NCAA selection committee chair, Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith "explained" the selection decisions speaking obliquely about a team's "resume" and "overall body of work," but what does that mean? Probably that there were no reasonable, systematic criteria at all.
30 years ago, to help systematize selections to the tournament, the NCAA established a "Rating Percentage Index" to rank teams based upon a team's wins and losses and its strength of schedule. This year Harvard (21-6), which was neck-and-neck all season for the Ivy League title, losing on a buzzer beater in a playoff after it tied with Princeton for the league title, ranked #35 on this index, as compared to VA Commonwealth's #49. Many from major conferences were admitted with far worse records and far lower RPIs, including:
- Michigan (19-13 Big Ten, RPI #52)
- Marquette (20-14 Big East, RPI #64)
- USC (19-14 Pac Ten, RPI #67)
So, why are these teams in, while others analysts expected to be such as Colorado (21-13, five wins over top-40 teams) and Virginia Tech (21-11, 9-7 in ACC*) not? (No one really expected an Ivy League at-large bid.)
In two words, organizational politics. The committee is made up of conference commissioners and athletic directors, each there, no doubt, to represent certain interests. Indeed, the final answer for every exclusion, was "they didn't get enough votes."
Conferences are the organizational units that constitute the NCAA. This year, the Colonial Conference and Conference-USA managed to enhance their own interest and prestige, just as the major conferences virtually always put their own interests ahead of the sport and its athletes. Note the conference from which selection committee chair Gene Smith hails placed seven of its 11 teams in the tournament, most of them with seeds and brackets more favorable than their "resumes" would seem to warrant (more on that tomorrow).
Organizational politics are a fact of life, but arbitrariness and, especially, favoritism undermines the spirit of sport. The attraction of sport is that, unlike life in general which we understand to be fixed at every turn, on the court, performance rather than pedigree prevails. The RPI is an extremely imperfect rating index, but it is something. In the best interest of the athletes, the schools themselves, and the sport, the NCAA ought to replace the current ad-hoc "body of work" with systematic, coherent selection criteria so as to reward play by student-athletes on the basketball court, rather than behind-the-scenes manuevering by operatives of the NCAA royal court.
* 21-11, 9-7 in ACC is normally good enough to get in not even factoring a late-season win vs. Duke, two wins in the ACC Tournament and a relatively challenging non-conference schedule, and an expanded at-large pool.
In two words, organizational politics. The committee is made up of conference commissioners and athletic directors, each there, no doubt, to represent certain interests. Indeed, the final answer for every exclusion, was "they didn't get enough votes."
Conferences are the organizational units that constitute the NCAA. This year, the Colonial Conference and Conference-USA managed to enhance their own interest and prestige, just as the major conferences virtually always put their own interests ahead of the sport and its athletes. Note the conference from which selection committee chair Gene Smith hails placed seven of its 11 teams in the tournament, most of them with seeds and brackets more favorable than their "resumes" would seem to warrant (more on that tomorrow).
Organizational politics are a fact of life, but arbitrariness and, especially, favoritism undermines the spirit of sport. The attraction of sport is that, unlike life in general which we understand to be fixed at every turn, on the court, performance rather than pedigree prevails. The RPI is an extremely imperfect rating index, but it is something. In the best interest of the athletes, the schools themselves, and the sport, the NCAA ought to replace the current ad-hoc "body of work" with systematic, coherent selection criteria so as to reward play by student-athletes on the basketball court, rather than behind-the-scenes manuevering by operatives of the NCAA royal court.
* 21-11, 9-7 in ACC is normally good enough to get in not even factoring a late-season win vs. Duke, two wins in the ACC Tournament and a relatively challenging non-conference schedule, and an expanded at-large pool.
No comments:
Post a Comment