Jamie Pollard had us as the last 2 seed in his submission

[Clonefan32]

I think we as fanbase need to take a step away from the ledge here. We have one of the best AD's in the country and I think people need to remember that.

I'll make 3 points:
- As others have well stated, he has to be impartial when he's on the committee and doing his own rankings and I think he was when he rated us as #8 overall. If I were on the committee, I know I would rank my team 1 or 2 spots worse than what they deserve just to totally eliminate any appearance that I was inflating ISU

- I think it's important to parse Jamie's words carefully. Lots of people disagreeing with the scheduling. But, he said the goal was to help us get into the tourney. They didn't think they were that good. I don't think anyone thought we would be as good as we are! It's a big difference scheduling to get into the dance as opposed to scheduling tougher to get good seed

- Let's be honest, if TJ and Jamie had scheduled harder and we had several losses in the non-con, all of cyclone nation would be mad cause they scheduled too hard and cost us a bid to the dance!!

I have no issue with the scheduling or what Jamie did.

Lets enjoy the best 4 days of the year and make a deep run!!

Absolutely all of this can be true, while it also being true that there is zero value to him going on a radio show and choosing to solely highlight our NCSOS. It was just so unnecessary, and gets to the core of what drives people nuts about JP. It's his unabashed need to feel like he's right about everything.

 

[jcyclonee]

You're all dumb......

View attachment 126003

I really want to dumb this comment now, just because. Can you go back and re-screenshot it so that my name is included?

 

[werdnamanhill]

No, he's supposed to vote us as the 4th 1 seed based on objective, factual metrics.

This is all subjective. If it was objective, they wouldn't use a committee.

 

[Die4Cy]

It's apparent at this point that a blue blood name on the jersey is good for a 3-6 slot jump in the seed selection, just because. Doesn't it?

It is what it is. The ISU team that played last weekend is a top 3 team. They will get their opportunity to prove it.

 

[3TrueFans]

I don't think he could. I believe in the past he's said he had to recuse himself for that part.

That doesn’t mean he has to put us as the worst 2 seed based on our ncsos on his own selection though.

 

[isucy86]

You clearly don’t pay attention to a lot of the national basketball media or understand the bracket process.
If we were seed 2 numbers 1,2,3 we’d still get Omaha. If we were a 3 seed, we’d still get Omaha.
Jamie didn’t “do us a favor” getting us Omaha. Once we got to the 2-3 line, we were getting it regardless.
CBS sports College Basketball insiders & reporters, Gary Parrish & Matt Norlander literally made 3 podcasts & multiple television spots criticizing the committee.
Parrish called Iowa states seeding a “travesty”
Matt Norlander said, “you know, there’s an argument with UNC & ISU as the 1 seed, so I’m not upset about that. Iowa State is ABSOLUTELY should not be the last 2 seed.”

I could go on about the numerous other errors, but this is about ISU.

No I don't listen to a lot of talking heads because they just make statements to incite listeners/viewers to get attention. You fell for their trap. Same reason I feel guys like Lunardi and DeCourcey are jokes.

The truth is, let's win!! Aren't 2 seeds, whether they are the 5th or 8th best overall seed supposed to beat 15 and 7/10 seeds? So are you saying, having to play Illinois in the Sweet 16 scares you more than playing #3 seeds Creighton or Kentucky?

 

[3TrueFans]

I’d be interested to know where Jamie had Houston, hopefully he had them as lowest 1 seed based on noncon schedule.

 

[riceville98]

I don't think he could. I believe in the past he's said he had to recuse himself for that part.

Exactly, Nothing he can can do for us when they are discussing us.

That's where having him on the committee hurts us (nice honor for him and ISU though) but, a different Big 12 rep could better advocate for us.

 

[HFCS]

The Ironic part is they do the exact opposite in football. SEC schedules a bunch of cupcakes but we all understand that they have the best football conference. So we understand when Alabama is regarded very high even though they played Grand Canyon in a football game or some very very low level team. It's because they have a brutal conference schedule. For some reason it's ok in football when the SEC does it, but not ok in basketball when Iowa State does it. So it appears that it's ok for one thing and not the other.

If we (big 12) have to schedule elite non conf we should back it down to 16 or 18 conf games.

We’re up to 20 next year. We had an elite schedule (16th, UNC was good to but only 32nd) and now we’re going to add maybe a third game against Baylor and maybe Arizona to that elite crazy difficult schedule…and yet the committee docks us for schedule????

When big 12 goes to 20 games it’s very possible all 16 teams have the 16 best sos regardless of how bad non conf is. Any rule that dicks that conference for schedule is a conspiracy out in the open.

 

[isufbcurt]

Absolutely all of this can be true, while it also being true that there is zero value to him going on a radio show and choosing to solely highlight our NCSOS. It was just so unnecessary, and gets to the core of what drives people nuts about JP. It's his unabashed need to feel like he's right about everything.

When people question your work you don't get defensive and want to prove you're right?

 

[Cloneon]

Honestly just let some AI program build the bracket at this point

That's funny. The old adage: "Stupid in, stupid out." Now magnify that infinitely, and you have AI. There's a lot AI is good for, but this is a disastrous take.

 

[HFCS]

That's funny. The old adage: "Stupid in, stupid out." Now magnify that infinitely, and you have AI. There's a lot AI is good for, but this is a disastrous take.

The various metrics aren’t AI. They’re not that different than they were 10-15 years ago.

It would be easy to pick the 8 best, remove high and low score, and get far better selections and seeding than committee did this year.

That’s what bcs ranking did for the computer 1/3. The year OKState got bumped they were still 2 in the computer average. TCU would’ve been top 4 the year they got bumped by cfpc too.

 

[Clonefan94]

Agree. The selection committee basically said conference tournaments don't mean much at all.

If I'm TJ and we're already a relatively high seed going into next year's Big 12 tournament, I rest my starters for most of the game(s), whether they're injured or not.

The committee is setting a really bad precedent here. They are going to turn conference tournaments into bowl games, where everyone with a future is going to sit out. Which, could then send even more ripples with a bunch of teams getting auto-bids who shouldn't, because they didn't play any of the top teams in the league.

I love the Big 12 tournament and definitely don't want it to go away, but seriously, what is the point of playing in it if you know nothing you do there will matter for the NCAA Tournament. Why risk injury and getting worn out if you are already locked in to your seed?

****, I think teams like Kansas and Kentucky would have been better off to go ahead and sit out their entire conference seasons and because of the name on the jersey, probably would have ended up with better seeds than they have now.

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

You haven't been paying attention if you think he knows anything about optics.

I just gave him too much.

 

[Cloneon]

The various metrics aren’t AI. They’re not that different than they were 10-15 years ago.

It would be easy to pick the 8 best, remove high and low score, and get far better selections and seeding than committee did this year.

That’s what bcs ranking did for the computer 1/3. The year OKState got bumped they were still 2 in the computer average. TCU would’ve been top 4 the year they got bumped by cfpc too.

In all honestly, AI is like any proof. Bad premise, bad output. The ambiguity of public information is off the charts and is more a narrative than fact these days.
Not to mention the foundational rules. For example, should AI be able to research past seedings, past outcomes, and use those metrics to weigh current metrics? And what about rule changes, year over year? How do those distort outcomes? Travel distances? Hotel arrangements? Funding? Or, do we dare use profitability of this tournament to influence choices? You see, we can start a discussion that's a bottomless pit WHICH AI will discover and justify.

 

[Cymon]

Jamie should be fired! Derp!

 

[jcyclonee]

Honestly just let some AI program build the bracket at this point

The AI would just build robots to win the tournament. Wasn't that the plot of one of the Return to Gilligan's Island movies and Space Jam?

 

[Clonefan32]

When people question your work you don't get defensive and want to prove you're right?

I'm not an extremely well paid public employee whose words anyone would care about, so no. He should have thicker skin than that, or find a new profession.

 

[Rabbuk]

I'm not an extremely well-paid public employee whose words anyone would care about, so no. He should have thicker skin than that, or find a new profession.

Or when it clearly isn't in alignment with reality. If I miss the mark badly on something at work I just take the L

 

[Cydkar]

We can still let them know they suck. We don't have to just accept mediocrity.

You have no power. Sorry.
This topic is a useless echo chamber. Everyone agrees that they suck.