re: LSU is a projected six seed slated to face Michigan in San Diego in ESPN's latest bracket

We wont face Michigan in the first round since we just played them in the 2nd round last year

I bet tPear is hongry to beat Arkansas

quote:

---

was that a nationwide trend? And SEC trend? or just an LSU thing.

Because I am absolutely NOT a conspiracy theorist but I definitely believe LSU's screwing was affected by bias and perception Re: Will Wade and the national media vendetta. Lot's of hypocritical AD's and administrators in that room falling in line with that.

---

Hard to say with 100% accuracy. You had a team like UCLA who was struggling down the stretch of the season last year, only to lose their opening round of the Pac 12 Tournament. You had a team like Ole Miss who was really hot to end the season and won their opener in the SECT before losing a tight game to LSU. They were left out. Virginia Tech on the otherhand had weaker metrics than Ole Miss and lost their opening game of the ACC tournament. They got in. Entering the AAC tournament Memphis had won 8 of 10 with their only losses being @ SMU (by 2) and at Houston (by 3). They reached the AAC semis where they lost to Houston again by 2. They were left out of the NCAAT.

Florida entered the SECT with a worse record and NET than LSU. They lost to Tennessee after beating a weak Vandy team. They were given a 7 seed. LSU, on the other hand, had better or at least as good metrics as Florida. LSU ran through a solid (and hot) Ole Miss team and a good Arkansas team. They were seeded behind Florida for that effort.

A potentially great case study for subjective bias this season could be LSU and Texas. Two or three weeks ago Texas and LSU had essentially the same overall record. Each had the same number of Q1 wins. Neither had a good road record. Texas's non-conf. SOS was better than LSU's, but not remarkably. It was still ranked somewhere in the 150's. LSU's best wins were better than Texas's best wins. Yet, when the committee released it's preview rankings Texas of the 16th overall seed whereas most bracketologists had LSU as a 7 or 8 seed.

As we sit here today, most brackets still have Texas a seed higher than LSU. Here are their resumes:

LSU:

20-10, NET (16); KenPom (16); BPI (15); road record: 2-8; record away from home (includes neutral site games) 6-8; SOS (29); NC SOS (215); Q1 wins (6); Q1/2 record: 10-9; Best wins: Kentucky +5 (NET #4); Tennessee +14 (NET #8); Alabama +3 (NET #27); (Neutral) Wake Forest +14 (NET #39)

Texas

20-10, NET (17); KenPom (15); BPI (17); road record: 4-7; record away from home (includes neutral site games) 5-7; SOS (12); NC SOS (170); Q1 wins (5); Q1/2 record: 10-10; Best wins: Kansas +3 (NET #7); Tennessee +3 (NET #8); @ Oklahoma +2 (NET #42); @ TCU +23 (NET #47)

LSU has a higher NET ranking, more Q1 wins, more wins away from home; and a better collection of good wins. Texas has a better SOS and a better road record. At WORST those two should be on the same seed line. Yet, you've seen Texas consistently projected ahead of LSU for 4 weeks now...despite them each having almost identical resumes.

And lest you don't believe in subjective bias either against LSU or in favor of Texas, just look at the current rankings. With basically identical resumes Texas is ranked 22nd in both the AP and Coaches Polls. LSU is unranked in both. In fact, if you look at the vote totals LSU would be "ranked" 30th in the AP and 39th in the Coaches poll. IDENTICAL RESUMES, yet LSU is subjectively ranked 8-17 spots lower. LSU only received 3 votes in the Coaches poll. THREE! Perhaps Texas escaping with a 1 point win over WVU (a team with a losing record) and their back to back losses over Baylor and Kansas that really made the difference for the coaches. Horseshoes, hand grenades, and what not