Much like last week, there were numerous topics from which I could choose a blog entry. The Steelers traded away 2022 first-round pick Kenny Pickett and a 4th-round pick for a 3rd-round pick and two 7th-rounders next year. Shortly after, they traded a conditional 6th round-pick to the Bears for 2021 first-round pick Justin Fields, completing a 100% overhaul of their quarterback room in the span of a week. Trubisky, Pickett, and Rudolph are out, and Wilson and Fields are in. Additionally, I could again lament the state of the Penguins, although they did earn 5 points from their 4 games this week.
However, I am forced to write about the absolute farce known as the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee, as Pitt was kept out of the tourney, while worse teams received at-large bids.
This enrages me beyond all belief. For the past three years, the “bracketologists” have preached about the value of the NET (NCAA Evaluation Tool) rankings as a new method of determining who hears their name called on Selection Sunday. The committee is also supposed to utilize the KenPom rankings, an algorithm that analyzes college basketball teams on a possession-by-possession basis to quantify how good a team is. Lastly, the virtues of the four “quadrants” of opponents have been sung repeatedly as a means of separating the tournament-bound teams from those that are on the outside, looking in.
Unfortunately, these analytical tools are not used well, and it leads to a bullshit tournament field being developed. Let us take a look at Pitt’s NCAA Tournament résumé:
- 22-11 overall record (12-8 in the ACC, the 4th-best finish in the conference)
- 9-9 record against teams in the top two quadrants of NCAA basketball, with four of those wins against quad-1 teams
- 7-4 record on the road (including wins at Duke and at Virginia, both of whom made the tournament), which is tied for the 5th-best road record among teams in power conferences
- #40 in both the NET and KenPom rankings
- 32nd in the basketball power index (BPI)
- 45th in strength-of-record (SoR)
- 343rd-ranked non-conference strength of schedule (NCSOS), arguably the biggest blemish on their résumé
In comparison to some of the teams that made the tournament, Pitt’s metrics are better by a wide margin. Here is a summary of some teams that wrongfully got in ahead of the Panthers:
- Virginia: 2-7 in quad-1 games, 69th in KenPom, 77th in strength of schedule, 54th in NET, Pitt won at Virginia
- Florida Atlantic: 3 quad-4 losses, which are the losses most damaging to a tournament résumé
- TCU: 357th ranked NCSOS (worse than the NCSOS of Pitt)
- It should be noted that bracketologist Joe Lunardi is on record saying that no bubble team had ever squeaked into the tournament with a NCSOS as low as Pitt’s. TCU did that
- Clemson: they did beat Pitt twice, but Pitt finished ahead of the Tigers in the ACC with more total wins and conference wins, as well as more wins against teams in the top-two quadrants. Clemson is a SIXTH SEED. Pitt is out
- Texas A&M: lower NET and KenPom rankings than Pitt, more losses against teams in the bottom-two quadrants
- Boise State: 22 total wins, the same number as Pitt. Boise State played two ACC opponents, which ended in a 17-point loss to Clemson and a 7-point loss to Virginia Tech, the latter of whom Pitt beat handily
Tell me again how important the NET is, Mr. Lunardi. To me, it does not seem to mean anything. The selection committee is a joke. There is absolutely zero consistency in choosing teams. Better NET? Who cares, I guess. Better records against better teams? Meh, I prefer the Mountain West. Better KenPom? Nah. Head-to-head? No, sir.
You cannot possibly compare those résumés and say that even half of those teams deserved to qualify for the NCAA tournament over Pitt. Anyone who does is deluding themselves. There is no comparison—Pitt played better, and played their best basketball towards the end of the season. The fact that teams like Virginia and Texas A&M got in over Pitt just goes to show how little respect the committee has for the Panthers, and it also demonstrates how fraudulent and baseless the selection criteria are. The people in charge of selecting the tournament field should be completely and utterly ashamed of themselves, as there is no objective rationale by which you can choose those teams over Pitt. Do not even try to justify your selections—there is no basis. You have not made any progress (or even an effort) on objective criteria for tournament selections. The NET stands for Not Even Trying.