|ESPN.com: College Basketball Nation||[Print without images]|
[...] I’m not comfortable with the committee monitoring the kinds of offenses teams run. It’s great in terms of having an intelligent discussion about basketball, but whether a team runs the DDM or the flex shouldn’t have any bearing on the selection process, and it adds clutter to an already difficult task. [...] In the end, it probably doesn’t matter either way. From all accounts, the selection process is chaotic, and RPI data is burned into the computer screens of committee members. I’m sure there’s some time for qualitative discussion, but I hope it doesn’t revolve around a committee member saying “When I saw Team X play, they had really good post-play, and I think that’s important to win basketball games. Therefore, Team X should get extra consideration.”
The committee’s charge is to select the 37 best at-large teams. It should be based on the play on the court, not on things like how much depth a team has or whether they have an effective press. At selection time, we’ll again hear about how the committee is seeing more games. However, I won’t get a warm and fuzzy feeling because I’m not sure it makes a difference in terms of the quality of the bracket that’s produced.
Ken Pomeroy may find his formula to be the best way to answer these dilemmas, but I think he would agree this is not a one-dimensional question. People can differ in the weights they put on different factors. Ken’s rightful crusade is to try to remove the RPI from team data sheets, because the RPI is very weakly correlated with anything meaningful. And his crusade to eliminate non-essential variables like “style-of-offense” from the discussion is important. But I would never discourage the committee from following college basketball and collecting more information, even if watching games induces the possibility of “subset bias”.