The Jimmer show continues today with BYU's Sweet Sixteen game against Florida. Florida is a tough team that has all five starters returning. BYU is coming off of their 22 point blow-out of Gonzaga.
Showing posts with label BYU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BYU. Show all posts
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Amazing - It's Going To Happen Today
The Jimmer show continues today with BYU's Sweet Sixteen game against Florida. Florida is a tough team that has all five starters returning. BYU is coming off of their 22 point blow-out of Gonzaga.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
2011 NCAA Tournament: Whorish Propaganda
Watch as the CBS whores ask softball questions to a university in Connecticut's Athletic Director, Jeff Hathaway (next year's head tournament selection whore).
Media whore, John Rothstein's question: Why give one of the last four at-large bids to a small conference team (VCU) and not give all of the bids to 'big conference' teams.
Shots Heard: What kind of f'd up question is that? Stop acting like the 'smaller schools' are 'given' anything.
Jeff Hathaway: He references 'the eye ball test' and data.
Shots Heard: Seriously, the eye ball test? You have the RPI. You know EXACTLY what teams have accomplished. Who died and made these guys gods.
Media whore, John Rothstein: He alleges to question Jeff if the Big East is worthy of their high seeds but then he never really asks the question! He does ask why Pitt got the third one seed, ahead of Duke (the last one seed) and others.
Jeff Hathaway: They spent a lot of time evaluating who should be the number one seeds. They made the one seeds based on 'the criteria.
Shots Heard: Jeff, it does not matter how much time you put into the process if you f'd it up. Like my father always said, don't confuse efforts with results. And in this case Shots Heard is not going to confuse honesty with dishonesty.
And then what kind of f'ing answer is that? Well it's based on 'the criteria.' Yea well what is the criteria? Pitt had only the 10th best RPI. And by the way, teams like BYU and SDSU had better records and RPIs than Pitt.
And where is the follow-up question when Jeff gives a phony answer? Don't slap us in the face with your pretend sports journalism CBS.
This is why the sports media has earned your media whore status. It's just pimping their interests to their markets.
Random Ass Clown Whore: Hey you work really hard, how about that?
Shots Heard: Come on! How about asking about the inherent conflict of interest of the tournament selection whores? Of course you aren't going to ask that because you have a mutual conflict of interest. In the mean time, the majority of schools are being screwed and the integrity of college sports has been hijacked.
Monday, March 14, 2011
2011 NCAA Tournament Selection: A Matter Of 'The Haves' and 'The Have Nots'
Those of you that follow Shots Heard, know that in recent weeks that we have ranted and even raved about the systematic unfairness of the NCAA Tournament Selection committee and the BCS (football). We've done it to an unhealthy degree even (but we are not wrong). Worse, we have basically been trying to stop a flood with a block of wood.
And it occurs to us that Collin Cowherd basically is right when he says that the typical sports fan is a dumbass. He may not have used that term, but that's basically what he has called the average sports fan that routinely sees reality through his/her own team's filter.
This is why if you go on a sports forum right now you'll see stupid posts like this (regarding selection/seeding):
Colorado is the best team to not make the tournament.
How did Alabama not make the tournament? Georgia is in as a ten seed and Alabama beat them twice in the last week. (Maybe because Alabama lost to a bunch of losers and has an RPI of 81 while Georgia handled their business to a better degree and has a 48 RPI. Dumbass.)
San Diego State is the weakest two seed ever.
If average sports fan cared about fairness you would see more posts like this:
USC got into the tournament as an at-large with a 67 RPI and Harvard was snubbed. For that matter.
Why does the media always pimp the 'how they finished' if a team like Pittsburgh can lose two of their last three and still get a one seed even though they have an RPI of only 10.
If finishing strong is so important, how can Florida lose the SEC Championship game by 16 and be a two seed?
UTEP (25-9, 2nd Conference USA), Cleveland State (26-8, 1st Horizon League), St. Mary's (25-8, 1st West Coast Conference), Missouri State (25-8, 1st Place Missouri Valley Conference), Wichita State (24-8, 2nd place Missouri Valley Conference) all had fine records and better RPIs than USC. What gives? I guess the Pac-10 was really strong this year. Oh wait it wasn't and since the RPI already accounts for conference strength then that doesn't matter. How does a 19-14 team in a weak conference get so much love?
Michigan State was a bubble team and now they are a solid 10 seed?
Shots Heard has put forth the plan that the NCAA Tournament entrants and seeds should be decided via the RPI and without human interference. Below, are listings of the teams that are either in the Top 68 RPI and would have made the tournament via the Shots Heard plan and the teams not in the Top 68 RPI that still made the tournament under the currenty system.
The first chart shows the fair seed (Shots Heard Plan) versus what seed a team was awarded by 'the committee.' My _____. It's like we're in a bad Star Wars movie.
The second chart shows how the Haves (ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big Twelve, Pac-10, SEC - You know, the BCS conferences) did versus the Have Nots (everybody else).
Final Analysis
San Diego State finished with a 32-2 record. Their only two losses were to a team (BYU) that was arguably the best team when they lost to them. If any team from a 'major conference' had compiled a 32-2 record then that team would be an unquestioned number one seed. It's not like the MWC was not rated better than three of those conferences either. And with a 3 RPI, SDSU was certainly worthy of a number one seed (if not a number one ranking).
So why is San Diego State getting the shaft?
There is a universal answer to that question and other. The other 'major conferences' control the committee. With that in mind, let's see how they screwed over the rest of the 'Have Nots.' Bare in mind that we will only go over selected examples. It will not be a cumulative analysis.
BYU gets a 3 (or 4 seed) despite being a 2 seed quality team).
This comes as no surprise. We already told you that after one loss to New Mexico, the 'experts' were dropping BYU from a one seed to a four seed in their prognostications (an unprecedented drop)
Utah State: Bend over and grab your ankles.
This is easily the biggest tragedy in the selection process. Utah State had an RPI of 15 and a record of 30-3, but they were given a 12 seed!
By the way their comfortable 8 point victory against the streaking Boise State Broncos should have 'impressed' the committee. Utah State kept one of those unwanteds out of the tournament and that's how the committee repays them (sarcasm)?
And to add insult to their ridiculous seeding, they play a 5 seed Kansas State (a proven mid major killer that took BYU out last year) that has been one of the hottest teams in the country. Before their last loss of the season, Kansas State was on a six game winning streak that included three wins against Top 20 teams (one of which, was a 16 point win over #2 Kansas).
Old Dominion takes a hit
Old Dominion is legit. They are perhaps college basketball's best kept secret. They are tall and can dominate the boards and the post. They also have decent shooters and that is also important. They are basically a mirror image of Pittsburgh.
Given the fact that ODU could play Pittsburgh, it is a good thing that they match-up well with Pitt. But they should be a 5 (or at worst a 6 or 7 seed) and have an easier road to The Sweet Sixteen.
Xavier shows they are something of a 'Have; a Legacy' - St. Mary's is not a 'Legacy'
Teams like Xavier are legacies. Even though, they are not in a 'major conference,' the committee does not want to stir the pot and put down a team that has been to The Sweet Sixteen three straight times.
Being a legacy, does not mean that a team will not get the shaft. But it does mean that the committee will think twice about b-slapping them. Gonzaga is a team that has achieved legacy status. Had they lost to St Mary's in the WCC Championship, they would have likely still earned an at-large bid.
Instead, St. Mary's lost to Gonzaga. And even though they are just as good as the Zags, they are not a legacy and they did not make the cut.
The subtle 8-9 Combo
Shots Heard sees this every year. The committee relegates 4-7 seed caliber teams to the 8 or 9 seed and thus relegating them to play a 1 seed in the second round and not make The Sweet Sixteen.
UNLV and George Mason are this year's victims of the 8-9 combo.According to the RPI, they both deserved seven seeds and much easier paths to the Sweet Sixteen. Instead, if they are not upset in their first round match-ups they will collectively face the top two teams Ohio State and Kansas.
Teams like Cincinatti (Big East) who should be a nine seed benefit from UNLV and George Mason's demotion. Cincy should get a nine seed, but instead they will get a six seed and an eaiser route to the Sweet Sixteen. And of course, CBS would much rather be talking about 'how many Big East teams made the Sweet Sixteen' rather than George Mason or UNLV.
And remember that this all goes back to the average dumbass sports fan. You won't see dumbass on the boards talking about how Cincy got an unfair seeding. You'll see him bragging that 'man, we were a good Big East team. Yea we deserved it man.' Dumbass Big East fan does not care that UNLV or George Mason might actually be better. He just has to be told 'Big East, Big East, Big East. Ah man, Big East, Big Hoops! -- Madison Square Garden.'
A Have Not with a 35 RPI does not make the tournament
At this very moment, there are a bunch of Big Twelve fans on boards, crying that their Colorado (RPI 65) team did not make the tournament. Everyday Dumbass Fan does not bother to care that Harvard (RPI 35) beat them by 16 points.
Everyday Dumbass Fan might counter, 'Yea well they had a 29 blowout loss to UCONN.' Yea letdowns happen all of the time. That's why Shots Heard thinks that all the so and so beat so and so is horse and buggy thinking anyhow. The RPI measures a teams overall performance and when it comes to the who beat who game, it's really not a transitive property. Every game is going to be different and a myriad of unexpected outcomes will occur. The fairest thing is to look at a team's RPI.
And by the way, you will never see a Have with an RPI of 35, not make the tournament. It just will not happen. If Bill Walton were alive, he would say why even have an RPI if you're not going to use it.
Anyhow, Shots Heard digresses. Ya'll can look at the tables and make your own determinations.
At this very moment, there are a bunch of Big Twelve fans on boards, crying that their Colorado (RPI 65) team did not make the tournament. Everyday Dumbass Fan does not bother to care that Harvard (RPI 35) beat them by 16 points.
Everyday Dumbass Fan might counter, 'Yea well they had a 29 blowout loss to UCONN.' Yea letdowns happen all of the time. That's why Shots Heard thinks that all the so and so beat so and so is horse and buggy thinking anyhow. The RPI measures a teams overall performance and when it comes to the who beat who game, it's really not a transitive property. Every game is going to be different and a myriad of unexpected outcomes will occur. The fairest thing is to look at a team's RPI.
And by the way, you will never see a Have with an RPI of 35, not make the tournament. It just will not happen. If Bill Walton were alive, he would say why even have an RPI if you're not going to use it.
Anyhow, Shots Heard digresses. Ya'll can look at the tables and make your own determinations.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Remembering how the Committee Whores screwed BYU over in 2009-2010
Shots Heard just made the case that the NCAA needs to use the RPI to determine tournament rankings. This will significantly reduce the undue influence of the media whores and even eliminate the selection committee whores.
Shots Heard pointed out that the whores plans on screwing over BYU. By the RPI, BYU has (currently) earned a one seed. But the media whores (currently) plan on only giving them a four seed. One might wonder why Shots Heard is ever vigilante about this subject (we are wondering it ourselves).
At any rate, we saw BYU get screwed over by the whores all of last season (2009-2010) and we just decided that enough is enough. We are going to write about the systematic injustice.
Last season, BYU was a top 15 quality team (if not better) that was not ranked for most of the season. They were still unranked when Jimmer's Cougars handed Arizona their asses (see videos). Consequently, the Arizona coach and the Wildcat players talked about how BYU was a three or four seed quality team (not the seven seed that BYU would end up receiving).
The Arizona coach even said that the idea that BYU was not ranked, discredited rankings! Shots Heard has been saying that!
Only near, the end of the season, did they crack the Top 25. BYU was even ranked in the Top 15 by the end of the regular season.
Top 15 - It would go to figure that BYU would get a four seed, right?
Wrong.
BYU was given a seven seed, which meant they had to play a Top Ten team in Round Two (Kansas State a two seed). In principle, no Top 15 team should have to face another Top 16 team, let alone a Top Ten team before the Sweet Sixteen.
But this is how the committee whores routinely screw over 'mid majors' and it's BS and Shots Heard is taking a stand this year.
College Basketball - NCAA Tournament: Use the RPI and get rid of the BS
CRecently, Shots Heard has spent a lot of time and effort detailing the corruption of the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee. We have detailed the inherent conflicts of interests of the committee and how that has led to systematic oppression of schools not in the loops.
Shots Heard has predominantly used BYU as an example, but the reality is that all schools that are not a part of the loop are trodden by the unfairness of the system.
Shots Heard has the solution to the problem. And we will point out that it is the solution and not just a solution. The solution is to just put the top 68 RPI teams into the tournament and to seed the teams according to their RPI ranking. The RPI measures performance and it properly regards strength of schedule.
The RPI has an immaterial margin of error as it is an amazing accurate ranking system. The variations in poll ranking relative to the RPI are man made errors. Shots Heard has detailed that the discrepancies perpetually relate to the media whores and 'big school' whores serving their own interests. The rankings are not at all valid corrections to the RPI.
(Below, you will see the listed RPIs from a week ago - Not the RPI listing used for this article.)
How will using the RPI restore sanity and fairness to the NCAA Tournament?
Teams would get the high seeds that they have earned (Take the 'selling out of it').
--BYU and SDSU would receive the number one seeds that they've earned. Please remember that RPI's will change after the conference tournaments. But at this point there is absolutely no doubt that they are worthy of 1 seeds. CBS projects that the committee whores will give BYU a 4 seed and SDSU a 2 seed. That is less than what they earned.
--Pittsburgh and Notre Dame are currently projected as one seeds, but really by the RPI Pitt is a two seed and Notre Dame is a three seed. Anybody that follows college basketball knows that that is entirely accurate. The media whores want Pitt and Notre Dame as number one seeds because they have been pimping the Big East as this master conference all season (And the Big East does have the best RPI, but it's still pretty much smoke and mirrors)
By giving Pittsburgh and Notre Dame opening round softball games (against weak 16 seeds from nowhere), they will ensure that those teams get opening victories and that the big markets tune in for longer (and that they get more money).
The best 68 teams would make the tournament.
Would the schools that end up 69, 70, 71, etc think that they were still worthy of making the tournament? Would they 69 look at 68 or even 62 and say 'I think we're better.' Of course. It is human nature to feel such a belief in one self. Nonetheless, they would still have to admit that it is fair and they would have to take their lumps.
The NCAA Tournament committee claims that they don't take prestige into the equation, but the truth of the matter is that they do. If New Mexico were to have an RPI of 49 and UCLA were to have an RPI of 71, the committee would look for any reason to justify UCLA's entrance and to deny New Mexico.
That is just not right. That decision is based on money and not fairness. The tournament will make more than enough money. Fairness needs to be a real priority and not something that is a lip service (non-value) value.
'Mid majors' would get their due (Stop canceling each other out)
--The committee is fond of pretending that top 25 'mid majors' are middle of the road teams and matching them up to try to erase solid mid majors from the tournament so that they can hopefully get 'major' teams and better ratings later in the tournament.
For instance, Utah has an RPI of 17 and George Mason has an RPI of 27. That would mean that Utah State should be a five seed (likely even a four seed if they win their conference tournament) and George Mason would be a seven seed. Predictably though, CBS bracketology has Utah State, an eight seed facing off against George Mason as a nine seed.
The committee wants to get rid of George Mason and Utah State ASAP and have as many 'major schools' make the later rounds as possible. And the committee hopes that the final extermination of Utah State or George Mason will come in the second round at the hands of a Kansas or Ohio State (teams that they should not be playing so early in the tournament in a fair system).
Cinerella is Cinderella, not who the media says they are.
If Utah State and George Mason were properly seeded, then they would not be considered Cinderella.
The Cinderella of Cinderellas would be Marquette. But Marquette is a Big East school! Nooooooo! Say it's not so! But they are (panting), a Big East school! Yes, Cinderella does not have to be the 'little school.' Cinderella happens to be the team that sucks. Write that down.
There would be no more automatic bids, but small schools would still be treated fairly
We have come to love watching the automatic bids for the conference tournament winners. But is it really fair for a better team to be excluded because some junior college level team won their conference tournament? Of course it is not so.
But excellent 'small schools' will still have an opportunity to rise above the ashes. And when they do, they will get the seed that they deserve. For instance, Harvard would get the nine seed that they have earned and not the 12 seed that the media whores (CBS projection) say that they should get.
There would not be an unwritten rule that 'small conferences' only will get one team into the tournament. That would mean that Harvard and Princeton would be in the NCAA Tournament this year! And yes, that is how it should be for this particular year.
A team like Old Dominion (RPI 23) would not be getting screwed over by the tournament committee. They would get a six seed. Instead, the committee plans on screwing them by giving them an eight seed and a match-up against UCLA, the second place Pac-10 team. If they win that match-up they'll get to play a one seed. That's not right.
Conference tournaments would still have great meaning
Also, if a 'small school' has an RPI of 75 heading into a conference tournament, then there would still be the drama of seeing if they can make that push for 68. Their performance relative to teams in other conference tournaments would still make for great drama.
There would be tougher match-ups and winning the tournament would have added meaning (and possibly even ratings)
Depending on the play-in match outcomes, the 16 seeds would be four of these eight schools:
Witchita State (23-8) - The second place team in the Missouri Valley Conference (They would not have to have won their conference tournament to get the seed that they deserve already).
UCF (18-10) - Eighth Place Conference USA team - What? The Conference USA is that good? I guess they just aren't 'major' enough for people to know that.
Oklahoma State (18-12) - They recently lost to Kansas by 12. What would you expect from a realistic 16 seed?
Virigina Tech (19-10) - Again, they are no that good, but they did beat Duke at home just a couple of weeks ago. They are certainly better than many of the 'small schools' that would lay down and die by 30 to a one seed.
California (17-13) - Look at this. All of the people that whine that their privileged 'major conference' deserves more teams; California would make the tournament with their 10-8 record against the weak Pac-10. They would likely lose by 14 points, but hey it beats 30. And certainly, there would be a realistic 'upset' opportunity that is almost non-existent in the current format.
Marquette (18-13) - The media has clamored for nine Big East teams. With the current batch of undeserving 'small schools' making the tournament it is quite likely that a worthy school like UTEP (RPI 60 - from a non 'major school') will be bumped in favor of the less deserving Marquette (RPI 66). This way, both deserving schools make the cut and get the seeding that they deserve.
Valparaiso (21-11) - Shots Heard honestly does not care about this team. But the media whores should not have the power to rob them of what they have earned at this point. They have an RPI of 67 so they make the cut. There was a segment on ESPN touting Colorado's accomplishments. 18-12 was a 'pass.' 8-8 in Big Twelve play was a 'pass.' 'The what have you done for me lately column (last 10 games) - 5-5 was laughably a 'pass' because we are supposed be in awe that they are in a 'tough conference.' 'Quality wins' was a pass for beating Kansas and Baylor (it somehow doesn't matter as much, the weak teams that they lost to).
Well here is real reality check Valparaiso has a 67 RPI and Colorado has a 78 RPI. In the fair system, Valparaiso gets 'the pass.' The ESPN whores are just sugar coating the fact that they want to pander to the Denver market / Big Twelve marke and not the who the hell cares about the Valparaiso market. The whores need to not have their hand in this anymore. It's pass/fail based on real results and some loud mouth a-hole on the air or d-bag on a committee gets no more say about it.
USC (18-13) - Right now they are not even a realistic bubble team. But if the tournament fairly recognized merit then they would be in (if results hold).
Also, Iona is RPI 69. They just lost their conference tournament and they know that they are not going to make the tournament? Why? Because they are not from a 'major conference?' That's BS. They should be watching the television rooting for others to lose and hope that their resume still cracks the top 68.
RPI Listing from March 6 (RPI listings from March 8 used for this article)
Rank Team W L SS Rank RPI 1. Kansas 29 2 .6146 10 .6768
2. Ohio St. 29 2 .5907 24 .6718
3. San Diego St. 27 2 .5826 29 .6604
4. BYU 27 3 .6014 15 .6590
5. Duke 27 4 .5825 30 .6548
6. North Carolina 24 6 .6160 9 .6488
7. Pittsburgh 27 4 .5817 32 .6470
8. Purdue 25 6 .5920 22 .6451
9. Notre Dame 25 5 .5811 33 .6447
10. Florida 24 6 .6237 5 .6410
11. Georgetown 21 9 .6545 1 .6404
12. Kentucky 22 8 .6118 12 .6369
13. Wisconsin 23 7 .5917 23 .6339
14. Texas 25 6 .5944 20 .6326
15. West Virginia 20 10 .6384 3 .6265
16. Arizona 25 6 .5640 49 .6234
17. Utah St. 27 3 .5262 111 .6229
18. Syracuse 25 6 .5738 39 .6226
19. Kansas St. 21 9 .6280 4 .6203
20. Louisville 23 8 .5976 18 .6186
21. Xavier 24 6 .5609 58 .6184
22. St. John's 20 10 .6181 7 .6173
23. Connecticut 21 9 .6107 13 .6136
24. Old Dominion 26 6 .5530 72 .6125
25. UNLV 23 7 .5774 38 .6113
26. Vanderbilt 21 9 .6096 14 .6103
27. George Mason 26 6 .5433 86 .6095
28. UAB 22 7 .5592 62 .6050
29. Temple 24 6 .5235 120 .6038
30. Texas A&M 22 7 .5614 56 .6016
31. Villanova 21 10 .5892 27 .5998
32. Cincinnati 24 7 .5368 94 .5953
33. Missouri 21 9 .5629 50 .5941
34. UCLA 22 9 .5725 41 .5933
35. Harvard 21 5 .4974 163 .5928
36. Tennessee 18 13 .6475 2 .5922
37. Butler 21 9 .5576 66 .5884
38. Memphis 22 9 .5642 48 .5878
39. Georgia 20 10 .5796 35 .5870
40. Illinois 19 12 .5970 19 .5850
41. Cleveland St. 24 8 .5276 108 .5846
42. Missouri St. 25 8 .5179 130 .5841
43. Colorado St. 18 11 .5881 28 .5835
44. St. Mary's 22 7 .5273 110 .5826
45. Boston College 19 11 .5903 26 .5823
46. Florida St. 21 9 .5423 88 .5816
47. Washington 20 10 .5581 65 .5805
48. Michigan St. 16 13 .6126 11 .5784
49. Va. Commonwealth 23 10 .5388 92 .5781
50. Marshall 19 10 .5600 61 .5766
51. Belmont 30 4 .4418 288 .5758
52. Princeton 22 6 .4753 212 .5757
53. Southern Miss 18 9 .5450 83 .5745
54. Penn St. 16 13 .6204 6 .5740
55. Richmond 24 7 .4991 159 .5736
56. Michigan 18 12 .5931 21 .5735
57. Clemson 20 10 .5469 78 .5715
58. UTEP 22 8 .5213 124 .5713
59. Wichita St. 23 8 .5337 99 .5710
60. UCF 18 10 .5735 40 .5703
61. Oakland 22 9 .5080 146 .5691
62. Gonzaga 22 9 .5281 107 .5680
63. Oklahoma St. 18 12 .5656 47 .5665
64. Virginia Tech 19 10 .5347 97 .5651
65. Iona 22 10 .5274 109 .5650
66. California 17 13 .5982 17 .5649
67. Col. Charleston 24 9 .5001 157 .5646
68. Marquette 18 13 .5825 31 .5642
69. Southern Cal 18 13 .5668 44 .5610
70. Valparaiso 21 11 .5282 106 .5609
71. New Mexico 19 11 .5259 112 .5601
72. Drexel 21 10 .5032 151 .5596
73. Miami-FL 18 13 .5666 46 .5593
74. Minnesota 17 13 .5799 34 .5592
75. Washington St. 19 11 .5389 91 .5587
76. Colorado 18 12 .5468 79 .5573
77. Morehead St. 22 9 .4948 169 .5573
78. Nebraska 19 11 .5591 63 .5565
79. Alabama 20 10 .5108 139 .5548
80. Long Island 26 5 .4438 281 .5546
81. Mississippi 19 12 .5504 73 .5545
82. Bucknell 24 8 .4720 219 .5544
83. Tulsa 18 12 .5610 57 .5538
84. Baylor 17 12 .5787 37 .5537
85. Indiana St. 19 13 .5445 84 .5536
86. Hofstra 20 11 .5151 134 .5526
87. Kent St. 20 10 .5135 136 .5526
88. Dayton 19 12 .5532 71 .5520
89. James Madison 21 11 .5065 148 .5511
90. Long Beach St. 18 10 .5218 123 .5505
91. Seton Hall 13 17 .6178 8 .5477
92. UW-Milwaukee 19 12 .5259 113 .5468
93. Northwestern 17 12 .5348 96 .5467
94. East Tenn. St. 21 11 .4953 168 .5458
95. Duquesne 17 11 .5247 115 .5452
96. Vermont 23 8 .4714 221 .5427
97. Rhode Island 18 12 .5191 128 .5424
98. Maryland 18 13 .5503 74 .5407
99. Fairfield 24 7 .4448 277 .5397
100. Robert Morris 18 13 .5132 137 .5383
101. St. Peter's 19 13 .5097 143 .5381
102. Air Force 14 13 .5602 60 .5378
103. Coastal Carolina 24 5 .4324 311 .5376
104. Rider 23 10 .4741 215 .5371
105. Miami-OH 15 15 .5723 42 .5368
106. Portland 20 11 .4975 162 .5365
107. IUPUI 17 13 .5156 133 .5363
108. Montana 18 9 .4642 233 .5337
109. Northern Iowa 18 13 .5203 126 .5330
110. Florida Atlantic 19 10 .4758 210 .5329
111. St. Bonaventure 16 13 .5244 117 .5322
112. Mississippi St. 17 13 .5441 85 .5314
113. Northern Colo. 17 10 .4698 224 .5313
114. Murray St. 21 8 .4612 236 .5309
115. Furman 20 10 .4614 235 .5307
116. Wofford 20 12 .4935 172 .5301
117. East Carolina 13 14 .5618 54 .5295
118. N.C. St. 15 15 .5607 59 .5295
119. Utah 12 17 .5905 25 .5288
120. Arkansas 18 12 .5231 121 .5284
121. Boise St. 18 11 .4794 201 .5270
122. San Francisco 15 14 .5416 89 .5248
123. Rutgers 14 16 .5568 68 .5243
124. Wright St. 17 14 .5160 132 .5221
125. American 22 9 .4361 304 .5217
126. Creighton 19 14 .5146 135 .5214
127. Iowa St. 16 15 .5481 76 .5206
128. South Carolina 14 15 .5491 75 .5202
129. Idaho 17 12 .4962 166 .5201
130. Akron 18 12 .4865 183 .5200
131. Austin Peay 18 13 .4930 173 .5197
132. Lipscomb 16 13 .4876 180 .5192
133. Oklahoma 13 16 .5793 36 .5180
134. Boston U. 20 13 .4736 217 .5178
135. Virginia 16 14 .5219 122 .5175
136. Geo. Washington 17 13 .5029 152 .5174
137. North Texas 19 10 .4559 248 .5163
138. Oral Roberts 18 14 .4866 182 .5151
139. New Mexico St. 13 16 .5717 43 .5149
140. Evansville 14 15 .5338 98 .5135
141. Delaware 14 17 .5303 102 .5128
142. Stanford 15 15 .5245 116 .5114
143. Jacksonville 18 11 .4466 271 .5113
144. Quinnipiac 22 9 .4365 303 .5106
145. Detroit 16 16 .5087 145 .5106
146. Providence 15 16 .5423 87 .5090
147. Massachusetts 14 14 .5236 119 .5081
148. UNC Asheville 16 13 .4832 191 .5081
149. North Florida 15 19 .5311 101 .5076
150. Cent. Conn. St. 19 12 .4501 262 .5075
151. Hawaii 17 11 .4810 199 .5074
152. Weber St. 15 11 .4680 229 .5068
153. Arizona St. 12 18 .5620 53 .5068
154. Oregon 13 16 .5573 67 .5066
155. Ohio 17 14 .5107 140 .5049
156. Yale 14 13 .4959 167 .5044
157. Northern Arizona 17 11 .4369 300 .5042
158. Texas Tech 13 18 .5586 64 .5014
159. Santa Clara 17 14 .4909 178 .5007
160. Buffalo 16 12 .4592 241 .4999
161. South Florida 9 22 .6012 16 .4996
162. Georgia Tech 13 17 .5459 82 .4996
163. McNeese St. 15 10 .4416 289 .4981
164. Saint Louis 11 18 .5668 45 .4974
165. Pennsylvania 13 14 .4840 189 .4971
166. Hampton 20 8 .3891 339 .4959
167. Wagner 13 17 .5251 114 .4958
168. Iowa 11 19 .5567 69 .4953
169. UW-Green Bay 13 18 .5208 125 .4950
170. Western Michigan 18 11 .4367 301 .4945
171. Western Carolina 17 15 .4536 256 .4942
172. IPFW 17 12 .4451 275 .4938
173. Ball St. 17 11 .4344 309 .4931
174. Northeastern 11 20 .5557 70 .4930
175. Texas Southern 18 11 .4057 329 .4926
176. Canisius 15 15 .4936 171 .4926
177. Loyola-Maryland 15 15 .4828 192 .4925
178. Davidson 16 14 .4574 245 .4919
179. La Salle 14 17 .5297 104 .4914
180. South Dakota St. 17 11 .4370 299 .4913
181. Indiana 12 19 .5621 52 .4912
182. Sam Houston St. 13 12 .4791 202 .4912
183. Pacific 14 14 .4761 208 .4910
184. San Jose St. 14 14 .4846 187 .4907
185. Arkansas St. 15 15 .4801 200 .4900
186. Liberty 16 13 .4547 253 .4896
187. Columbia 14 13 .4712 222 .4894
188. Rice 11 17 .5379 93 .4879
189. Tennessee Tech 17 12 .4461 273 .4879
190. Nevada 11 18 .5471 77 .4878
191. Appalachian St. 14 15 .4721 218 .4867
192. UC Santa Barbara 13 13 .4766 206 .4867
193. Saint Joseph's 9 21 .5618 55 .4864
194. Cal Poly 15 13 .4434 282 .4863
195. Bethune-Cookman 16 11 .4296 314 .4858
196. Western Kentucky 16 15 .4688 227 .4854
197. Fresno St. 13 16 .5021 153 .4843
198. Loyola-Chicago 16 15 .4648 232 .4830
199. Chattanooga 14 16 .4837 190 .4819
200. SMU 14 13 .4768 205 .4797
201. VMI 14 13 .4489 268 .4790
202. Siena 13 18 .5044 150 .4785
203. Presbyterian 13 18 .4817 196 .4768
204. Lehigh 16 15 .4423 287 .4759
205. UALR 15 16 .4701 223 .4757
206. Southern Ill. 13 19 .5110 138 .4757
207. Middle Tennessee 15 15 .4554 250 .4754
208. Cornell 10 18 .5237 118 .4732
209. Southeastern La. 12 13 .4425 283 .4727
210. TCU 10 21 .5462 80 .4727
211. UMKC 15 14 .4446 279 .4702
212. St. Francis NY 15 15 .4396 293 .4699
213. Drake 13 18 .4941 170 .4695
214. La.-Lafayette 13 14 .4500 265 .4693
215. Maine 14 15 .4505 260 .4690
216. Albany 16 16 .4443 280 .4690
217. UNC Wilmington 13 18 .4841 188 .4685
218. Mercer 14 18 .4862 185 .4679
219. LSU 11 20 .5283 105 .4676
220. Georgia St. 12 19 .5004 156 .4665
221. Stephen F.Austin 14 10 .4057 330 .4661
222. Charlotte 10 20 .5201 127 .4660
223. Lafayette 12 18 .4889 179 .4658
224. Winthrop 11 17 .4916 177 .4654
225. William & Mary 9 22 .5401 90 .4653
226. N.C. A&T 12 16 .4602 238 .4652
227. Texas-San Ant. 13 13 .4237 317 .4629
228. Nicholls St. 10 13 .4561 247 .4625
229. Texas St. 13 14 .4548 252 .4624
230. Northwestern St. 16 12 .3861 340 .4616
231. DePaul 7 23 .5628 51 .4614
232. Oregon St. 10 19 .5184 129 .4612
233. Mount St. Mary's 11 21 .5075 147 .4611
234. Tennessee St. 12 16 .4618 234 .4608
235. Morgan St. 15 13 .4051 332 .4606
236. Tulane 10 16 .4812 197 .4595
237. Bradley 11 20 .5047 149 .4595
238. Charleston So. 12 16 .4549 251 .4587
239. Houston 10 17 .4924 175 .4583
240. Coppin St. 13 13 .4097 327 .4561
241. Brown 10 17 .4864 184 .4560
242. Stony Brook 14 16 .4347 308 .4556
243. North Dakota St. 12 15 .4491 267 .4555
244. Pepperdine 11 21 .4927 174 .4551
245. Utah Valley 15 10 .3715 344 .4545
246. Mississippi Val. 13 18 .4385 295 .4541
247. Jackson St. 14 14 .3992 334 .4538
248. Bowling Green 12 18 .4601 239 .4535
249. Denver 13 17 .4686 228 .4515
250. Wyoming 8 20 .5328 100 .4507
251. Louisiana Tech 11 20 .4827 193 .4498
252. CS Northridge 11 17 .4461 272 .4494
253. Fordham 7 21 .5461 81 .4473
254. Auburn 10 19 .4975 161 .4465
255. Bryant 8 21 .5106 141 .4454
256. Montana St. 11 18 .4606 237 .4452
257. Wake Forest 8 23 .5303 103 .4446
258. St. Francis PA 9 21 .4976 160 .4430
259. Illinois St. 12 19 .4739 216 .4430
260. Eastern Kentucky 13 16 .4132 325 .4426
261. Gardner-Webb 9 21 .4714 220 .4425
262. High Point 10 19 .4748 213 .4420
263. Troy 7 21 .5170 131 .4415
264. N.C. Central 11 14 .3986 335 .4405
265. Savannah St. 7 18 .4531 257 .4401
266. Elon 11 17 .4350 307 .4396
267. Southern Utah 10 18 .4692 226 .4396
268. Loyola Marymount 9 21 .4973 164 .4381
269. Sacred Heart 11 18 .4272 316 .4349
270. Texas-Arlington 9 16 .4384 296 .4346
271. Seattle 11 19 .4357 306 .4344
272. UC Riverside 9 18 .4576 243 .4344
273. South Alabama 10 16 .4360 305 .4336
274. Hartford 11 20 .4593 240 .4335
275. New Hampshire 11 18 .4272 315 .4326
276. Army 10 19 .4406 290 .4325
277. Campbell 11 19 .4425 284 .4310
278. Fla. Gulf Coast 10 20 .4558 249 .4310
279. Florida Int. 9 19 .4788 203 .4308
280. Texas A&M-CC 7 21 .4963 165 .4291
281. Holy Cross 8 21 .4761 207 .4289
282. Norfolk St. 10 19 .4502 261 .4279
283. North Dakota 12 14 .3919 337 .4279
284. Monmouth 9 21 .4812 198 .4276
285. Niagara 9 23 .4754 211 .4274
286. Towson 4 26 .5358 95 .4270
287. Samford 10 19 .4404 291 .4269
288. Manhattan 6 25 .5090 144 .4268
289. Illinois-Chicago 6 24 .5021 154 .4264
290. Portland St. 12 16 .4229 319 .4263
291. Eastern Wash. 8 20 .4820 195 .4261
292. Tennessee-Martin 10 21 .4457 274 .4260
293. Alabama St. 12 17 .4061 328 .4258
294. Lamar 9 17 .4305 312 .4248
295. Youngstown St. 7 21 .5017 155 .4247
296. The Citadel 8 22 .4760 209 .4240
297. UC Irvine 12 18 .4056 331 .4240
298. UNC Greensboro 7 24 .4919 176 .4237
299. CS Fullerton 10 19 .4305 313 .4231
300. Navy 10 20 .4425 285 .4227
301. Binghamton 8 23 .4671 230 .4212
302. UC Davis 8 20 .4657 231 .4209
303. Idaho St. 7 20 .4820 194 .4207
304. Delaware St. 7 20 .4544 254 .4183
305. Marist 6 27 .5102 142 .4169
306. SE Missouri St. 9 22 .4448 278 .4162
307. Central Michigan 9 20 .4366 302 .4160
308. Alabama A&M 10 14 .3932 336 .4159
309. Stetson 8 22 .4576 244 .4157
310. New Jersey Tech 11 14 .3800 343 .4139
311. CS Bakersfield 9 19 .4423 286 .4104
312. Dartmouth 5 23 .4862 186 .4093
313. Northern Ill. 8 20 .4384 297 .4090
314. USC Upstate 5 25 .4871 181 .4077
315. Eastern Illinois 7 20 .4482 269 .4070
316. Colgate 7 23 .4501 263 .4068
317. San Diego 4 24 .4993 158 .4041
318. Kennesaw St. 7 23 .4517 259 .4007
319. Longwood 8 19 .4212 321 .4000
320. UMBC 5 25 .4787 204 .3974
321. Grambling St. 10 20 .3832 341 .3972
322. South Dakota 12 14 .3263 345 .3929
323. Florida A&M 8 19 .4123 326 .3923
324. Ark.-Pine Bluff 7 23 .4204 322 .3875
325. Louisiana-Monroe 5 24 .4491 266 .3870
326. Fair. Dickinson 5 24 .4519 258 .3868
327. Md.-East. Shore 6 21 .4387 294 .3857
328. Eastern Michigan 6 21 .4376 298 .3852
329. SIU-Edwardsville 4 21 .4698 225 .3846
330. Sacramento St. 5 21 .4474 270 .3822
331. Howard 6 23 .4541 255 .3767
332. Jacksonville St. 4 25 .4397 292 .3760
333. Prairie View 7 21 .3907 338 .3738
334. Radford 2 24 .4743 214 .3727
335. Western Illinois 4 23 .4333 310 .3690
336. Alcorn St. 4 24 .4235 318 .3664
337. Toledo 3 27 .4586 242 .3658
338. S.C. St. 5 21 .4171 323 .3645
339. Chicago St. 4 24 .4212 320 .3635
340. Central Arkansas 2 24 .4568 246 .3597
341. Georgia Southern 2 27 .4448 276 .3538
342. Centenary 1 27 .4500 264 .3490
343. Texas-Pan Am. 3 24 .4166 324 .3398
344. Southern U. 3 24 .4039 333 .3374
345. Houston Baptist 4 23 .3820 342 .3262
Rank CONFERENCE W L FII Rank RPI 1. Big East 303 185 .5903 1 .5832
2. Big Ten 203 128 .5846 2 .5777
3. Big 12 232 129 .5748 3 .5749
4. Mountain West 158 105 .5672 4 .5627
5. Atlantic Coast 218 145 .5574 6 .5579
6. Southeastern 214 147 .5646 5 .5559
7. Pacific 10 171 130 .5561 7 .5468
8. Conference USA 197 142 .5362 8 .5378
9. Atlantic 10 224 191 .5326 9 .5273
10. Colonial 200 176 .5255 10 .5247
11. Horizon 160 148 .5153 11 .5143
12. Missouri Valley 167 147 .5148 12 .5124
13. Western Athletic 141 121 .5079 14 .5117
14. West Coast 120 121 .5093 13 .5012
15. Ivy League 109 109 .4900 16 .4997
16. Metro Atlantic 152 163 .4932 15 .4915
17. Atlantic Sun 155 185 .4712 18 .4740
18. Northeast 166 197 .4737 17 .4730
19. Southern 163 200 .4675 20 .4707
20. Mid-American 159 191 .4704 19 .4693
21. Summit 133 156 .4639 23 .4689
22. Big South 127 159 .4668 22 .4672
23. Sun Belt 156 192 .4671 21 .4658
24. Big Sky 110 136 .4593 24 .4641
25. Patriot 109 133 .4561 27 .4636
26. Big West 110 142 .4581 25 .4629
27. Ohio Valley 133 162 .4548 28 .4624
28. America East 122 154 .4563 26 .4599
29. Southland 133 175 .4426 29 .4521
30. Mid-Eastern 118 184 .4291 31 .4299
31. Independents 50 110 .4368 30 .4183
32. Southwestern 98 186 .4064 32 .4105
33. Great West 61 123 .3842 33 .3884
Monday, March 7, 2011
College Basketball: The whores are hard at work, laying their groundwork for screwing over BYU, SDSU, Others
Video: 2011 NCAA Tournament chairman, Gene Smith has connections. He can defer suspension to his OSU football players allowing them to play in bowl games and go pro the next season.
Media Whores and Big School Whores chomping at the bit to oppress BYU
BYU lost their second best player due to an in-house suspension. They then lost their next game to a good New Mexico team by eighteen points at home.
The media whores and 'big school' whores that run the NCAA Tournament selection committee were chomping at the bit to knock BYU down. The real math did not even have to add up. They just had to get 'eighteen point loss' and 'man down' out there and it was done.
Before the loss to New Mexico, BYU was a projected number one seed on cbsbracketology.com. After the loss, they were dropped to a four seed!
Unheard Of Happenings!
Here is another Shots Heard reality check: Never in my years of following the NCAA Tournament have I ever seen a team dropped from a projected one seed to fourth in the span of a one loss! It is unheard of! But as long as you think 'embarrassing loss at home' and 'man down' then the whores are counting on the general consumer to not care.
Trying to make sense of the illogical
But that does not mean that the general consumer, who likely follows a 'big market' team should not care. Fairness should be a cornerstone of any major American event like the NCAA Tournament.
For the sake of focus, Shots Heard will not debate exactly what BYU's seed should be. But let us look examine CBS's projection that Syracuse should be a two seed. Let us try to imagine if it is justified that Syracuse would be a two seed while BYU is relegated to a four seed.
And by the way, the four seed is a full four seed projection. While the selection committee reserves the right to bump a team a seed in either direction to accommodate geography, BYU was projected as a four seed in the Southeast Bracket. Had they been a projected four seed in the West or Southwest then it would be conceivable that they were bumped from three to four to get placed in their geography.
BYU vs. Syracuse Comparison
BYU: Record 28-3, RPI 4, Strength Of Schedule 20
Syracuse: Record 25-6, RPI 18, Strength Of Schedule 33
As you can see, BYU is the better team across the board.
But what about BYU's eighteen point loss at home to New Mexico? That's what the media whores will point out.
Okay. (Media Whore Gottlieb Style. Okay (Listen). As Shots Heard has mentioned before, the RPI is a measure of strength of schedule and performance. The numbers basically speak for themselves.
But if that is not enough for you, then take into account Exhibit B. Syracuse got their buts kicked by twenty two points to 13-17 Seton Hall. BYU lost to 20-11 New Mexico by less at home.
And then you might bring up, well BYU's second best player is gone. So what? If Paul Pierce gets injured on the last day of the season, will the NBA drop the Celtics from a one seed to a six seed? Teams earn whatever they earn. If Jimmer got hurt would that mean that BYU should be a 12 seed? The media whores love such arguments even though they have no real merit. Merit is what a team accomplishes and not how good the media whores think a team is at any given moment.
So what gives?
We'll tell you what gives. The first thought is perhaps they are going for the highest ratings. But the reality is more people are chomping at the bit to see the soon to be crowned player of the year, Jimmer Fredette than a Syracuse team that nobody outside of New York cares about. And if ratings was the trump card, then Stephen Curry's 'lowly' and deserving Davidson squad would have made the NCAA tournament his final year at college.
What does it matter? (A four seed is almost as high as a two seed anyways)
Well, besides the basic principle of right and wrong there is a huge difference between getting a two seed and a four seed. With the four seed, BYU is projected to play last year's finalist, Butler. With the two seed, BYU would play someone like the weak Long Beach State squad (and we say that with all deference to Long Beach State as we will be rooting for them).
Other Mountain West Teams getting screwed
Now mind you, that just about all of the conference tournaments are yet to be played and the landscape will significantly change in the upcoming days. But let's look at how the Mountain West is tentatively scheduled to be screwed over by the selection whores.
San Diego State
San Diego State should be a projected number one (not Notre Dame, according to CBS). They would be undefeated and have an RPI if not for their losses to BYU. But let's not justify based on fuzzy math like the media whores. Let's look at the numbers.
Notre Dame is 25-5 and has an RPI of 9 and SOS of 27. SDSU is 29-2 and has an RPI of 4 and SOS of 34. Clearly SDSU, who has a better record and RPI is more deserving.
UNLV
UNLV is projected as a six seed. With a 23-7 record, 25 RPI and 37 SOS UNLV should be about a six seed. We honestly are not sure what the occasion is that they are getting what they deserve. Is it the Las Vegas connection? Hmmmm.
Colorado State
CSU (4th - MWC) has a 19-11 record, 43 RPI and 34 SOS. What about that resume says that they do not deserve to be in the tournament?
But let us look at some of the 'major conference' teams that are projected to be in the tournament.
Marquette (9th - Big East) - 18-13, 67 RPI, 41 SOS
Clemson (T4th - ACC) - 20-10, 58 RPI, 74 SOS
Virginia Tech (T4th - ACC) - 19-10, 64 RPI, 87 SOS
Michigan State - (4th Big Ten) - 17-13, 48 RPI, 9 SOS
The numbers speak for themselves. CSU has better numbers than all of those teams and yet it is the 'non major conference' team projected to get the shaft. This stuff is like clockwork for the selection whores though.
New Mexico
Sunday, March 6, 2011
BYU Bounces Back - Wins 2010-2011 Mountain West Title
Earlier this week, BYU dismissed their starting power forward and defensive anchor, Brandon Davies after he broke the Honor Code (A BS decision by the way by BYU's admin but that would be an entirely different post). The move almost certainly cost BYU a number one seed (and probably a two seed ore even three seed - (see media whores) as they got routed at home byt New Mexico by 18 points.
If there's a happy ending at least in the short run, it is that BYU beat Wyoming last night and thereby won the Mountain West Title for the fourth time in the last five years.
BYU will be in the West Coast Conference next year (for basketball).
Jimmer Fredette scored 38 points to finish his season with an eye popping 27.9 scoring average. He is a lock for player of the year. Shots Heard is pretty sure that even the media whores are not going to f that one up.
BYU vs. Wyoming - 03/05/2011 - In Stands Cam
Jackson Emery - Post Game Tid Bit
Utah Jazz Talk Jimmer
Teach Me How To Jimmer
.
Monday, February 28, 2011
ESPN media whore Doug Gottlieb (Twat!) attempts to rob BYU basketball of their rightful seeding in the NCAA Tournament
The college basketball rankings came out today. Predictably, the 'experts' did not give BYU the number one ranking that they deserve. But it's like Clint Eastwood told Gene Hackman in 'Unforgiven,' deserves gots nothing to do with it (as noted in a recent Shots Heard rant).
We already told you that it's about the media whores serving their bigger markets. So of course it came as no surprise that BYU came in at number 3 in the recent rankings behind Ohio State and Kansas even though they have a better RPI and strength of schedule than both of those teams.
Granted, polling is subjective in nature and designed to allow for some additional reasoned analysis. And on that basis we would not condemn any individual fan or pollster that believes that a Kansas or Ohio State should get the nod over BYU. Our problem is that collectively the media whores clearly have their vested interests and that they routinely and systematically discriminate against non 'major' teams.
Want proof? BYU, Kansas and Ohio State are all in the top 3 in RPI in that order. They are also all 27-2. They are all clearly comparable teams although if you look at the data, BYU does hold an edge over those teams.
BYU 27-2, Strength of Schedule - 12, , Record versus Top 50 RPI: 9-1
Kansas 27-2, Strength Of Schedule - 13, Record versus Top 50 RPI: 6-2
Ohio State 27-2, Strength Of Schedule - 27, Record versus Top 50 RPI: 6-2
Now if the pundits/'experts' were giving proper credence to the numbers, the voting would almost certainly be close. But let's look at the reality:
AP Voting Totals
Ohio State - 45 First Place Votes
Kansas - 14 First Place Votes
BYU - 5 First Place Votes
So BYU is numerically the best team in the country and yet they get less than eight percent of the vote? The media whores are busy at work.
Speaking of media whores, it gets worse when you look at the USA/ESPN Poll. There are seventeen first place votes for Ohio State, fourteen first place votes for Kansas and ZERO first place votes for BYU.
San Diego State (RPI 4, Strength Of Schedule 26) would be 29-0 and they would be the undisputed number one team in the nation had BYU not handed them their asses by thirteen points not once but twice. Yet, BYU is somehow unworthy of recognition from any of the ESPN media whores?
Speaking of media whores, let's have a laugh as we watch media whore, Doug Gottlieb pretend that not only is BYU unworthy of the number one spot in the rankings, but also a number one seed in the NCAA Tournament (a tournament that is also ran by money whores, the 'major' conference heads).
Analyzing the 'better conference myth'
You will notice that when the pundits speak of The Big East, Big Ten, or even the especially weak ACC that we are supposed to hold those conferences in some sort of reverence compared to the The Mountain West. (And by the way, what happened to the SEC this year? - Guess they aren't too 'major' this year).
Mathematicians were paid handsome sums of money to develop the strength of schedule formula and RPI formula. Anybody that has taken a college level statistics course will know that every formula has a margin of error. From everything I've read, the RPI and SOS formulas have very minimal margins of error and are quite reliable. And certainly, any margin of error does not justify the votes in the polls.
Let's assume for a moment that the voters were on the level. In such a case, the lack of first place votes for BYU would be quite the statistic anomaly. But we know that it is not truly an anomaly. Rather, the media whores are whoring it up the way they do.
And so knowing that the RPI and SOS formulas are legitimate formulas, then we legitimately surmise that the Mountain West is solid even 'major,' else BYU would have a much worse SOS (not to mention RPI) than Kansas and Ohio State. And so ti is that the Mountain West is a tough conference as all of the teams in the conference are .500 or better in non-conference play.
The only team not better than .500 in non conference play is Utah. The Utes were 7-7 in conference play. However, Utah is BYU's arch nemesis and teams generally bring their A-Game against rivals. BYU still beat the Utes by an average of 19 points in their two meetings against each other.
The Mountain West, Conference USA, Big Ten and the Big 12 were the only conferences with all of their respective teams perform at .500 or better in non conference play. It's noteworthy that South Florida was the only Big East team (6-7 in non-conference play) with a sub .500 record in non-conference play. (Currently the media whores are slobbering about the idea of eleven Big East teams making the Big Dance). We can see though that the Mountain West is roughly on par with the teams from supposed 'major' conferences.
Relaying Doug Gottlieb's flaming pile of analysis
In the above video ESPN's Joe Lunardi and Doug Gottlieb are asked to give their number one seeds, essentially the top four teams. Shots Heard will analyze their slutty analysis (particularly Doug Gottlieb's Bull Durham).
Joe Lundardi's Top Four
Ohio State - East
Pittsburgh - Southeast
Kansas - Southwest
BYU - West
Doug Gottlieb's Top Four
Ohio State - East
Pittsburgh - Southeast
Kansas - Southwest
Texas - West
In the beginning of the video, Joe Lunardi is fairly reasonable with his logic. He clarifies that the choice for the fourth number one spot was between an over-rated Pitt (an over-rated team that has terrible outside shooting, but great inside presence and a solid closer with Wannamaker) and Duke (a good all around team from the weak ACC). Even Lundardi was wise enough not to totally whore it up and to deny BYU who is clear cut number one seed.
Then Joe Gottlieb gave his load of cow dung analysis:
I'd have Texas over BYU and Joe my logic behind it is the number one seed is a reward. It's a reward not just for stellar play in conference but what do you do on the road and I know that you're going to come back with BYU's road numbers; but also what you do out of conference and how you schedule up. Now BYU plays a decent out of conference schedule; Arizona, UCLA; split those two, essentially home and away, quote unquote neutral sites, Utah State they play every year and St. Mary's. You compare that to Texas and what they challenged themselves with; Pittsburgh in Madison Square Garden, a two point loss. They played Carolina in Greensborough a win. They played Michigan State, a preseason top ten and I know numbers wise it does not help them as much. But you consider those wins that they had out of conference and how they challenged themselves. They go to USC and get beat on the road. Probably the same thing would have happened to BYU. And then within conference they don't get the benefit of having Kansas come and play them at their place. And instead they have a monster victory (at Kansas). You got a two point loss and a win on the road at two of your one seeds. I still think Texas is the one seed, especially considering they have a chance to win at Baylor, Kansas State at home tonight. I think Texas has a better resume in terms of pure wins than BYU does.
Joe Lunardi Response:
If it was close, I would absolutely take Texas and their win at Kansas putting them up to the top line but it's really not close. The non-conference schedule strength for BYU is actually 14th (strength of schedule) and they're 14-1 against that schedule. Texas is seventy fourth in non conference (strength of schedule) and they have extra non conference losses. So it's really BYU across the board in terms of number of losses, schedule strength, both overall and non conference, and then of course in the what have you done for me lately category, Texas has lost two of its last three.
Joe Gottlieb Counter:
Texas has also played a far more difficult stretch of road games with Nebraska and Colorado. Look, I'm with you generally. I do fall back on some of the numbers. But I only point this out, of the ten true road victories BYU has, Okay? Eight of them are one hundred (presumably RPI) and below. So they loaded up on road wins against..And then you're counting a Colorado State and a UNLV, two at-best bubble teams. I think UNLV is going to get in (to the NCAA Tournament) largely on the back of win of Wisconsin going back to the first month of the half of the season.
I like BYU, not a shot at BYU. I just think that we're falling a little bit in love with the numbers based on the Arizona win, played essentially on a home court (Utes court) and the latest wins against San Diego State. They've dominated their conference and they got the Arizona win. Outside of that, there's not a lot to fall in love with.
Analyzing the 'Employee Of The Month' level analysis
'Employee Of The Month,' starring Dane Cook is possibly the worst movie in history. It is so bad that you can analyze any segment of it and laugh at how bad it is. Watching Doug Gottlieb's analysis is so bad that if it were a movie it would be on par with 'Employee Of The Month.' It truly deserves a critical dissection. It is just that bad.
So prepare to laugh as we dissect the idiot's (Doug Gottlieb's) analysis. Gottlieb's words are in italics.
I'd have Texas over BYU and Joe my logic behind it is the number one seed is a reward.
Oh! Stop the presses! The number one seed is a reward. Shut your hole you condescending twat (ironically I thank Dane Cook for revitalizing that slang word). BYU has earned a number one seed. There has never been a two loss team with an RPI of 1 that did not deserve the reward of a number one seed. Think about that. Never! And yet this guy is trying to state that not only is Texas more deserving, but that BYU does not even merit a number one seed; that they should not get that reward. Twat! It needs to be restated.
It's a reward not just for stellar play in conference but what do you do on the road and I know that you're going to come back with BYU's road numbers; but also what you do out of conference and how you schedule up.
Joe Lunardi basically trumped Joe Gottlieb's BS by stating that BYU has a non conference RPI of 14 to Texas's 71! It is not even close as Lunardi states.
Now BYU plays a decent out of conference schedule; Arizona, UCLA; split those two, essentially home and away, quote unquote neutral sites, Utah State they play every year and St. Mary's.
Let's look at the impressive BYU wins that the a-hole glossed over
(Oh how can you not be civil?) I'm not going to err on the side of civility when I deal with con artists. Just because ESPN is paying this guy handsomely to tickle the ears of the customers in the big markets doesn't mean I'm going to pretend that this guy is worthy of my respect.
(Oh how can you not be civil?) I'm not going to err on the side of civility when I deal with con artists. Just because ESPN is paying this guy handsomely to tickle the ears of the customers in the big markets doesn't mean I'm going to pretend that this guy is worthy of my respect.
BYU beat currently ranked 18th Arizona by 22. Sure it was in Salt Lake City. But it was still a 22 point ass kicking. What were they supposed to win by 35 for it to be worthy of Doug Gottlieb's love?
And let's just look at this straight-up. At one point this season, Texas had a 21 point win at home against currently 21st ranked Texas A And M. Last I checked, 21 is not better than 22. So what's the point of claiming that the Arizona win was in Utah if Texas isn't supplying better fruits in the Top 25 ass whoopin' department on their own home floor? There is no difference.
Con artists like Gottlieb will throw out numbers and not care if they actually make sense. He knows that he just has to fool most of the people (who aren't doing in depth fact checks) for a few minutes on television.
And let's just look at this straight-up. At one point this season, Texas had a 21 point win at home against currently 21st ranked Texas A And M. Last I checked, 21 is not better than 22. So what's the point of claiming that the Arizona win was in Utah if Texas isn't supplying better fruits in the Top 25 ass whoopin' department on their own home floor? There is no difference.
Con artists like Gottlieb will throw out numbers and not care if they actually make sense. He knows that he just has to fool most of the people (who aren't doing in depth fact checks) for a few minutes on television.
Gottlieb mentioned BYU's loss in Anaheim to UCLA. Okay, but he did not mention that BYU played uncharacteristically bad that game and that UCLA is pretty good. They are currently tied with Arizona for first place in the Pac-10.
Then he tried to gloss over the six point win against the WAC Champion, Utah State and WCC Champion, St. Mary's. And he did not bother to mention that Utah State is 26-3 and has and RPI of 21. Instead,, he wasted time stating that BYU plays Utah State every year as if that is supposed to support his premise that BYU did not challenge themselves.
You compare that (BYU's aforementioned wins) to Texas and what they challenged themselves with; Pittsburgh in Madison Square Garden, a two point loss. They played Carolina in Greensborough, a win. They played Michigan State, a preseason top ten and I know numbers wise it does not help them as much.
I love the line, and what they challenged themselves with. Apparently Arizona, UCLA, Utah State, St. Mary's were not a comparable challenge.
Gottlie mentions the Texas's two point loss to Pitt at Madison Square Garden. But Pitt is an over-rated team (they have terrible outside shooting). It's tempting to point out that BYU has beat a comparable opponent, San Diego State by 13 points twice. But perhaps that would not be fair because we are comparing non-conference feats and SDSU is a conference opponent. But fine, don't factor in SDSU and we still come back to the actual non-conference RPIs.
The North Carolina win is impressive, but it is enough to overlook losing to a team like Nebraska and Colorado? Impressive non-conference wins should not cancel out bad performances in conference. Certainly, if BYU accumulated extra losses to Colorado State and Air Force (two comparable teams) then BYU would not even be afforded three seed consideration, despite the fact that those opponents both have similar records and RPIs.
And what is so impressive about Texas anyhow, that Gottlieb can overlook losing a 22 point lead and losing to Colorado? What kind of number one seed cannot hang on to a 22 point lead? If all things were even then okay we could possibly overlook that parameter. But since BYU is 27-2 with a number 1 RPI then should Texas not have such pathetic happenstances on their resume?
They played Michigan State, a preseason top ten and I know numbers wise it does not help them as much.
Let me remind you that Gottlieb is trying to speak about the context of impressive non-conference wins. He is stacking up 16-12 Michigan State against three conference champions and another second place team that will quite possibly finish in the Top 25. Wow! Way to try to sneak that one in under the guise of preseason top ten. Twat!
But you consider those wins that they had out of conference and how they challenged themselves. They go to USC and get beat on the road. Probably the same thing would have happened to BYU.
WTF! I would say the real words of that acronym, but decorum prevents it. Is it plausible that BYU could have lost on the road to USC. Well USC is 17-12. So yes they are good enough to beat anybody. But would BYU go to USC and probably lose? No a-hole. BYU would have probably went into the one third filled Galen Center and beat them down by 20 points. That is what they probably would have done. If BYU would have probably lost to USC then why did they not fold in SDSU (a team with a legitimate claim for the number 1 ranking)? Twat!
BYU has a 49 point and 50 point win on their resume and they did not get to 27-2 and a 1 RPI by losing or even barely beating teams like USC. Obviously, I can't repeat 27-2 and 1 RPI enough.
For stating that BYU would have probably lost to lowly USC, Gottlieb ought to be banned from the airwaves for a year. I'm not even saying that for effect either. As a consumer, I don't want watch whores lie to my face.
For stating that BYU would have probably lost to lowly USC, Gottlieb ought to be banned from the airwaves for a year. I'm not even saying that for effect either. As a consumer, I don't want watch whores lie to my face.
This is how the double standard is really in effect; Gottlieb would not be claiming that Ohio State or Kansas would likely go to the mediocre USC and lose. Yet, BYU is the same caliber team as those teams. And by the way, going to USC is not exactly a daunting task in the first place.
And then within conference they don't get the benefit of having Kansas come and play them at their place. And instead they have a monster victory (at Kansas). You got a two point loss and a win on the road at two of your one seeds. I still think Texas is the one seed, especially considering they have a chance to win at Baylor, Kansas State at home tonight. I think Texas has a better resume in terms of pure wins than BYU does.
Actually idiot, the RPI significantly weights road wins and conversely punishes losses at home. So playing Kansas on the road was a really good thing; especially since Texas won. And really since, Pittsburgh is an artificial (borderline) number one (they are not BYU, OSU or KSU) then your touting Texas's playing two number ones is fairly disingenuous. And it's worth noting that they went 1-1 in those games! Fifty percent win percentages is hardly a trump card. BYU could have just as easily went fifty percent (or better) against those teams.
SDSU, 27-2 has a 4 RPI and they are a legitimate number one seed caliber team. And BYU DID beat a legitimate number one seed twice and by 13 points (None of this only losing by two points BS).
By the way, what is that BS about pure wins? Gottlieb is just making up terms! There's no definition or measure for pure wins! Gottlieb only compounded his stupidity by trying to sound especially smart. The only thing more annoying than having a smart person trying to con you is having a dumb person trying to con you! It's like dude, just shut the f up. You sound like such an idiot and we don't want your snake oil.
By the way, what is that BS about pure wins? Gottlieb is just making up terms! There's no definition or measure for pure wins! Gottlieb only compounded his stupidity by trying to sound especially smart. The only thing more annoying than having a smart person trying to con you is having a dumb person trying to con you! It's like dude, just shut the f up. You sound like such an idiot and we don't want your snake oil.
(Further analyzing) I still think Texas is the one seed, especially considering they have a chance to win at Baylor, Kansas State at home tonight. I think Texas has a better resume in terms of pure wins than BYU does.
Hmm. Texas will play Kansas State at home and Baylor on the road. KSU has a 25 RPI and Baylor has an RPI of 72. Yes that is more impressive than the RPI of BYU's last two opponents who are New Mexico, RPI 91 and Wyoming RPI 258. But will that somehow be enough to move Texas's RPI from 9 into the top 4 and BYU from 1 into 5? No. Even if so, it is pure speculation at best. It does not justify this a-hole's going on television and claiming that five loss, nine RPI Texas is more worthy of the one seed than two loss and top RPI team, BYU.
I know that we are making fun Doug Gottlieb's BS, but let us not forget that Joe Lundardi is basically a wolf in sheep's clothing either, when he conceeds, If it was close, I would absolutely take Texas and their win at Kansas putting them up to the top line but it's really not close.
That's the big preliminary load of BS that we are dealing with from the outset. Why is it preset that if it is close that Texas gets the nod over BYU? This a-hole undoubtedly put his preset bias right on the table for you. He made a Freudian slip and showed you exactly how the ESPN whores divvy out rankings. Lundardi is basically the equivalent of a sports bigot. The fact that he is not trying to pile on like Gottlieb only speaks to his pragmatism and not a sense of real fairness.
Yea and they lost those road games to bubble teams (at-best bubble teams if they were in the MWC). BYU has won their road games against bubble teams. BYU went to the gyms of similar teams like Utah, Colorado State and Air Force and handled their business. And they won their road games against tougher teams like UNLV and SDSU.
You ever have someone look you in the eye and pretend like they are adhering to reason when you know they are just trying to get away with a huge con? This guy is not falling back on the numbers is the big problem. He has completely thrown the numbers out the door.
But Gottlieb pretends that he is adhering to numbers when he mentions that BYU has eight victories against opponents with an RPI of one hundred or higher. Okay? (I'm going to do the Gotliebb Okay? technique -- Like listen to me I know what I'm talking about okay?).
Texas performed better in their non-conference road schedule? They only had four road games and they went 2-2 in those games! Fifty percent again! The rest of the time Texas loaded up with all really weak opponents at home (not challenging themselves).
And in Texas's two challenging non-conference games against UCONN and Illinois, they went 1-1. Fiftye percent again!
And in Texas's two challenging non-conference games against UCONN and Illinois, they went 1-1. Fiftye percent again!
Let's remember the crux of Gottlieb's argument. He wanted to value the non-conference performance. Hmm. Texas went 3-3 against Top 100 RPI teams in non-conference play (that's how they got that justified 71 non conference RPI by the way).
And I like how he tried to pretend that it was about Texas finishing strong against KSU and Baylor. That would just magically disregard BYU's accomplishments.
Do you ever wonder why a media whore will tout how a team finishes? It's because in the olden days, before RPI and quick data, it was easier for the pundits to snow people into thinking somebody finishing on a good note was more worthy of a seeding. It somehow did not matter the team sucked earlier in the year.
But does that really make sense?
If a Guy A finishes a marathon with a better time than Guy B do we say that Guy B deserves the win because he was ran the last two or three miles faster? No. That would be preposterous. The same principle should apply in college basketball.
If a Guy A finishes a marathon with a better time than Guy B do we say that Guy B deserves the win because he was ran the last two or three miles faster? No. That would be preposterous. The same principle should apply in college basketball.
Nonetheless, 'experts' will often use the 'who's hot' trick to whore it up for their bigger markets. But even Gottlieb is using that tool to take an unprecedented leap. Gottlieb is taking so much undue liberty with that Joe Lunardi has to pragmatically remind his fellow media whore: So it's really BYU across the board in terms of number of losses, schedule strength, both overall and non conference, and then of course in the what have you done for me lately category, Texas has lost two of its last three.
So they (BYU) loaded up on road wins against..And then you're counting a Colorado State and a UNLV, two at-best bubble teams. I think UNLV is going to get in (to the NCAA Tournament) largely on the back of win of Wisconsin going back to the first month of the half of the season.
Okay, I cannot say this enough mister a-hole (Gottlieb). The RPI is a measure of strength of schedule and performance. So stop trying to pretend that the Mountain West is weak when they are one of only four conferences in which all of the teams have winning non conference records.
Also characterizing CSU and UNLV as two at-best bubble teams is so contemptuously pathetic that someone ought to just slap you in your snide face.
UNLV has a 26 RPI and 33 SOS and they are 22-7. Granted a pinhead like yourself will come back and say cough, cough well look at their 3-6 record versus Top 50 RPI teams. Of course idiots like yourself would ignore the fact that they were all hard fought games. If it were Kentucky or UCONN and they had the exact same numbers, Gottlieb would not be pretending that they were bubble teams. So knock the double standard off already media whores. We know you're game. It's old.
Idiots like Gottlieb are not going around calling UCLA a bubble team or at-best bubble team. UCLA is only 3-4 against the Top 50 RPI teams with a 46 SOS and a 21-8 record that is worse than UNLV's 22-7 record. Could it be because calling a likely first or second place team of a 'major' conference is sacrilege but calling a third place team in a 'non major' conference is standard procedure?
Quite frankly if UNLV was in the ACC or Pac-10 they would have been competing for a conference title and then it would be unthinkable to call them an at-best bubble team.
Colorado State has an RPI of 47 and an SOS of 38 to go with an 18-10 record. Admittedly, with two games left they are a bubble team in that if they finish the season with losses, they would jeopardize their tournament selection. However, CBS Bracketology 'experts' have CSU in the tournament as it stands right now and they certainly are not an at-best, a bubble team. So again, the a-hole lied to the viewers.
Getting back to UNLV; they went to Virginia Tech and beat the Hogies by 12 points. Duke went to Blackburg and lost by 4. A couple days ago, Gottlieb would have been willing to give Duke a number one seed. This guy knows that UNLV is not a legit contender, not a bubble team.
And what's more, Gottlieb's going discredit UNLV while worshiping University of Wisconsin basketball?
I like BYU, not a shot at BYU. I just think that we're falling a little bit in love with the numbers based on the Arizona win, played essentially on a home court (Utes court) and the latest wins against San Diego State. They've dominated their conference and they got the Arizona win. Outside of that, there's not a lot to fall in love with.
Gottlieb tries to to make BYU sound like a fluke. He paints a picture that BYU only got a few lucky wins. This is a patented media whore maneuver. BYU is 9-1 vs. the RPI Top 50 whereas Texas is 7-2 vs. the RPI Top 50.
BYU has played as well as any team in the country and they have performed great on both ends of the court. They also have an offense that has outperformed everybody. Jimmer Fredette has routinely bombed forty foot threes. Despite that reality, the ESPN whores seek to discredit them.
And let's not just pretend that this is on Gottlieb. The show's producers and the Disney executives knowingly allow for this system of deceit to continue.
Picture: ESPN whore, Doug Gottlieb
Noteworthy: Soon after the publishing of this article, Texas lost at home to KSU.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)