Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: Washpost68 and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  Sports e-mail alerts  |  RSS
Posted at 9:15 AM ET, 01/31/2011

NCAA tournament 2011: How watered down is the 68-team field?

By Eric Prisbell

Most of the teams on the so-called NCAA tournament bubble are dangerous and are capable of blah, blah, blah. Yeah, okay. That's true. The truth also is that most of these teams are mediocre and that it is painful splitting hairs and choosing the final seven at-large teams to make the field at this point. There is a dearth of quality victories, and it is hard to feel strongly about a lot of these teams. You can be the judge.

If the season ended today, eight of these 15 teams likely would make the 68-team field as at-large teams. The records in parenthesis reflect games against top 50 RPI teams as of Sunday night. Combined, the 15 teams are 15-48 against top 50 teams. Again, it's difficult to make a compelling case for several of these teams. For example, Wichita State has not beaten a top 100 team - yes, top 100 team -- all season. And yet eight of these teams would round out the field if the season ended today. Fortunately, it does not end today.

Virginia Tech (1-4)
Clemson (0-2)
Maryland (1-6)
Richmond (1-2)
Oklahoma State (2-2)
Kansas State (0-6)
Penn State (3-3)
George Mason (1-1)
Alabama-Birmingham (0-3)
Valparaiso (2-3)
Butler (1-3)
Wichita State (0-3)
Colorado State (1-2)
UCLA (1-4)
Washington State (1-4)

If you were on the selection committee, which of these teams should make the cut?

By Eric Prisbell  | January 31, 2011; 9:15 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: NCAA tournament 2011: Maryland, Georgetown, Virginia Tech, George Mason
Next: NCAA tournament 2011: Does Duke deserve a No. 1 seed?

Comments

Prisbell, why are you so focused on record vs the top 50 in the rpi? I realize it is one factor the committee looks at, but who ever said that was the most important criteria? Traditionally, the committee looks at how you do on the road/neutral sites, strength of schedule, and how you did in your final 10 games every bit as much as they look at record vs the top 50.

Another factor is the "eye test." I haven't watched all these teams closely, but I do know that as of right now... Vtech and MD both pass the eye test.

Posted by: Barno1 | January 31, 2011 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company