[gu03alum]

03 are you still planning on going to the Regional is Boise ??? What a great slate of games.....I am even thinking of coming down off my mountain....

yep, bought my plane ticket 6 or 7 months ago. You should. I agree, there are some great teams to watch in Boise.

[GoZag]

St. Mary's should have got the message 3-4 years ago. Schedule tougher. I don't feel sorry for them until they do. Gonzaga about 10 years ago was hoping for a #3 seed but got a #6 seed instead. They learned the lesson that the committee sent and have scheduled tough ever since. I would have thought St. Mary's would have got that message before now and am concerned that they still have not got the message

[webspinnre]

by what objectives? They have one good win. They didn't try to play good teams. They shouldn't be rewarded for running up the score against little sisters of the poor.

By analytics such as Kenpom and BPI, and composites of multiple analytics. Based on the games they actually played, they're significantly better than several of the other at-larges who did get in.

[Hoopaholic]

By analytics such as Kenpom and BPI, and composites of multiple analytics. Based on the games they actually played, they're significantly better than several of the other at-larges who did get in.

but those analytics were not being used and everyone knew what rules the committee was using this year

[webspinnre]

but those analytics were not being used and everyone knew what rules the committee was using this year

Well, when the quadrants were originally proposed, they were supposed to be using these metrics, not RPI. More importantly, if the goal is to try to get it right, then they SHOULD be using them, even if they aren't yet. My ultimate point is that St. Mary's deserved to be in the tournament this year.

[CDC84]

By analytics such as Kenpom and BPI, and composites of multiple analytics. Based on the games they actually played, they're significantly better than several of the other at-larges who did get in.

In addition to the performance metrics (which should be taken into far greater consideration), the Sporting News has shown definitively over the past 20 years that teams with a winning percentage of 80.1% or greater - and SMC is at 84.4% - excel in the NCAA tournament. They either live up to their seed and most times beat it....especially non-BCS teams. The only difference between SMC and one of those typical non-BCS teams that ends up on the 12 line is that the others won their league tournament. That's kind of hard to do when Gonzaga's there with major conference resources.

Arizona State had 9 losses against teams who aren't in the NCAA tournament. A well known college basketball analyst is offering someone a free beer if they can find an at large BCS team who has ever gotten into the dance with 9 losses against teams that are not in the NCAA tournament. Yes, they have two wins over two number one seeds. But they were horrific beyond that. Awful. Also, Oklahoma at about the midway point in the Big 12 season just flat out quit. They didn't even try. I have never seen a major conference team exert less effort on a basketball floor than OU did the last half of the Big 12 season.

As much as I agree that SMC needs to begin scheduling better, those 2 teams don't deserve to be in the field over them. Neither does Syracuse.

There is also something else that is bothering me about this......is the NCAA more concerned about picking the best group of at large teams, or are they more concerned about "socially engineering" college basketball? Despite their constant emphasis on non-conference strength of schedule over the past 10 years, we have never seen less quality non-league games than we are witnessing right now. Moreover, the good ones are being played in Las Vegas, 2,500 miles from the campus of both teams. The number one thing that the college game has going over the NBA is campus excitement. We just no longer see these games like Kansas at Arizona, or Kentucky at Michigan State, or Duke at Florida. Everyone wants to go neutral, and neutral just bores the hell out of TV viewers.

In other words, the NCAA committee's attempt to "socially engineer" college basketball is not working. Teams don't care. Most successful programs are going to schedule the way they want to, regardless of what the NCAA "politicians" and "psychologists" have to say. I feel this will include Randy Bennett as well. He's not going to change because he's been burned 3 to 4 times already.

I still criticize Bennett for not taking the Rhode Island series (which would've started in Moraga) and for buying out the Nevada road game. I mean, would it really have killed him and his team to have played two games they could have won? It's not like someone was asking him to pack his bags and play at Villanova.

But I think the national criticism and trashing of St. Mary's has gone beyond the beyond. The truth of the matter is that the history of the NCAA tournament has demonstrated that winning games matters. You just don't see many 28 win teams in NCAA basketball. And winning games at a huge rate in the regular season leads to winning games in the dance. IMO, the way you "punish" a team like SMC is through seeding. You don't exclude them in an attempt to "socially engineer" the college game. It's going to stay the same way no matter what the NCAA commitee does. The NCAA's punishment of St. Mary's will not ignite other good non-BCS teams to schedule really tough. If you go down this strength of schedule road, nobody will ever be satisfied. The NCAA told Middle Tennessee State that they scheduled great, but that they didn't win "enough" of those games. Then someone is going to schedule tough games, win them, and then the "tough" teams will crap out like San Diego State did on the Zags last season. You can only do so much to predict whether a top 25 team will perform to expectations. And I've got news for you....the quality of non-league games is only going to get worse with leagues like the ACC expanding the amount of league games they play. This expansion will probably squeeze out even more 28 win non-BCS teams who don't win their league tourney.

I just feel the St. Mary's bashing has gone way, way, way too far. The truth of the matter is that the NCAA and critics have done this to a number of good, non-BCS teams over the years. We just feel it more intensely because they are a WCC team, and because Randy is "repeat offender" in the eyes of the committee and his harshest critics.

If you're going to bash anyone, do it to dysfunctional teams like Arizona State and OU with lousy overall resumes. But as usual, CBS/Turner wants those teams for the TV dollars. Who cares what makes for the best tournament. I think this issue speaks to a larger issue than whether St. Mary's deserved to be in the field or not. It's whether the NCAA committee is correct to "socially engineer" a game that it's proven they can't. There is way too much emphasis on SoS and not enough on winning games. I am really hoping the new "metric" next year will help the situation, but it will not if the NCAA committee continues to behave paternalistically like it has done.

[zagcheer78]

CDC84, thank you for your explanation of the system. Social engineering does not work, never has, plus the network looking for more revenue gives us a sub-par tourney.

Unfortunately the fans, including this one, tend to become cynical and distrust the powers that be.