Its okay to acknowledge JP is a good AD but isn't always perfect (no one is).
Jamie Pollard had us as the last 2 seed in his submission
- Thread starter Cfinnerty16
- Start date
I’m doubting if ByU is going to score a point against Duquesne lol
I don't know. As you're seeing with BYU, they're a lot like our old Hoiberg teams. If the shots aren't falling, they can lose to anyone.
No. Leadership is not about proving yourself right.
There is absolutely nothing worse that a "leader" in the realm of athletics can do than to consistently be vocally whiney and defensive (thin-skinned) to fans/stakeholders and feel any need to "prove" themselves right, particularly in this situation when there is literally 0 benefits do voicing these opinions publicly. Especially when the logic used to support these opinions is ridiculously stupid, counter-intuitive, and contradictory, and it is very obvious that it would rile up the fanbase in a negative way - a freaking day ahead of the start of a tournament when the absolute last thing a supposed leader should do is introduce any distractions of any kind.
3 times actually. He then tripled-down and publicly supported a philosophy that double-counts the NCSOS, and then was arrogant and oblivious enough to air this opinion publicly before a huge weekend of basketball for his school.
To me, it seems like the committee didn’t really take conference tournaments into account unless you were getting an AQ. I don’t agree with it and I think it’s stupid that noncon games are worth more than our wins in KC. But, if they really view it like that, then we deserved the last 2.
The metrics ARE objective, it's the people (i.e., committee) who aren't.
Ken Pomeroy decided how Adjusted Efficiency Margin is calculated on his site. The math used to get there is objective, choosing what variables go into it is subjective. Back up far enough and its not all that different to how individuals on the committee decide to place teams on their own seed list
That's why the decision should be an aggregate of multiple metrics
Sure, you can disagree with how the formula is put together, but at least it's transparent and you can't disagree with the application of the formula. Committee members have their own individual formulas inside their heads which are not transparent and are not applied consistently. I know which method I prefer.
If he hasn’t yet…. he will. He always knows more than anyone else about everything …. and loves to let you know it.
It's objective that team A has the better KenPom. But there's nothing objective about saying the tournament should be seeded by KenPom rank.
Yes, you can do that. And then you have everyone gaming the system because they know the rules. Or, you can do your best to eliminate bias and accept the inherent randomness of a bunch of people making their own informed decisions.
Pollard's tenure on the committee is done, you're a free elf. Start doing your homework now to figure out who's going to screw us next year
Bingo. Sure he's said or done some things we may question but he's really navigated ISU overall really well.
15 seeds don’t have large fanbases. Why is this that important? I would bet that in most 2/15 games there are more fans of the other 2 teams in the session rooting for the 15 than actual fans of the program.
The 15 seeds last year were
Vermont (Vermont)
Princeton (New Jersey)
Colgate (New York)
UNC Asheville (North Carolina)
You're gonna get some long miles in with 3 New England schools being sent to California, California, Iowa, and Ohio
It’s not a big deal but I can tell you it has had an effect on ticket prices. Prices are dropping today but I, like many others purchased after the session announcement.
