Final thoughts on another grim Selection Sunday at Virginia Tech
Darryl Slater
Mar 13, 2011
A robbing – that’s what ESPN analyst Jay Bilas said in various forums tonight about Virginia Tech getting left out of the NCAA tournament for the fourth straight year.
An agenda – that’s what Hokies coach Seth Greenberg wondered if someone on the tournament’s selection committee had against his team.
Or maybe Tech simply didn’t do enough to make the tournament. That’s what the committee chairman, Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith, said on his teleconference with media members.
Figuring out who made it in ahead of the Hokies was easier this year, since the tournament now has the last four at-large teams selected participate in those play-in games. So those teams were Clemson, Alabama-Birmingham, Southern California and Virginia Commonwealth.
But Smith never specifically stated why the Hokies got left out. And that has to be the frustrating thing for them and their fans.
If he had said the loss to Clemson – in the teams’ only meeting – hurt them in a head-to-head comparison, that would’ve made sense. Or if he singled out the Hokies’ two losses to Virginia, which was 141st in the Ratings Percentage Index, that would’ve made sense, too. He did indicate that while the Hokies played a better non-conference schedule, they didn’t win enough of those games. More on that at the end of this post.
What’s the harm in coming out and citing specifics? Surely, the committee looked at them. So why not say the precise reason or reasons – or specific wins or losses – that resulted in one team making it over another?
The committee has a very hard job. There’s no doubt about that. And let’s remember, college basketball has a far superior postseason system to college football. Any team with a reasonable shot of winning the national championship is not left out of the NCAA tournament.
Of course, that doesn’t make tonight sting any less for the Hokies, whose three seniors – Jeff Allen, Terrell Bell and Malcolm Delaney – will never play in an NCAA tournament. They never said they wanted to win a national championship, just make the NCAAs. That was their goal, and they didn’t reach it.
You can safely say they probably came one quality win away from making the tournament. The two missed opportunities that will haunt them are three-point losses to North Carolina and Purdue (in overtime). Carolina finished sixth in the RPI, Purdue 12th.
What if Delaney’s 3-pointer had fallen in that Carolina game, when Tech trailed by one point with eight seconds left? What if Delaney had been able to get a shot off against Purdue, with Tech down by two in overtime, instead of slipping in the lane with three seconds left?
Those wins would’ve helped the Hokies. But would they have done enough to get them into the tournament? Nobody will ever know for sure.
The only thing that was obvious tonight is the disappointment the Hokies felt. All you had to do was see assistant coach John Richardson, who joined Greenberg’s staff just this year, sitting in an office at Tech’s basketball facility. He was in there with the Hokies’ other assistants, Adrian Autry and James Johnson. They were silent. Richardson buried his face in the neck hole of his shirt, hiding tear-reddened eyes.
Down on the court, shooting guard Dorenzo Hudson was wearing headphones and shooting baskets. He wore a white long-sleeved shirt with the word “FINISH” in big block maroon letters on the back. Now, the Hokies must wait until next year to finish their NCAA tournament chase, when Hudson, who would’ve been a senior this season, returns from a foot injury that sidelined him in December.
They began this season with such high hopes, as essentially their entire team returned. They were ranked 21st in the preseason Associated Press poll, their first preseason ranking since 1995-96, when they made the NCAAs for the first time since 1986.
They lost forwards Allan Chaney (heart condition) and J.T. Thompson (knee) before the season, then Hudson was lost in December, along with reserve forward Cadarian Raines, who also had a bum foot. But with the help of Erick Green, who took over at point guard, they battled through the injuries and went 9-7 in the ACC despite having just eight healthy scholarship players – four of whom started last season.
They won twice in the ACC tournament, including a thrilling, 52-51 victory in Friday night’s quarterfinals over Florida State – 55th in the RPI. It was their second victory over the Seminoles this season. They also beat No. 4 Duke and No. 39 Penn State. They were 2-5 against the RPI top 50, 8-8 against the top 100, with three losses to teams outside the top 100 – the worst being No. 168 Georgia Tech.
But it wasn’t enough. The Hokies have not only missed the NCAA tournament for four straight years, they have made history while doing so.
In 2008, they became the first ACC team to win 10 games in the regular season and conference tournament combined and miss the NCAAs. Last season, they became the first ACC team to win 10 regular-season games and not get selected. And this season, they became the first ACC team to win 11 in the regular season and league tournament combined and still get left out.
Remember, winning nine or 10 games in the ACC regular season isn’t what it used to be. Expansion – which is why Tech is in the league – did away with the double round robin format that made all ACC regular season schedules equal.
In addition to Greenberg sitting down with a few reporters earlier tonight, he also held a teleconference for several others. When asked if he seeks out someone for an explanation about what his team must do, after four years of getting left out, he said, “I think that’s the job of our league office. I’ll leave it at that.”
—
OK, so how do the Hokies match up against the last four teams in the tournament? Here’s a look …
VIRGINIA TECH
2-5 vs. top 50
8-8 vs. top 100
Three losses outside top 100
Best wins: No. 4 Duke, No. 39 Penn State, No. 55 Florida State (twice), No. 61 Oklahoma State
Worst losses: No. 141 Virginia (twice), No. 168 Georgia Tech
CLEMSON
0-5 vs. top 50
9-8 vs. top 100
Three losses outside top 100
Best wins: No. 55 Florida State, No. 58 Boston College (twice), No. 62 Virginia Tech
Worst losses: No. 125 North Carolina State, No. 134 South Carolina, No. 141 Virginia
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
5-5 vs. top 50
8-8 vs. top 100
Six losses outside top 100
Best wins: No. 11 Texas, No. 19 Arizona, No. 32 Washington, No. 34 Tennessee, No. 44 UCLA
Worst losses: No. 105 Rider, No. 135 Oregon (twice), No. 208 Texas Christian, No. 219 Oregon State, No. 233 Bradley
ALABAMA-BIRMINGHAM
1-4 vs. top 50
10-7 vs. top 100
One loss outside top 100
Best wins: No. 49 Virginia Commonwealth, No. 54 Marshall (twice), No. 59 Texas-El Paso, No. 63 Southern Mississippi
Worst losses: No. 161 Arizona State
VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH
3-6 vs. top 50
8-8 vs. top 100
Three losses outside top 100
Best wins: No. 20 Old Dominion, No. 24 George Mason, No. 44 UCLA, No. 60 Wichita State
Worst losses: No. 155 South Florida, No. 178 Northeastern, No. 223 Georgia State
—
We’ll close with what Smith, the selection committee chairman, said about the Hokies – and then it’s on to Wednesday night’s first-round National Invitational Tournament home game against Bethune-Cookman.
Not that anybody cares at all about that. Seriously, how can this team get itself interest in any way in playing in the NIT at this point? It’ll be interesting to see if Greenberg can lift his players back up after tonight.
Now, here is Smith …
“Virginia Tech is a very good ball club and well-coached team. When we look at them, considering all the other criteria we look at, and the committee looks at about 15 different quantifiable criteria. And then we have advice from our regional coaches’ advisory committee. A lot of different things. At the end of the day, when we stacked Virginia Tech’s resume up against all the other teams, we just didn’t feel like they were a team that should be in the at-large field.”
Can you be more specific? Last season, the committee cited Tech’s non-conference strength of schedule.
“Virginia Tech did a great job of improving the teams in their non-conference schedule. Again, it’s all about who you play, where you play and then how you did, relative to that competition. While they significantly improved their non-conference schedule and the teams that they played, still it’s about how you did.
“And so when you go back to the comment that you were referring to from previous committee members, I think that has been a primary focus for Virginia Tech. They’re still a very good ball club. They were considered with many other teams and just weren’t able to get enough votes to be in the at-large field.”
So what specifically was it that kept Tech out?
“I would just say look at their overall resume, look at their schedule, how they did relative to their competition that they scheduled in their non-conference schedule.”
(Along those lines, the Hokies scheduled Kansas State to improve their non-league schedule and lost out there in the first game of a home-and-home series. Kansas State finished No. 23 in the RPI. Greenberg scheduled a tournament in Anaheim, Calif., where he beat No. 61 Oklahoma State but lost to No. 26 UNLV. He finished his home-and-home with Penn State from last season and beat the No. 39 Nittany Lions. But he lost the big game he was given in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge: No. 23 Purdue.)
