Jay Bilas Was Wrong About the Committee Going By Who You Lost To, It Was the Bad Teams You Beat That Were the Difference
Jay Bilas said last night that it was “who you lost to” that mattered more to the committee than who you beat. I actually disagree with this. I think the story of the selection committee can be told through the lens of a group that operated within a very tight window in using the RPI, and who actually did make some adjustments based on the best wins for teams. The story of why some teams (among several equals) were selected and some were not is really not related to who they lost to. It’s actually related to who they beat at the bottom of the schedule.
In other words, it’s the story of how the Mountain West successfully bypasses the RPI system, and how the ACC might want to learn a thing or two about things that should be essentially meaningless when it comes to rating teams to play in a tournament, but which matter greatly to the RPI and the committee (even if they don’t know it).
[RELATED: NCAA Tournament 2013 Bracket Breakdown: Midwest]
First, let’s talk about the RPI and seeding. I got 68 of 68 teams right this year. Big whoop. I really went 2 for 2, correctly having La Salle and Middle Tennessee in my field, instead of Tennessee, or Kentucky, or Virginia, or Maryland. As I noted last year, a monkey throwing darts could be trained to get 65 of 68 right, since you are given the answer on 31 of them.
If you just went by the RPI, you would have correctly called 36 of the 37 at-larges, and would have needed to only switch Southern Miss out for California to get the field right. Southern Miss was held out because of who they did not beat, namely no tournament teams, and certainly not because of bad losses.
If you blindly assigned a seed to a team based on the RPI rank relative to the 68 teams in the field (22 as a 6-seed, 31 as an 8-seed, etc), you would have gotten within one seed line of what the committee did on 71% of the teams. Only ten teams were seeded three or more seed lines away from where a blind RPI seeding would have placed them. In each of those cases, it was actually big wins (or lack thereof) that caused the moves.
The biggest improvers in seed, compared to their RPI: Wisconsin, Illinois, Pittsburgh, Villanova.
Two Big Ten and two Big East teams. Wisconsin beat five teams that appear in the top four seeds. Villanova beat four. Illinois knocked off both Indiana and Gonzaga. Pittsburgh beat Syracuse, and Georgetown on the road.
The biggest decliners in seed, compared to their RPI: Belmont, Middle Tennessee, Memphis, North Carolina, St. Mary’s, and Colorado State.
Belmont’s best wins were Middle Tennessee and South Dakota State. Middle Tennessee beat Ole Miss and no other teams in the tourney. Memphis beat Southern Miss three times. North Carolina went winless against Duke and Miami, and had a best win of UNLV. St. Mary’s only beat Creighton. Colorado State is probably the only one with a complaint if we view it from a “RPI, adjusted slightly for who you beat scenario”. They dropped below San Diego State and were seeded four spots lower than UNLV.
[RELATED: NCAA Tournament 2013 Bracket Breakdown: East]
It actually wasn’t bad losses to teams that cost seeding. It was bad wins. The RPI cares about your opponent’s schedule, and the opponent’s opponent’s schedule. A couple of really bad teams can really submarine your RPI.
Mark Turgeon had this to say earlier today: “There was so much talk about the Mountain West all year. A 9-7 team [San Diego State and Boise State] got in from that league. I just think that’s the way it works.”
You can call it sour grapes, but Boise State was in (and bracketologists who look at the RPI had them in), and Maryland was out, because of the funny math at the bottom of the RPI.
If you look at the teams ranked outside the Top 200 in the RPI, the Mountain West appeared to play a much tougher schedule. Their nine members combined to play 37 such teams (4.1 per team). The ACC, meanwhile, played 62 teams outside the RPI top 200 (5.17 games against weak opponents). Appeared, because the RPI doesn’t include games against non-Division I schools. The ACC only played one such excluded game (and that was North Carolina vs. Chaminade in the tournament in Hawaii). The Mountain West played fourteen!
If you add those games in, then the Mountain West teams averaged 5.67 games against teams outside the RPI top 200, and the ACC averaged 5.25.
[RELATED: NCAA Tournament 2013 Bracket Breakdown: South]
If you think that is just funny math and will have no impact, think again. Let’s compare Maryland to Boise State, and also throw in Oregon. There is some thought that Oregon got screwed (yes, they did), but it wasn’t because of an East Coast Bias. It was a RPI bias. Oregon got seeded where the RPI dictated.
If you go by the RPI formula, Boise State played four weak non-conference opponents, and Maryland and Oregon each played six. Neither Maryland or Oregon played any non-Division I opponents. Boise State also played Corban and Walla Walla. I kid you not. They beat them by 56 and 67. Those results did not sink Boise State (nor should they, because that would make no sense).
Maryland playing Maryland Eastern Shore and South Carolina State, though, sunk Maryland. Oregon playing Idaho State and Portland State nearly did them in, and apparently meant they needed to win the Pac-12.
How big of an impact was Walla Walla and Corban wins not counting for Boise, and those bottom feeders counting against Maryland and Oregon?
The first column is the non-conference strength of schedule per the RPI, followed by the rank in SOS. The third column is the non-conference strength of schedule if we just remove the two worst teams (all wins by each). And no, I did not look up how Corban and Walla Walla did in the NAIA or wherever they play. Turns out, if we just lop off the last two games, which the RPI did for Boise but not for Oregon and Maryland, Boise had the easiest non-conference schedule. Maryland was near average, Oregon above average, and Boise slightly below average.
However, the RPI viewed it differently. If you want to know why you are out right now, Maryland fans, well, it’s because you played Maryland Eastern Shore rather than Walla Walla. Now, does that make sense? I suggest Mark Turgeon give Bluefield College a call next year when Maryland needs an extra game to sell popcorn and t-shirts, and tell the MEAC teams to stay at home. It’s not who you lost to, it’s the bottom 10% of who you beat that is unfortunately driving a committee hidebound to follow the RPI.

- Miami Heat Remix of Pitbull’s “Feel This Moment?” Dále!
- Buffalo Bills Fan Has O.J. Simpson Mug Shot Tattoo on His Thigh
- Fox Sports 1 Heavily in Pursuit of Former NFL Player Trevor Pryce and ESPN Chicago’s Sarah Spain
- Premier League: What Each Club Should Prioritize in the Summer
- Footage of Kelly Tripucka Unveiling the Original Teal Charlotte Hornets’ Uniforms in 1988 is Breathtaking [Video]

- somewhereoverthedwaynebowe on Fox Sports 1 Heavily in Pursuit of Former NFL Player Trevor Pryce and ESPN Chicago's Sarah Spain
- ohheelyeah on Buffalo Bills Fan Has O.J. Simpson Mug Shot Tattoo on His Thigh
- arkbadger on Fox Sports 1 Heavily in Pursuit of Former NFL Player Trevor Pryce and ESPN Chicago's Sarah Spain
- KC Resident on Fox Sports 1 Heavily in Pursuit of Former NFL Player Trevor Pryce and ESPN Chicago's Sarah Spain
- Jason McIntyre on Fox Sports 1 Heavily in Pursuit of Former NFL Player Trevor Pryce and ESPN Chicago's Sarah Spain
45 Responses to “Jay Bilas Was Wrong About the Committee Going By Who You Lost To, It Was the Bad Teams You Beat That Were the Difference”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.








March 18th, 2013 at 5:58 PM
Lisk, any comment on the committee director saying MTSU made it because they won on the road? Seemed to me their road wins were in conference in cauldrons like Troy and Directional (insert state here). Would middling (re: UT, UMD, Miss) be better served by playing a couple minnows away (although hurting $$) but artificially inflating the Road W-L record?
March 18th, 2013 at 6:01 PM
Lisk, any comment on the committee director saying MTSU made it because they won on the road? Seemed to me their road wins were in conference in cauldrons like Troy and Directional (insert state here). Would middling (re: UT, UMD, Miss) be better served by playing a couple minnows away (although hurting $$) but artificially inflating the Road W-L record?
Dumb comment. I think it’s just a case of they go by the RPI. I think they should have been in because they had enough wins against the schedule they faced to show they are a quality enough team to get a chance. Plenty of teams like them, such as Davidson, Northern Iowa, Cornell, etc., have shown to be worthy when they won a really high percentage of games against lower tier teams and not enough opportunities (particularly at home) against top teams.
I would have just said “they passed the eye test”
March 18th, 2013 at 6:09 PM
Did the selection committee confirm this last night? I thought Ole Miss was the only one of the bubble teams that were getting an at large regardless of the result in the SEC tourney final. Pretty sad if that’s the case.
March 18th, 2013 at 6:14 PM
I actually disagree with this.
Disagreeing with Jay Bilas should be our new national past time.
March 18th, 2013 at 6:14 PM
If you don’t discuss teams that don’t have a legitimate argument of winning the tournament, pretty much all of this is moot.
March 18th, 2013 at 6:18 PM
This is an example of why scheduling matters so much. Pitt and Jamie Dixon normally do this incredibly well by scheduling the little guys that will still have good records. It’s a gaming of the system that never creates great non-conference games but inflates the RPI.
This year Pitt didn’t get the Big East SEC challenge game they were promised and missed out when Delaware beat UVA. Toss those two games on top of the “little guys” they played this year and they are probably 20 spots higher in RPI and a 5 seed instead of an 8.
March 18th, 2013 at 6:23 PM
Gonzaga has no business being a #1
March 18th, 2013 at 6:23 PM
Gonzaga has no business being a #1
March 18th, 2013 at 6:25 PM
counterpoint: gonzaga’s business is being a #1 and business is good.
March 18th, 2013 at 6:25 PM
double post. It must be re-iterated
March 18th, 2013 at 6:25 PM
Spence that isnt a counter-point
March 18th, 2013 at 6:26 PM
but isnt it though? isn’t it?
March 18th, 2013 at 6:27 PM
Oh and Spence I wish butler still played in the horizon so they could humilate Cleveland State
March 18th, 2013 at 6:28 PM
no pun intended, i have no dog in gonzaga’s fight. fuck em for all i care.
March 18th, 2013 at 6:28 PM
Jay Bilas is an ass clown.
March 18th, 2013 at 6:29 PM
Counterpoint: While Gonzaga has no business being a #1, being a #1 is good business for Gonzaga.
March 18th, 2013 at 6:29 PM
No. A counterpoint would be “Gonzaga won its league and tourney.” As to my counterpoint of being they lost to the only top 50 rpi teams they played
March 18th, 2013 at 6:29 PM
Aren’t you basically saying to upgrade your schedule if you want to get into the tournament?
March 18th, 2013 at 6:30 PM
yea, but i dont care about cleveland state any more since their competency is no longer convenient.
March 18th, 2013 at 6:31 PM
/will never apologize for laughing at ‘butler peen gobblers’
March 18th, 2013 at 6:33 PM
Spence dont get me started!
March 18th, 2013 at 6:33 PM
The problem is that someone always throws out VCU as an example. That they were one of the last in, and rolled to the Final Four. No matter that it was a 1 in a million occurrence, but it COULD happen.
/don’t agree with that argument, just sayin’
March 18th, 2013 at 6:33 PM
The reasoning changes too much year by year to get any good reading on what the committee is thinking. I think they’re looking to get as many mid majors in there as possible to create the Cinderella buzz. Last year, from Friday to Sunday Norfolk State was the story for example, even though they were an automatic bid.
March 18th, 2013 at 6:42 PM
This is a great analysis but it doesnt mean Bilas was wrong. In fact he nailed it. Too many teams got in that beat absolutely no one such as MTSU and Boise. The old saw that going out and challenging yourself OOC wasnt worth a bucket of warm spit for teams like UT and UK.
March 18th, 2013 at 7:00 PM
That is a false statement.
March 18th, 2013 at 7:02 PM
I wouldn’t presume that. They probably needed to get to the PAC-10 final, but I don’t think a loss to UCLA would have dropped them below the 4 opening rd. at-large-teams + the first team out.
March 18th, 2013 at 7:15 PM
This is a good post. Nice work, Lisk.
The one problem I have with “quality wins” is that two wins over Duke should mean a hell of a lot more than beating three or four mediocre top 50 teams. Seems like the committee doesn’t really factor in “degree of difficulty”
March 18th, 2013 at 7:17 PM
Bilas may be right, but he needs to stop pointing to UVA. UVA got the good wins on their resume at home in conference- something LaSalle and MTSU had no shot at. UVA also had multiple, MULTIPLE putrid losses. Maybe next time UVA, don’t lose to 6 sub 140 RPI teams, including a sub 300 team.
March 18th, 2013 at 7:18 PM
Oregon would’ve been in if they’d lost in the final based on their true seed.
March 18th, 2013 at 7:31 PM
I’m literally in the process of putting together an RPI spreadsheet for an organization right now. (Off topic, it’s the biggest pain in the ass ever) I know the NCAA’s formula is a little more complex than win % + opp win % + opp opp win %, but it’s really just how you schedule more than anything. It needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
March 18th, 2013 at 7:31 PM
Jay V who did they beat? Lost to Illinois and Butler. St Caly Pol Tech Jesuit school isnt an OOC victory. I hope they lose and cry like Adam Morrison
March 18th, 2013 at 8:01 PM
UVa’s win @Wiscy is better than any win that any bubble team had. Didn’t matter one bit. The cmte is full of it; they were going to use whatever criteria they needed to get CBS maximum odds at a new Cinderella. Next year, the ACC and SEC teams will fix their schedules and the goalposts will have moved.
BTW, I think your registration system is jacked up…might want to check that.
March 18th, 2013 at 8:40 PM
charlie sheens an idiot: they are 6-2 vs top 50 rpi
March 18th, 2013 at 8:49 PM
Virginia lost to Wake, BC, GaTech, Clemson, George Mason, Florida State, Delaware, and Old Dominion. Pathetic. Stop losing to shitty teams
March 18th, 2013 at 9:03 PM
Jay V who did they beat? Lost to Illinois and Butler. St Caly Pol Tech Jesuit school isnt an OOC victory. I hope they lose and cry like Adam MorrisonQuit being lazy. They spanked Kansas State and Oklahoma, beat St. Mary’s three times and beat Oklahoma State.
March 18th, 2013 at 9:12 PM
Who did Middle Tennessee State beat who are better than those teams?
March 18th, 2013 at 9:31 PM
Ole Miss, Tennesse.
March 18th, 2013 at 9:41 PM
Pardon, they didnt play UT.
You cant lose to 4 of the bottom 6 in the ACC in a down year. you cant finish mid conference, lose to a 5 win Old Dominion, only beat/play 1 good nonconference opponent (Wisconsin), and complain about not getting in. MTSU played Ole Miss, Florida, Akron, and Belmont (travelling to 3 of 4). Despite losing 3 of them, they scheduled better nonconference than virginia. Thats the reasoning the committee used so thats why i was pointing out why virginia shouldnt complain, based on how committee rated teams
March 18th, 2013 at 10:06 PM
that goes along with what Bilas said. It isn’t who you beat, but it’s who you lost to. As down as the ACC was this year, it was still superior to the SEC. The difference in comparison between Virginia’s and MTSU’s non con schedule pales in comparison to the difference between Virgina’s and MTSU’s conference schedules. That seems to not have been given enough consideration. Then you consider that two of the ACC teams that UVA lost two that is supposed to be a detriment to them also beat Miami. And Miami is better than anyone MTSU or Ole Miss played.
March 18th, 2013 at 10:09 PM
Hey, i never said i agreed with it or thatbit made sense. Just going by what i heard the committee chair say last night
March 18th, 2013 at 11:54 PM
MTSU’s road wins may seem insignificant, but how did Virginia/Maryland do on the road against such teams? Virginia lost to George Mason, Old Dominion, Ga. Tech, Wake, Clemson…Maryland lost to Ga. Tech & Boston College (both sub-100 teams). Iowa lost to Nebraska & Va. Tech. Not nearly as easy to dominate that competition on a consistent basis like MTSU did as people want to think.
Also, as far as non-D-I games not counting on RPI…teams know the rules going in. RPI doesn’t measure those games, nor should it (in part because some D-II or NAIA teams are better than the bottom of D-I). The committee can and does dock teams for playing non-D-I teams (thus Boise State maybe being a 13 seed instead of an 11), but if Maryland doesn’t like the current rules…then, yeah, they should play Walla Walla instead of Maryland-Eastern Shore. They knew the rules going in. The RPI is just fine, it’s a far more unbiased formula than any other out there, but people always need something to complain about. The committee did a fantastic job this year, not perfect, but pretty darn good. They realized it’s impossible to accurately judge teams like MTSU or St. Mary’s solely on their conference, just like it’s impossible to accurately judge teams solely on the quality wins they get, often at home, because of birthright of their conference. They took everything into account and made the right decisions.
March 19th, 2013 at 12:38 AM
what road wins?
March 19th, 2013 at 1:11 AM
MTSU has 4 wins against Savannah State, Alabama State, Tennessee State and Texas Southern. I didn’t know if I was reading a basketball schedule or an itinerary to tour HBCU’s throughout the south. Those 4 tough wins plus their 3 road losses is a big part of the outer conference schedule props they’re receiving that got them into the tournament. Georgia Tech not only beat Virginia, they also beat St. Mary’s in California.
March 19th, 2013 at 8:24 AM
SVP giving TBL and Jason some dap this morning on M&M. I think he just wanted to talk about Maryland.
March 19th, 2013 at 10:58 AM
Aren’t you basically saying to upgrade your schedule if you want to get into the tournament?
Exactly. Mizzou finished behind Alabama, Tennessee, Ole Miss and Kentucky this year in the SEC and went 2-4 against those teams.
Then why was Mizzou a lock before the SEC tourney, and the others all had to win it to attain an NCAA berth? Easy. Non conference schedule.
Mizzou played Louisville, VCU, Illinois, UCLA and Bucknell in the non conference.