NCAA Tournament Bracket

Status
Not open for further replies.
#126      
HensonHall71
21ChampaignSt said:
I ran into him once and asked him if he read this board and he said no but that he had maybe heard of it. Could've just been acting coy lol
Click to expand...
Their discord members likely have a heavy overlap with this board and they clearly interact with them a lot (I think they read every discord post in their daily podcast) and they follow Piper and Werner on Twitter so I would imagine a lot of the relevant info flows to them in those circles

They are entertaining for what they are and occasionally have some good analysis of a game but you can’t expect them to have good Illinois takes all the time or be completely up to speed. But for being outsiders they clearly follow the Illini closely (likely because it’s the biggest part of their subscriber base and hence paycheck)
 
#127      
OrangeBlue98
Here is the full rundown of the selection committee.

hoopshd.com

NCAA Tournament Selection Committee

The 2024-2025 Selection Committee (the year the term is up is in parenthesis): BUBBA CUNNINGHAM (2025) – North Carolina Athletic Director (Chairperson) MARK COYLE (2026) – Minnesot…
hoopshd.com hoopshd.com

BUBBA CUNNINGHAM (2025) – North Carolina Athletic Director (Chairperson)

MARK COYLE (2026) – Minnesota Athletic Director

GREG BYRNE (2026) – Alabama Athletic Director

KEITH GILL (2026) – Sun Belt Commissioner (Vice-Chairperson)

LEE REED (2026) – Georgetown Athletic Director

MARTIN NEWTON (2027) – Samford Athletic Director

TOM WISTRCILL (2027) – Big Sky Commissioner

ARTHUR JOHNSON (2028) – Temple Athletic Director

IRMA GARCIA (2029) – Manhattan Athletic Director

STU JACKSON (2029) – West Coast Conference Commissioner

ZACK LASSITER (2029) – Abilene Christian Athletic Director

CHAD WEIBERG (2029) – Oklahoma State Athletic Director

I get the frustration about UNC getting in with the UNC AD as the chair of the committee. However, a completely "outsider" committee isn't going to help things a lot. You need some sort of knowledge about the product to be on the committee. I equate it to a corporate board of directors. Yes, you need a degree of independence. However, you need enough understanding of the organization and industry to exercise proper oversight.

Here's an ancillary situation - suppose Josh Whitman was the chair of the CFP committee (and I could absolutely see that one day), and Illinois got in as a lower-seeded at large team. I'm sure there would be some cries about Illinois being in over a different team, whether or not they are justified.

I personally still feel like this was a matter of TV ratings than it was about the chair being the UNC AD. Not saying there was ZERO influence, but I think weighing UNC against another team in the play-in games (which probably don't have great ratings unless a big-name team is playing) is a more logical theory to chase.
 
#128      
Piotyr
illini510 said:
The other thing that bothers me about the UNC inclusion was that the vice head of the committee specifically said that if UAB had beat Memphis, North Carolina would've been the first one out. Does anyone actually really believe that? It's like they wanted to emphasize that to the extreme. Had UAB beat Memphis, my belief is that they would've still kept UNC in the Dayton and would've sacrificed San Diego St. No doubt in my mind that would've happened. I think this single inclusion tarnished the selection show b/c all of the attention went onto UNC and not as much on the other deserving teams
Click to expand...
I mean, they were the last team on the seed list, and if UAB beats Memphis, that bumps the last team on the seed list out, doesn't get much more simple logic than that.
 
#129      
Heisenbobble
RML said:
Honestly, the NC AD should have said, "hey guys, we don't deserve it and it'll look bad if you put us in. For the good of the tournament, it's best if you leave us out."
Click to expand...
Michael Jordan Lol GIF
 
#130      
ChiefGritty
www.espn.com

Joe Lunardi reacts to the 2025 men's NCAA tournament bracket

After genuinely consistent selections in the NET era, the committee's decision to include both Texas and North Carolina has stumped our resident bracketologist.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

A good point from Lunardi. You can make the case for Texas, you can make the case for UNC, but those two cases completely contradict one another.

You just can't get around how much emphasis the committee itself has put on Quad 1 wins since that metric was introduced.

They seem to have gotten completely wrapped around the axle on the idea of "Non-conference SOS"

The Big Two era with such a hyper-concentration of resources in just two leagues that play 18-20 games against each other does make this all harder, no doubt. But they've really blown it here.
 
#131      
Goillinikobd
Piotyr said:
I mean, they were the last team on the seed list, and if UAB beats Memphis, that bumps the last team on the seed list out, doesn't get much more simple logic than that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, well the conspiracy part of me says it’s easy to come up with that explanation after the fact. We will never know if that was actually the plan before the fact.

Show me a signed, time stamped, notarized document that laid out that scenario BEFORE the UAB game

😄
 
#133      
Piotyr
This season continues to feel like the most top-heavy season in recent memory, and the 1 and 2 seeds were basically nailed down by the beginning of February.

That said, I'm sure one of them will lose horribly and somehow ruin that narrative, but it's awfully tempting to put all 1 and 2 seeds in the E8 this season.
 
#134      
ChiefGritty
Goillinikobd said:
Can the NC AD give himself a raise?
Click to expand...
There's a whole question of Hubert Davis' fitness for that job and job security that's being severely under-analyzed in everyone's search for a conspiracy theory here. Did the UNC AD even want the team in the tournament? I'm sure the Texas AD didn't.

It's obvious what happened here, the entire group got themselves totally turned around on the brand name and the "eye test" of a team they knew too much about relative to others and they just blew it.
 
#135      
OrangeBlue98
Piotyr said:
This season continues to feel like the most top-heavy season in recent memory, and the 1 and 2 seeds were basically nailed down by the beginning of February.

That said, I'm sure one of them will lose horribly and somehow ruin that narrative, but it's awfully tempting to put all 1 and 2 seeds in the E8 this season.
Click to expand...
This year is so, so odd.

I would agree with you that the top 8 teams are top-heavy. But then in the same breath, I look at the bracket and have already picked Louisville to upset Auburn and am debating the same for Gonzaga vs Houston (which would COMPLETELY open up the region Illinois is in given the bottom half of the region is wide open). I can also see St. Mary's giving Alabama fits in a 2-7 game given the way the Gaels can control tempo and slow a game down.

So in other words, my current mood when looking at the bracket. :)
Sesame Street Idk GIF
 
#136      
Illwinsagain
OrangeBlue98 said:
This year is so, so odd.

I would agree with you that the top 8 teams are top-heavy. But then in the same breath, I look at the bracket and have already picked Louisville to upset Auburn and am debating the same for Gonzaga vs Houston (which would COMPLETELY open up the region Illinois is in given the bottom half of the region is wide open). I can also see St. Mary's giving Alabama fits in a 2-7 game given the way the Gaels can control tempo and slow a game down.

So in other words, my current mood when looking at the bracket. :)
Sesame Street Idk GIF
Click to expand...
I years past, when I was better at picking brackets, I would commonly have top teams knocked out prior to playing the Illini. So, my Illini victories didn't appear to surprising and they would end up in the Final 4. Maybe I should go back to that method.
 
#137      
AyoDos11
ChiefGritty said:
www.espn.com

Joe Lunardi reacts to the 2025 men's NCAA tournament bracket

After genuinely consistent selections in the NET era, the committee's decision to include both Texas and North Carolina has stumped our resident bracketologist.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

A good point from Lunardi. You can make the case for Texas, you can make the case for UNC, but those two cases completely contradict one another.

You just can't get around how much emphasis the committee itself has put on Quad 1 wins since that metric was introduced.

They seem to have gotten completely wrapped around the axle on the idea of "Non-conference SOS"

The Big Two era with such a hyper-concentration of resources in just two leagues that play 18-20 games against each other does make this all harder, no doubt. But they've really blown it here.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it really doesn't make sense. UNC's Non-conference SOS is 5th in the country, but their best OOC wins are against UCLA and Dayton. It shouldn't matter if a team's OOC schedule is really difficult if they lose all the games.
 
#138      
illini510
Piotyr said:
I mean, they were the last team on the seed list, and if UAB beats Memphis, that bumps the last team on the seed list out, doesn't get much more simple logic than that.
Click to expand...
That's what they want the country to think. They did this in such a way to put the committee in the best possible light as possible given the egregious decision to include UNC in the tournament. They think the fans and media will fall for the fact that they would've been out if UAB had but won. Don't you see? They made UNC the last team to cover their butts. IMO, the reality is just like they left out Boise St, they would've left out SDSU before leaving out precious UNC.
 
#141      
Piotyr
illini510 said:
That's what they want the country to think. They did this in such a way to put the committee in the best possible light as possible given the egregious decision to include UNC in the tournament. They think the fans and media will fall for the fact that they would've been out if UAB had but won. Don't you see? They made UNC the last team to cover their butts. IMO, the reality is just like they left out Boise St, they would've left out SDSU before leaving out precious UNC.
Click to expand...
Or, just hear me out here, they unfairly penalized a WVU team for injury, and as a result a UNC team who was right near the bubble cut line got the benefit. By Sunday afternoon, the bracket matrix was fairly evenly split on that last spot for Indiana, Texas, and UNC, and the WVU snub just made it so two of them made it.

If anything the opposite logic for Texas and UNC is puzzling, but including them isn't some vast conspiracy, and this level of lunacy for what is effectively the 37th place team in the bracket is a little much.
 
#145      
the juiceman cometh
Dan said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1901658962425962887
Click to expand...
I wish this was a door that had not been opened. We may not like the result that the Selection Committee came up with but I'm not sure I want the Committee to be thinking about potential lawsuits and political pressure while they make their choices. The problem here with the WV governor getting involved is that if this winds up going down the road of political pressure, in the current environment, I would fear results would become more unbiased not less. And I'm not talking about bias towards name-brand schools, but perhaps bias towards schools based on who is in power and who is advocating for them. Not a welcome development. Something to watch for is if any politicians from outside WV weigh in support of WVU and Gov. Morrisey. That could be a bad sign.
 
#147      
NASchamp
OrangeBlue98 said:
This year is so, so odd.

I would agree with you that the top 8 teams are top-heavy. But then in the same breath, I look at the bracket and have already picked Louisville to upset Auburn and am debating the same for Gonzaga vs Houston (which would COMPLETELY open up the region Illinois is in given the bottom half of the region is wide open). I can also see St. Mary's giving Alabama fits in a 2-7 game given the way the Gaels can control tempo and slow a game down.

So in other words, my current mood when looking at the bracket. :)
Sesame Street Idk GIF
Click to expand...
This is where the most Illinois thing can happen (getting my ChiefGritty hat on ;)). We get what looks like an awesome draw (for once), Houston loses early, and we still find a way to sh*t the bed in the first weekend. The committee gave us an easy path this year because they knew we were too inconsistent to take advantage of it.

The NCAA vs Illinois conspiracy lives on!!!

/s (kinda)
 
#149      
illini510
Piotyr said:
Or, just hear me out here, they unfairly penalized a WVU team for injury, and as a result a UNC team who was right near the bubble cut line got the benefit. By Sunday afternoon, the bracket matrix was fairly evenly split on that last spot for Indiana, Texas, and UNC, and the WVU snub just made it so two of them made it.

If anything the opposite logic for Texas and UNC is puzzling, but including them isn't some vast conspiracy, and this level of lunacy for what is effectively the 37th place team in the bracket is a little much.
Click to expand...
UNC got the benefit of being near the bubble cut line? No, their AD is the head of the committee. That's what happens. It isn't conspiracy if it logically makes sense. Do we reward teams for winning against high major opponents or we do we reward teams for playing high major opponents but losing 95% of those games but still use the excuse that their Quad 2 record was 8-0 and their WOB(wins above bubble) was strong along with the Net Ranking being strong. But, the point about the logic between Texas getting in and UNC getting in is correct. They were not consistent with their reasons for including one team vs another. There was clear bias here. Clear as the night sky
 
#150      
Illini2010-11
Some of this is just ridiculous. West Virginia did themselves no favors by losing to a very bad Colorado team on Wednesday. As far as I am concerned, West Virginia played themselves out of of the tournament. North Carolina took care of business the last few weeks by beating everybody (with exception of Duke). When you look at the NET, West Virginia simply did not do enough. I personally would not have placed North Carolina in the tournament, but it is sour grapes for all this backlash in keeping West Virginia out. West Virginia is putting in more effort complaining about being left out than they did taking care of business vs a bad Colorado team. If they win that game, there is no way that West Virginia is on the outside looking in. In some ways, other teams have a more legitimate case than West Virginia.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back