mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-29-18 08:35 PM - Post#267583
In response to palestra38
While I don’t disagree with the sentiment around at-large bids for this season, it’s important to separate what the committee will do from objective measures of resume strength. By those objective measures, Harvard’s 10-11 squad should have been the first Ivy ar-large team, finishing with a positive Wins Above Bubble rating.
At present, if Harvard had gone 2-1 in its close games (UMass, URI and USF) instead of 1-2, it would have a positive WAB again.
This is obviously wholly different than what the committee decides to do, which tends to be to find every excuse to let a major conf team in (eg counting Tier I wins instead of considering record in Tier I games) and keep a mid-major out (eg citing too few Tier I wins even if the Tier I record is strong in a small sample). I can’t imagine this behavior will change any time soon. That being said, if you don’t have teams that objectively deserve to be in, then it doesn’t matter if the behavior changes.
My point on this subject always tends to be that we actually have had a situation where a team objectively deserved to be in based on resume and will likely have more in the future. But I don’t believe the committee will ever be savvy enough to understand and accept these facts. Thus I would agree that a second bid is a bit of a pipe dream for now.
|
