If Wichita St. runs the table, do they deserve a #1 seed?

[Sumdumguy]

I wish that we could say that the decision made this year on whether or not an undefeated 'mid major' should get a one seed will be an indication as to the process in which seeding is awarded. Unfortunately, the committee has shown so many inconsistencies throughout the years that it's anyone's guess whether a weaker undefeated season ranks with a 3 or 4 loss, but more difficult, season. Everything seems so subjective that if any of the top 10 teams goes on a good run at the end of the regular season and into the conference tourney they could take away the 1 seed from WSU. The only consistency shown by the committee is that they are inconsistent. I wouldn't say that WSU doesn't deserve a 1 seed, but I am still not convinced they are one of the top 4 teams in the country. That is the beauty of NCAA basketball, you can literally not win a game the entire regular season and still win a NC. It's so much more exciting for the fan than football where you know that if you lose 2 or 3 games your title chances are gone. The Madness is addicting.

[stever20]

It's sad to me that a team that plays in the MVC and really has no serious competition at all is allowed to be ranked this high. IMO no mid major team should be ranked in the top 10 unless they truly go out and beat a top 10 power conference team i.e. Kansas, Duke, Cuse, etc. If Wichita State played in the ACC or Big Ten, they'd be a slightly above .500 team if not .500. I can't stand when little guys benefit from a weak schedule, power through it as they should, and they get treated like Duke. If you want to be mentioned in the same breath as the big boys, you have to play with the big boys like Creighton. You can't play in the minor leagues and get the same respect as the Yankees no matter how much you win. Wichita State is just the latest Davidson…they go on a big run, shock the world, but then after the core graduates that gave them all the success for the few years, they go back to being an afterthought.

Give me a break. After they're gone, fine they're gone but while they are there, they deserve to be rewarded. They made the final 4 last year. A team in their conference is gone to the Big East and they're winning the Big East.

You might not like it, but Creighton winning the Big East is helping out Wichita SO much this year. I don't think Wichita would be getting nearly the respect if Creighton was a 7-6 Big East team right now.

It has nothing to do with what they "deserve". The guidelines that the committee follows are designed to seed teams based on what they've actually accomplished on the court, not based on someone's opinion of what they "deserve".

Unfortunately for Wichita State , their ability to accomplish big things on the court during the regular season this year is limited by the weakness of their schedule. They can't compile many quality wins because they don't play many quality teams. The notion that the committee is going to suspend their guidelines so one team can get what they "deserve" isn't based on precedent or current practice.

they did last year for Gonzaga. Last year Gonzaga had the #96 SOS with 2 losses. So I think one could easily say that is is based on precedent and current practice. The committee is a LOT different than it used to be, something you totally fail to acknowledge. They reward the mid-majors a whole lot more now than they ever used to. Probably a lot to do with Butler, VCU, George Mason, and Wichita making the final 4. You might not like it- but it's a major consideration that wasn't there 10 years ago. Just look last year at Middle Tennessee making the tourney with 3 games against top 100 teams. They NEVER make the tourney 5 years ago. Never.

Also, Wichita's profile easily could really improve here last few weeks. Indiana St right now is 55 in the RPI. If they make the final of the MVC and lose to Wichita, they would be a top 35 RPI team. Wichita would have 3 wins vs them. Tennessee is 51 right now. Easily could see them get into the top 50. That would be 4 more top 50 wins than they have right now to give them 6.

[ljay]

Um, Indie State is not moving up 20 RPI spots with a loss to Wichita especially when they will have beaten a couple 200 RPI teams to get to the finals. They are fimly entrenched outside the Top 50.

Wichita's ceiling is a 2 seed with the schedule they have put together. Not their fault that Tennessee is meh, Alabama sucks and the Valley is as bad as it's been in decades but that's how it has fallen out.

There is nothing to hang your head about in being a 2 seed. The road to the Sweet 16 is still relatively smooth and after that it's all about being hot and match ups.

[buckswope]

Um, Indie State is not moving up 20 RPI spots with a loss to Wichita especially when they will have beaten a couple 200 RPI teams to get to the finals. They are fimly entrenched outside the Top 50.

That's just like...your opinion man.

It's not likely to happen, but there is some data to suggest that Indiana St would crack the RPI top 35 if they won every game from here on out save for an MVC tournament championship game loss to Wichita St
http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/ct/Indiana%20St..html

Now as far as Indiana St being "fimly entrenched outside the top 50"...

Final Record W-L pctg. Expected RPI Probability
25-6 80.65% 25.0 2.44%
24-7 77.42% 32.4 10.77%
23-8 74.19% 39.2 17.77%
22-9 70.97% 47.2 11.26%
23-7 76.67% 47.5 5.11%
(sum of the above probabilities = 47.35%)

Maybe you don't trust that math...but that math is a better argument than "because I say so"

Wichita's ceiling is a 2 seed with the schedule they have put together. Not their fault that Tennessee is meh, Alabama sucks and the Valley is as bad as it's been in decades but that's how it has fallen out.

Creighton fans are the last ones who should be playing this card. YOU LEFT. You chose to stop playing Wichita St. You're a huge reason why their schedule is so weak.

It would be like a Xavier fan hating on SLU for being top 10 despite a lack of quality wins. (Xavier was the last A10 team to beat SLU. Creighton was the last MVC team to beat Wichita St.)

There is nothing to hang your head about in being a 2 seed. The road to the Sweet 16 is still relatively smooth and after that it's all about being hot and match ups.

If the difference is negligible, why do you feel so strongly that a team that made the Final 4 a year ago and hasn't lost since should not receive a 1-seed?

[Bill Marsh]

Give me a break. After they're gone, fine they're gone but while they are there, they deserve to be rewarded. They made the final 4 last year. A team in their conference is gone to the Big East and they're winning the Big East.

You might not like it, but Creighton winning the Big East is helping out Wichita SO much this year. I don't think Wichita would be getting nearly the respect if Creighton was a 7-6 Big East team right now.

It has nothing to do with what they "deserve". The guidelines that the committee follows are designed to seed teams based on what they've actually accomplished on the court, not based on someone's opinion of what they "deserve".

Unfortunately for Wichita State , their ability to accomplish big things on the court during the regular season this year is limited by the weakness of their schedule. They can't compile many quality wins because they don't play many quality teams. The notion that the committee is going to suspend their guidelines so one team can get what they "deserve" isn't based on precedent or current practice.

they did last year for Gonzaga. Last year Gonzaga had the #96 SOS with 2 losses. So I think one could easily say that is is based on precedent and current practice. The committee is a LOT different than it used to be, something you totally fail to acknowledge. They reward the mid-majors a whole lot more now than they ever used to. Probably a lot to do with Butler, VCU, George Mason, and Wichita making the final 4. You might not like it- but it's a major consideration that wasn't there 10 years ago. Just look last year at Middle Tennessee making the tourney with 3 games against top 100 teams. They NEVER make the tourney 5 years ago. Never.

Also, Wichita's profile easily could really improve here last few weeks. Indiana St right now is 55 in the RPI. If they make the final of the MVC and lose to Wichita, they would be a top 35 RPI team. Wichita would have 3 wins vs them. Tennessee is 51 right now. Easily could see them get into the top 50. That would be 4 more top 50 wins than they have right now to give them 6.

Steve, I respect your opinion - especially since it's an educated opinion. I'd just like to take up just some of the factual points.

1. According to real Real Time RPI, Gonzaga had an SOS of 75 last year, not 96.

2. I agree that the committee rewards mid majors a lot more than they used to. But what do they reward them for? Playing a competitive schedule. They rewarded Gonzaga last year because they went out and scheduled as competitive a lineup of power conference teams OOC as they possible could - 5 from the Big XII alone:

West Virginia
@Oklahoma
K State
OK State
Baylor
Clemson
@Washington State
Illinois
@Butler

Wichita State has made no remotely comparable effort to schedule power conference teams.

[Bill Marsh]

Um, Indie State is not moving up 20 RPI spots with a loss to Wichita especially when they will have beaten a couple 200 RPI teams to get to the finals. They are fimly entrenched outside the Top 50.

That's just like...your opinion man.

It's not likely to happen, but there is some data to suggest that Indiana St would crack the RPI top 35 if they won every game from here on out save for an MVC tournament championship game loss to Wichita St
http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/ct/Indiana%20St..html

Now as far as Indiana St being "fimly entrenched outside the top 50"...

Final Record W-L pctg. Expected RPI Probability
25-6 80.65% 25.0 2.44%
24-7 77.42% 32.4 10.77%
23-8 74.19% 39.2 17.77%
22-9 70.97% 47.2 11.26%
23-7 76.67% 47.5 5.11%
(sum of the above probabilities = 47.35%)

Maybe you don't trust that math...but that math is a better argument than "because I say so"

Wichita's ceiling is a 2 seed with the schedule they have put together. Not their fault that Tennessee is meh, Alabama sucks and the Valley is as bad as it's been in decades but that's how it has fallen out.

Creighton fans are the last ones who should be playing this card. YOU LEFT. You chose to stop playing Wichita St. You're a huge reason why their schedule is so weak.

It would be like a Xavier fan hating on SLU for being top 10 despite a lack of quality wins. (Xavier was the last A10 team to beat SLU. Creighton was the last MVC team to beat Wichita St.)

There is nothing to hang your head about in being a 2 seed. The road to the Sweet 16 is still relatively smooth and after that it's all about being hot and match ups.

If the difference is negligible, why do you feel so strongly that a team that made the Final 4 a year ago and hasn't lost since should not receive a 1-seed?

Whoa, Nellie! Hold the horses.

IJay objected to the comment that simply getting to the MVC finals and losing to WSU would bump ISU 20 spots in RPI rankings. It won't. That's what they're already projected to do and they're projected to finish the season after the conference tourney with an RPI rank of 53.

You added the key caveat which wasn't mentioned earlier. ISU would have to go undefeated the rest of the way, which they're not expected to do. They'd have to pick up road wins over both Missouri State and Illinois State, both of which are expected to be very competitive games. They've already shown themselves to be vulnerable on the road, losing to a terrible SIU team by 19 points and barely escaping Drake and Loyola on the road.

It's not like Indians State has a cake walk to going undefeated the rest of the way by playing teams they're clearly superior to. Their RPI is where it is for a reason. Suggesting that they're going to bump up to a 35 RPI is going out on a limb and suggesting something that is out of character with who they've been all season long.

[buckswope]

Wichita State has made no remotely comparable effort to schedule power conference teams.

It has nothing to do with "effort". Gonzaga has established their national brand over the last 15 years to the point where teams are willing to play them on fair terms, whereas Wichita St are the non-sexy (i.e. in terms of box office draw) dangerous team that nobody wants to play in anything other than a "buy" game.

Wichita St has drawn a line in the sand where they are willing to play anyone in a home and home series with the Shockers going on the road first, but the best they've been able to get is SLU and Tennessee. Wichita St got further in the NCAA tournament last year than all but 3 other teams. Don't punish them for standing their ground.

as for Gonzaga's schedule vs Wichita St's

Here are the end of year KenPom ratings for Gonzaga's 2013 opponents that you cited

West Virginia 125
@Oklahoma 49 (note: this was a neutral site tournament)
K State 21
OK State 22 (note: this was a road game)
Baylor 29
Clemson 129 (note: this was a neutral site tournament)
@Washington State 85
Illinois 39 (loss)
@Butler 38 (loss)

Now here is Wichita St (conference affiliation is less relevant than overall rating)

@Tulsa 88
BYU 49 (note: this was a neutral site tournament - Texas was the projected opponent but they lost to BYU)
@SLU 19
Tennessee 24
@Alabama 116

@SLU and @Okla St cancel out
BYU and Oklahoma cancel out
Tennesee cancels out either Baylor or K-State
@Tulsa and @Washington State cancel out
@Alabama is a better win than WVU or Clemson

So really, Gonzaga's edge is 3 games (2 home 1 road) against opponents in the 20-40 range - 2 of which they lost...and again, Wichita St made the effort to try and get a top 30 "power conference" team (Texas) on a neutral court but it didn't work out.

[buckswope]

Buckswope objected to the comment that simply getting to the MVC finals and losing to WSU would bump ISU 20 spots in RPI rankings. It won't. That's what they're already projected to do and they're projected to finish the season after the conference tourney with an RPI rank of 53.

You added the key caveat which wasn't mentioned earlier. ISU would have to go undefeated the rest of the way, which they're not expected to do. They'd have to pick up road wins over both Missouri State and Illinois State, both of which are expected to be very competitive games. They've already shown themselves to be vulnerable on the road, losing to a terrible SIU team by 19 points and barely escaping Drake and Loyola on the road.

It's not like Indians State has a cake walk to going undefeated the rest of the way by playing teams they're clearly superior to. Their RPI is where it is for a reason. Suggesting that they're going to bump up to a 35 RPI is going out on a limb and suggesting something that is out of character with who they've been all season long.

You're the one who is confused. Let me clarify.

I don't believe Indiana St will win out until the MVC final. Neither does KenPom. Neither does RPIForecast.

RPIForecast projects Indiana St to have an RPI of 53.5...with at least 1 non-Wichita St loss along the way.

however, IF Indiana State is able to win every game between now and the MVC final - which there is only a 13% chance according to RPIForecast - they would jump to the RPI top 35.

[Bill Marsh]

Buckswope objected to the comment that simply getting to the MVC finals and losing to WSU would bump ISU 20 spots in RPI rankings. It won't. That's what they're already projected to do and they're projected to finish the season after the conference tourney with an RPI rank of 53.

You added the key caveat which wasn't mentioned earlier. ISU would have to go undefeated the rest of the way, which they're not expected to do. They'd have to pick up road wins over both Missouri State and Illinois State, both of which are expected to be very competitive games. They've already shown themselves to be vulnerable on the road, losing to a terrible SIU team by 19 points and barely escaping Drake and Loyola on the road.

It's not like Indians State has a cake walk to going undefeated the rest of the way by playing teams they're clearly superior to. Their RPI is where it is for a reason. Suggesting that they're going to bump up to a 35 RPI is going out on a limb and suggesting something that is out of character with who they've been all season long.

You're the one who is confused. Let me clarify.

I don't believe Indiana St will win out until the MVC final. Neither does KenPom. Neither does RPIForecast.

RPIForecast projects Indiana St to have an RPI of 53.5...with at least 1 non-Wichita St loss along the way.

however, IF Indiana State is able to win every game between now and the MVC final - which there is only a 13% chance according to RPIForecast - they would jump to the RPI top 35.

How am I confused? That's exactly what I said.

[Bill Marsh]

Wichita State has made no remotely comparable effort to schedule power conference teams.

It has nothing to do with "effort". Gonzaga has established their national brand over the last 15 years to the point where teams are willing to play them on fair terms, whereas Wichita St are the non-sexy (i.e. in terms of box office draw) dangerous team that nobody wants to play in anything other than a "buy" game.

Wichita St has drawn a line in the sand where they are willing to play anyone in a home and home series with the Shockers going on the road first, but the best they've been able to get is SLU and Tennessee. Wichita St got further in the NCAA tournament last year than all but 3 other teams. Don't punish them for standing their ground.

as for Gonzaga's schedule vs Wichita St's

Here are the end of year KenPom ratings for Gonzaga's 2013 opponents that you cited

West Virginia 125
@Oklahoma 49 (note: this was a neutral site tournament)
K State 21
OK State 22 (note: this was a road game)
Baylor 29
Clemson 129 (note: this was a neutral site tournament)
@Washington State 85
Illinois 39 (loss)
@Butler 38 (loss)

Now here is Wichita St (conference affiliation is less relevant than overall rating)

@Tulsa 88
BYU 49 (note: this was a neutral site tournament - Texas was the projected opponent but they lost to BYU)
@SLU 19
Tennessee 24
@Alabama 116

@SLU and @Okla St cancel out
BYU and Oklahoma cancel out
Tennesee cancels out either Baylor or K-State
@Tulsa and @Washington State cancel out
@Alabama is a better win than WVU or Clemson

So really, Gonzaga's edge is 3 games (2 home 1 road) against opponents in the 20-40 range - 2 of which they lost...and again, Wichita St made the effort to try and get a top 30 "power conference" team (Texas) on a neutral court but it didn't work out.

Taking my comment out of context, what you're saying makes perfect sense.

In context, I was responding to Steve's comment that in his opinion, the committee was rewarding certain mid majors. I agree that in some recent years, the committee has done that.

Your analysis looks at the schedule strictly as it normally is done, i.e. strictly how the teams rank in RPI.

BUT what I'm saying for right or for wrong is that certain committees have gone beyond RPI and have rewarded mid major programs that have scheduled teams from power conferences, knowing that when those schedules were made, there was no way of knowing what their RPI would be. West Virginia is a program that went to the Final Four only 3 years before Gonzaga played them. GU had no way of knowing that WVU would have an uncharacteristic down year in 2012-13.

Wichita State is in much the same position that Southern Mississippi was in last year when despite a 31 RPI, they didn't even get an invitation to the dance. WSU won't suffer that fate; they're too good. But they're likely to suffer for a relatively weak SOS.