Well

[BigZiti09]

Why would "prestige, nba players, name recognition", etc cause a committee member to choose uk over another team?

What is your best guess as to how kentucky might impact attendance at an ncaa 1st round event? How many more tickets might they sell and why would the avg committee member give a crap? What's it matter to them?

To your first part - why wouldn't it? If its Akron and Kentucky and their resumes are even, Kentucky is going in. Just my opinion.

To the second part- I'm going to try this again. I DON'T THINK ATTENDANCE WOULD IMPACT THE COMMITTEE'S DECISION. But how would Kentucky impact attendance? They would buy thousands and thousands of tickets. Occupy hotels, spend money. Again, I DO NOT BELIEVE IT IMPACTS THE COMMITTEE THOUGH.

 

[PowerSweep]

Resumes are never even or exactly the same...you have made a statement that all of those things- prestige, nba players, etc, would matter to a committee member...I ask why and your answer is "why not?"

Really? This passes for intelligent thought in your world?

To your first part - why wouldn't it? If its Akron and Kentucky and their resumes are even, Kentucky is going in. Just my opinion.

To the second part- I'm going to try this again. I DON'T THINK ATTENDANCE WOULD IMPACT THE COMMITTEE'S DECISION. But how would Kentucky impact attendance? They would buy thousands and thousands of tickets. Occupy hotels, spend money. Again, I DO NOT BELIEVE IT IMPACTS THE COMMITTEE THOUGH.

 

[volbeast33]

Resumes are never even or exactly the same...you have made a statement that all of those things- prestige, nba players, etc, would matter to a committee member...I ask why and your answer is "why not?"

Really? This passes for intelligent thought in your world?

There are very close resumes between the bubble teams. It's why they are bubble teams......even though it shouldn't, I'm sure kentuckys prestige comes into play.....how much....depends on the individual committee member.

 

[BigZiti09]

Resumes are never even or exactly the same...you have made a statement that all of those things- prestige, nba players, etc, would matter to a committee member...I ask why and your answer is "why not?"

Really? This passes for intelligent thought in your world?

I gave you reasons. I gave an example. You asked the same question again. I think you can figure out why those things matter. But I'll simplify it. Kentucky brings all of those things to the table and adds them to the NCAA basketball tournament. So yes, where I am from when someone asks why I have an opinion and I answer it by giving them reasons and an example of a possible scenario, that passes as an intelligent response.

And yes I know resumes are not exactly the same. However, when you are trying to decide the 64th best team in the country is, it's going to be subjective. In fact, I would guess that you could make a legitimate case for about 5 teams ever year who were more deserving to get a bid. This is the situation where I think Kentucky goes in over another team with a resume that is similar.

 

[BigZiti09]

I asked a simple question.."how would that work?" Tell me how UK might impact attendance at a venue since you think it is a large factor and secondly, why would a committee member put in uk over a more deserving team? Simple questions.

Also, I've never said UK would go in over an undeserving team. I said all things being equal, they get the nod IMO.

 

[PowerSweep]

You said, "prestige, nba players, etc", but have yet to once mention WHY any of that would matter to an ncaa committee member...not once have you done that. If you have then quote your exact words where you did.

I gave you reasons. I gave an example. You asked the same question again. I think you can figure out why those things matter. But I'll simplify it. Kentucky brings all of those things to the table and adds them to the NCAA basketball tournament. So yes, where I am from when someone asks why I have an opinion and I answer it by giving them reasons and an example of a possible scenario, that passes as an intelligent response.

And yes I know resumes are not exactly the same. However, when you are trying to decide the 64th best team in the country is, it's going to be subjective. In fact, I would guess that you could make a legitimate case for about 5 teams ever year who were more deserving to get a bid. This is the situation where I think Kentucky goes in over another team with a resume that is similar.

 

[BigZiti09]

You said, "prestige, nba players, etc", but have yet to once mention WHY any of that would matter to an ncaa committee member...not once have you done that. If you have then quote your exact words where you did.

I thought that was self explanatory. Here's the quote...

"I think you can figure out why those things matter. But I'll simplify it. Kentucky brings all of those things to the table and adds them to the NCAA basketball tournament."

To expand on that.... Having Kentucky in the field raises the bar for the tournament. Maybe not in reality but in perception. It's the same reason that bowl games want big time schools in their bowl. The same reason the bcs bowls don't like getting stuck with two teams that aren't good draws for tickets, TV ratings, and most importantly... $$$.

If you're putting together a field for a preseason tournament any where in the world and you have the choice to add Kentucky or Akron, who are you adding to the field? Now the NCAA tournament field is supposed to be earned. My argument isn't that Kentucky would go in over a more deserving team. My argument is that if it comes down to a coin flip, they aren't going that route. They would put Kentucky in.

 

[PowerSweep]

Once again you fail to mention how selecting kentucky would matter TO A COMMITTEE MEMBER...you know, the people who actually select the field? You have yet to once say what positive benefit accrues to them.

 

[BigZiti09]

I guess that is where you and I differ then. You must be assuming they are completely fair and unbiased arbitrators who are above being influenced by the things I mentioned.

 

[PowerSweep]

You think the athletics director at Utah St is biased more in favor of a power school in a power conference or a team like Akron? I mean...come on.

 

[whocaresgobobcats]

I asked a simple question.."how would that work?" Tell me how UK might impact attendance at a venue since you think it is a large factor and secondly, why would a committee member put in uk over a more deserving team? Simple questions.

Are you serious? Kentucky fans travel better than any fan base in the country. They also probably bring in better TV ratings than any team.

I'm not saying this happens, but if you don't think someone in the NCAA considers this, you are very very naive.

 

[BigZiti09]

And for the record, your view may be accurate. I heard Jerry Palm on the radio this past week saying that the things I mentioned have zero influence on the committee. I just disagree. Maybe I'm jaded. I just don't believe that Kentucky wouldn't get the "benefit of the doubt" so to speak. Again, I'm saying that all things being equal. Not saying Kentucky would go in over a more deserving team. I'm saying they get the bid if it comes down to a handful of teams that are equally deserving.

 

[whocaresgobobcats]

no one is saying this for sure happens. but you can't rule it out as it is humans making these decisions and bias is always present. they see the UK logo on the screen and they immediately think of the best college basketball program of all time and there is that bias.

 

[BigZiti09]

You think the athletics director at Utah St is biased more in favor of a power school in a power conference or a team like Akron? I mean...come on.

I'm saying that they could be influenced from outside the "locked doors of the war room."

 

[whocaresgobobcats]

here you go. The NCAA had the VP of championships and alliances in the selection committee meetings. the guy that is responsible for making the tournament run and profitable. i'm sure he'd like to have UK over some other school.

Y! SPORTS

And according to this article, the NCAA wants to go more corporate with the tourney, so they would want bigger name teams.

speculation yes. but like i've said, i wouldn't put this past the ncaa.

 

[PowerSweep]

You simpleton..."someone at the ncaa" doesnt pick the teams...10 actual persons that represent diverse interests across the spectrum from big schools to small schools make the decision on who gets in. Unless you can answer why a committee member would care whether 2,000 extra fans attend a pittsburgh regional the argument is a silly one.

Are you serious? Kentucky fans travel better than any fan base in the country. They also probably bring in better TV ratings than any team.

I'm not saying this happens, but if you don't think someone in the NCAA considers this, you are very very naive.

 

[whocaresgobobcats]

You simpleton..."someone at the ncaa" doesnt pick the teams...10 actual persons that represent diverse interests across the spectrum from big schools to small schools make the decision on who gets in. Unless you can answer why a committee member would care whether 2,000 extra fans attend a pittsburgh regional the argument is a silly one.

i just did, you simpleton. do some research on whose all involved with the process before you go around insulting people.

 

[PowerSweep]

How so?

I'm saying that they could be influenced from outside the "locked doors of the war room."

 

[PowerSweep]

At best you have said why the director of the ncaa might care...you have not offered why the committee members-and I gave an example the Utah St AD- would care. I'll be waiting. And since you are so knowledgable, who IS involved in the process?

i just did, you simpleton. do some research on whose all involved with the process before you go around insulting people.

 

[whocaresgobobcats]

At best you have said why the director of the ncaa might care...you have not offered why the committee members-and I gave an example the Utah St AD- would care. I'll be waiting

Yeah, I never said anything about some guy from Utah State. I said people at the NCAA who are involved in the selection process would care if UK got in over a mid major, which I proved.

I also said the human element of bias might creep in to the thoughts of the committee, but, as I've said, that is just speculation.

Learn to read. I'll wait.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

I'm gonna I'll advised intervene and try to clear things up hopefully lol....I believe what ziti and who are basically saying is that with a NCAA tourney guy being in the room he may influence the "Utah ad" to pick UK over say Akron....is that right?

 

[PowerSweep]

The utah st ad is an actual committee member

What evidence did you give that would indicate that someone involved in the selection process would care? Who in that article is involved in selecting teams?

Yeah, I never said anything about some guy from Utah State. I said people at the NCAA who are involved in the selection process would care if UK got in over a mid major, which I proved.

I also said the human element of bias might creep in to the thoughts of the committee, but, as I've said, that is just speculation.

Learn to read. I'll wait.

 

[BigZiti09]

I'm gonna I'll advised intervene and try to clear things up hopefully lol....I believe what ziti and who are basically saying is that with a NCAA tourney guy being in the room he may influence the "Utah ad" to pick UK over say Akron....is that right?

Yeah. I'm saying influence from outside the committee. Whoever that may be. I'll loosely define it as "one with power and influence great enough who would benefit from UK or another prestigious program being selected to the tourney."

 

[PowerSweep]

They can confirm but basically there 2 points...the absurd one where some unnamed ncaa people come into the committee and strong arm a selecrion through a threat or bribe, and the more reasonable but still wrong notion that members(there are 10), all things equal, will be biased towards the power conf school w a glamour name...if you actually look at where the members come feom it becomes a silly argument to make but these people have no idea who they are...no 2nd level critical thinking

I'm gonna I'll advised intervene and try to clear things up hopefully lol....I believe what ziti and who are basically saying is that with a NCAA tourney guy being in the room he may influence the "Utah ad" to pick UK over say Akron....is that right?

 

[BigZiti09]

They can confirm but basically there 2 points...the absurd one where some unnamed ncaa people come into the committee and strong arm a selecrion through a threat or bribe, and the more reasonable but still wrong notion that members(there are 10), all things equal, will be biased towards the power conf school w a glamour name...if you actually look at where the members come feom it becomes a silly argument to make but these people have no idea who they are...no 2nd level critical thinking

I think it's just as absurd to believe that our notion is absurd. Every aspect of our lives is influenced by money.

As small and insignificant as it may seem to stick UK in there as an at large bid as a 12 seed, it really would be a big deal to several heavy hitters. I know if I bid on hosting an opening round of the NCAA, I want Kentucky in my city. They travel better than any fan base in America. I know if I'm an advertiser buying commercials for the first round, I would want my ads shown in the ky game over Boise state. So if I'm selling the rights to be a host city or selling the advertising for the NCAA tourney, I want Kentucky in the field because it means $.

To your point, the AD of Utah state may not care about such things but those who put him in that position most likely do.