Conspiracy theory #2

[PhillyBuff]

I honestly believe that UNC being in hurt us. I don't think they wanted two teams from Colorado in the tournament.

you might be on to something here.... because when they listed UNC... they listed them as NO Colorado... I think the committee saw it as a sign......

 

[JRK1212]

you might be on to something here.... because when they listed UNC... they listed them as NO Colorado... I think the committee saw it as a sign......

Unlike your thread about CU playing Temple, there is some well exicuted sarcasm here.

 

[Buffnik]

He is not suppose to be selling the big 12, thats why he is not allowed in the room when a big 12 team is being discused. Its not like all of the conferences have their commisioners on the committee to lobby for them or even represenation from an AD for that matter. The pac 10, sec, and big east have no representation on the committee at all. Committee members are meant to be objective participants in the selection proccess.

You really believe this? No agendas in that room, huh? Do you also believe what politicians tell you?

 

[CarolinaBuff]

For whatever reason, the committee drastically under-rated the Big 12. Texas, ranked in the top 10 almost the entire season and coming off a trip to the conference finals... got a 4 seed. Texas A&M, ranked in the top 25 and clearly the #3 team in the Big 12... got a 7 seed. Missouri, a team that went 23-10 is an 11 seed (crazy when you look at some of the teams seeded in front of them). Kansas State, strangely, was over-seeded by getting a 5. There is no way to make sense of them being seeded 2 lines higher than Texas A&M. That one is a really weird outlier that makes no sense given the rest.

Anyway, the lack of love for the Big 12 really hurt CU. If you don't value the conference appropriately, you don't value CU going 10-9 highly enough for it to overcome a weak non-conference schedule that was devoid of marquee wins or even very many matchups with decent teams.

I think that Beebe showed himself once again to be an awful conference commissioner. He did not sell the Big 12. I can guarantee that the folks in Texas, Texas A&M and Missouri are not happy with him today. Considering that those represent the programs in the only significant Big 12 (10) media markets going forward, this is not a good day for Mr. Beebe.

This whole idea is self-contradictory because Beebe cannot be in the room when any of the Big 12 teams are discussed. So how can he sell the Big 12 when he can't be in there to sell the Big 12? In fact, since Beebe couldn't be in the room when the Big 12 was being discussed is a perfect explanation as to why the Big 12 got so little respect, K-State withstanding.

 

[Buffnik]

This whole idea is self-contradictory because Beebe cannot be in the room when any of the Big 12 teams are discussed. So how can he sell the Big 12 when he can't be in there to sell the Big 12? In fact, since Beebe couldn't be in the room when the Big 12 was being discussed is a perfect explanation as to why the Big 12 got so little respect, K-State withstanding.

No way in hell.

Let's say this is your business. Let's say that you're part of a committee. Let's say that the rules are that you have to leave the room when your interests are discussed and decided. But as part of that, the other committee members have to leave the room when their interests are discussed and decided. I've got news for you. If you get totally screwed on your interests when you are out of the room, it's because the other committee members don't respect you and don't believe you have enough juice to screw them over in turn.

It's naive to believe that being on the committee would not serve your interests... assuming you are competent.

 

[CarolinaBuff]

So not only do you think Beebe is not respected, you think they would actually take that lack of respect out on him by dissing his conference? And the committee members are all there to screw each other over? OK, got it.

Have you actually thought that maybe this isn't the best way to make up a selection committee for the division I men's basketball tournament? And that the real problem is simply ignorance on their part when it comes to doing the best job of selecting and seeding teams?

 

[MtnBuff]

I have no doubt that when the "official" discussions were occurring about CU and other teams that may be considered a conflict Beebe and the others left the room. At the same time these guys all know each other and spend a lot of time together during this process. Try to tell me that they did't discuss personal agenda items (i.e. who they would like in and out) over a drink in the hotel bar at the end of the day, over breakfast in the morning. We all know that there are ways to get the message across loud and clear without violating the official rules.

I also find it interesting that the Big X got in two teams that won less than 20 games and have less impressive resumes than CU. Beebe and Smith are old time buddies so along with the Wake Forest bias against CU I wonder if 25 wins would have gotten us in.

 

[NWD Buff]

Plus, we take it on faith that there is some Chinese wall when it comes to conference reps discussing their teams. Really? Am I really to believe that someone doesn't occasionally drop a "Hey, did you see what Colorado did to K-State last night?" while the committee is dining on bad catered food in their meeting room?

Until there is transparency in the selection process, any criticism along these lines is valid.

EDIT: Better said by Mtn while I was writing this post.

 

[Buffnik]

So not only do you think Beebe is not respected, you think they would actually take that lack of respect out on him by dissing his conference? And the committee members are all there to screw each other over? OK, got it.

Have you actually thought that maybe this isn't the best way to make up a selection committee for the division I men's basketball tournament? And that the real problem is simply ignorance on their part when it comes to doing the best job of selecting and seeding teams?

I know how negotiations work. People in the room have interests beyond getting the most deserving teams and seeding them in a fair way. Part of it is lining up compelling story lines for television with the matchups. Part of it is loyalty (or dislike) for certain people, colleges or conferences. Let's not pretend that this this thing is pure and that there's no politicking going on. And let's certainly not pretend that it's no help and maybe a detriment to your interests if you have a seat at the table.

I completely agree that this isn't the best method to select teams. A closed room with no accountability as decisions are made by non-basketball people? Really? This is the best we can do? I'd be much happier if they went with a BCS type system so that the teams selected and how they were seeded is based on transparent and objective criteria everyone knows about going into things.

 

[MtnBuff]

So not only do you think Beebe is not respected, you think they would actually take that lack of respect out on him by dissing his conference? And the committee members are all there to screw each other over? OK, got it.

Have you actually thought that maybe this isn't the best way to make up a selection committee for the division I men's basketball tournament? And that the real problem is simply ignorance on their part when it comes to doing the best job of selecting and seeding teams?

They are politicians, not basketball people so in many ways you are right. In the first place they are people who's job is to advance specific agendas and history tells us that the NCAA is very good at that. Look at the inequity of decisions regarding violations from school to school, eligibility issues, etc..
Add to that people who even without personal agendas are probably not the right people to be making these choices. If it were not so consistent and blatant over the years in favor of the power brokers I would agree with your ignorance idea which still may be a part of it. On the other hand from prior history I find it hard to believe that at least some of these people are capable of acting in an unbiased manner. They push their desired outcomes and in this case they got it.

 

[Buffnik]

Also, does anyone think this conversation is outside the plausible:

"Dan, you gonna have my back in there?"

"Sure, Gene. What's your number?"

"7. What's yours?"

"5."

"What about Colorado?"

"**** Colorado."

 

[JRK1212]

You really believe this? No agendas in that room, huh? Do you also believe what politicians tell you?

I never said there were no agendas, just that agendas are not meant to influence the process. How can you critisize the guy for the not selling the big 12 when he is not allowed to? Doing so would violate the trust that the NCAA and fans of other schools have to put in committe members. Id like to think that all of the participants have some integrity and try to go about things as objectivley as possible. Its too bad that you dont feel this way. You say that Beebe not mongering the big 12 makes him awful, but how would you feel if the big 12 didint have representation at all while some other conference commisioner went and pushed all of his own teams? Way to fault a guy for doing his job.

 

[pwbuffan]

I keep reading these theories and yet no one has explained exactly how he screwed us. Do you think he stuffed the ballot box? Or perhaps he brainwashed the other committee members? We clearly got screwed, but there is no conspiracy. Just bad luck. Beebe was not even allowed in the room when big 12 teams were being discussed. I guess its easier for people to cope if they have someone to blame.

Dan Beebe was the advocate for the Big 12 in the selection committee, do you need any more info?

 

[Buffnik]

I never said there were no agendas, just that agendas are not meant to influence the process. How can you critisize the guy for the not selling the big 12 when he is not allowed to? Doing so would violate the trust that the NCAA and fans of other schools have to put in committe members. Id like to think that all of the participants have some integrity and try to go about things as objectivley as possible. Its too bad that you dont feel this way. You say that Beebe not mongering the big 12 makes him awful, but how would you feel if the big 12 didint have representation at all while some other conference commisioner went and pushed all of his own teams? Way to fault a guy for doing his job.

You are assuming that the only conversations that committee members have occur while they are in session. That's a big assumption.

Beebe's job is to advocate for the Big 12. That's why he gets paid a lot of money. That's his job description. The Big 12 did not get any advantage. Hell, the conference got less than it deserved. He failed.

Edit: Think of it this way. Let's say your organization hired a lobbyist to represent your interests in Washington. An important bill came up for your industry. The lobbyist used her connections to get on the committee that was writing the language of the bill. The bill then comes out and it turns out that it screws your industry over. Would you say that your lobbyist did a good job?

 

[pwbuffan]

He is not suppose to be selling the big 12, thats why he is not allowed in the room when a big 12 team is being discused. Its not like all of the conferences have their commisioners on the committee to lobby for them or even represenation from an AD for that matter. The pac 10, sec, and big east have no representation on the committee at all. Committee members are meant to be objective participants in the selection proccess.

Then why did the Big 10 do so well if the commish isn't allowed to lobby? Head of the selection committee and every bubble team gets in, hmmmmm.

 

[tante]

You are assuming that the only conversations that committee members have occur while they are in session. That's a big assumption.

Beebe's job is to advocate for the Big 12. That's why he gets paid a lot of money. That's his job description. The Big 12 did not get any advantage. Hell, the conference got less than it deserved. He failed.

Edit: Think of it this way. Let's say your organization hired a lobbyist to represent your interests in Washington. An important bill came up for your industry. The lobbyist used her connections to get on the committee that was writing the language of the bill. The bill then comes out and it turns out that it screws your industry over. Would you say that your lobbyist did a good job?

you are looking at the short term. Did they really fail? The big 12 got the 5 teams they wanted in and NEXT year when they only have 5 members they may get some extra help.

 

[BuffNut99]

Dan Beebe was the advocate for the Big 12 in the selection committee, do you need any more info?

Anyone think this conversation is plausible?

Comm: "Dan, why don't you tell us about Colorado?"

Dan: "Well, they had some really bad losses in the course of a really weak schedule. I mean, Cal State Bakersfield? Western New Mexico? I don't even know where that is... Hmm, what else... Up and down season, questionable style of play, pretty mediocre RPI. Not too much else to discuss here."

 

[GregInArlington]

Dan Bebee failed for all Big 12 teams. ESPN talked about them being the second best conference in basketball all year long, then they get hosed by the selection committee with the conference commissoner on the committee!! (Except for KSU, which no-one knows what happened there).

 

[Buffnik]

you are looking at the short term. Did they really fail? The big 12 got the 5 teams they wanted in and NEXT year when they only have 5 members they may get some extra help.

I'm trying to be nice. It's either incompetence or a willful violation of his duties (we are still a member). I don't think he was out to screw Colorado. I just don't think he cared to do the Buffs any favors.

 

[NWD Buff]

Dan Bebee failed for all Big 12 teams. ESPN talked about them being the second best conference in basketball all year long, then they get hosed by the selection committee with the conference commissoner on the committee!! (Except for KSU, which no-one knows what happened there).

What happened there was that KSU was a preseason Top 10 team, and the committee seemed to reward a lot of teams that were hyped coming in to the year. Look at the #9 seed for 19-win Illinois. Just one example.

 

[Junction]

What happened there was that KSU was a preseason Top 10 team, and the committee seemed to reward a lot of teams that were hyped coming in to the year. Look at the #9 seed for 19-win Illinois. Just one example.

Makes you wonder if the committee just went in there with a copy of Athlon's preseason basketball preview....

 

[JRK1212]

Beebe's job is to advocate for the Big 12.

Im not sure what you are finding so complicated about this. Beebe's job as a member of the selection committee is to be an objective participant, not a Big 12 lobbyist. Period. If Beebe or anyone else want to promote their leauge thats fine, but then they cant be on the committee.

And your example is not aplicable beacuse unlike the lobbyist, the goal of the committe members is not to further the agenda of the institution they represent.

 

[cnbuff410]

Im not sure what you are finding so complicated about this. Beebe's job as a member of the selection committee is to be an objective participant, not a Big 12 lobbyist. Period. If Beebe or anyone else want to promote their leauge thats fine, but then they cant be on the committee.

And your example is not aplicable beacuse unlike the lobbyist, the goal of the committe members is not to further the agenda of the institution they represent.

Now I firmly believe that you are living in a ideal world. Do you know anything about politics?

"Beebe's job as a member of the selection committee is to be an objective participant". You must be freaking kidding me.

 

[Buffnik]

Makes you wonder if the committee just went in there with a copy of Athlon's preseason basketball preview....

Villanova got a 9 seed. They lost 10 of their last 15 games, including their last 5.

The "Athlon Theory" may have some merit.

 

[CUFan]

Im not sure what you are finding so complicated about this. Beebe's job as a member of the selection committee is to be an objective participant, not a Big 12 lobbyist. Period. If Beebe or anyone else want to promote their leauge thats fine, but then they cant be on the committee.

And your example is not aplicable beacuse unlike the lobbyist, the goal of the committe members is not to further the agenda of the institution they represent.

This is the most naive post I have ever read. You don't see a conflict of interest here? If I'm Deloss Dodds, you can be damn sure Dan Beebe better be advocating for UT or his ass is fired.

 

[JRK1212]

Dont shoot the messanger. Im not saying its a good system, just explaining how its suppose to work.

 

[Buffnik]

Im not sure what you are finding so complicated about this. Beebe's job as a member of the selection committee is to be an objective participant, not a Big 12 lobbyist. Period. If Beebe or anyone else want to promote their leauge thats fine, but then they cant be on the committee.

And your example is not aplicable beacuse unlike the lobbyist, the goal of the committe members is not to further the agenda of the institution they represent.

And my congressman's job is to defend the constitution above all other concerns and, secondly, represent the interests of the people in his district. He's not supposed to worry about trading favors, supporting the interests of big campaign donors or cronies, towing the political party line, or gearing up for a re-election campaign. Since he's not supposed to do those things, I guess he doesn't.

When the manager for the MLB All-Star game is selecting pitchers, lineups, and rotations his job is to win the game while playing as many guys as possible and delivering a good show for tv and fans. He is not supposed to concern himself with the politics of who starts, which pitchers get selected, or the competitive advantages of using/not using certain pitchers. Since he's not supposed to do those things, I guess he doesn't.

I don't think you even believe what you're typing, JRK. You can't be that naive.

 

[Buffnik]

Dont shoot the messanger. Im not saying its a good system, just explaining how its suppose to work.

I think we all know how it's supposed to work. You're coming strong as if you believe that it does work that way.

 

[NWD Buff]

Makes you wonder if the committee just went in there with a copy of Athlon's preseason basketball preview....

Now this has me interested. Here is the list of teams on the ESPN/USA Today Preseason Top 25:

1 Duke (29) 0-0 772
2 Michigan State (2) 0-0 737
3 Kansas State 0-0 656
4 Pittsburgh 0-0 621
5 Ohio State 0-0 615
6 Villanova 0-0 552
7 Kansas 0-0 538
8 Purdue 0-0 521
9 North Carolina 0-0 467
10 Kentucky 0-0 449
11 Florida 0-0 424
12 Gonzaga 0-0 423
13 Syracuse 0-0 422
14 Baylor 0-0 362
15 Missouri 0-0 354
16 Illinois 0-0 329
17 Washington 0-0 307
18 Butler 0-0 245
19 Memphis 0-0 212
20 Tennessee 0-0 158
21 Georgetown 0-0 129
22 Temple 0-0 120
23 Virginia Tech 0-0 97
24 Wisconsin 0-0 91
25 Texas 0-0 89

With just a cursory glance, it is clear that the majority of the teams on this list were seeded favorably, given their actual performance. You can make the argument that a startling number of teams on this list received favorable seeds. Duke, Michigan State, Illinois, etc. Texas is the only team on here that I think got a lower seed than they should have, and I think that was the result of the committee's desire to put them in Tulsa.

EDIT: Clearly, Virginia Tech did not benefit from their lofty preseason ranking.

 

[PhillyBuff]

Dont shoot the messanger. Im not saying its a good system, just explaining how its suppose to work.

well.... you are supposed to be born with your head on top and your *** free and clear..... didn't happen in your case....