In the past, OSU has either been solidly in, or clearly out by the time the Big 12 tournament rolled around, so I don't think I paid very close attention to the job the committee does. Obviously, we are all paying close attention this season. I have a couple of topics that I am paying especially close attention to.
1). St Mary's and Middle Tennessee. Both programs won a ton of games and lost very few. They don't have the quality wins that some of the P5 bubble teams have (specifically OSU), and they have losses to some really bad teams (unlike OSU). But, if I am on the committee, I think I would be conflicted about these 2 teams. On the one hand, they had dominant seasons, and should (maybe) be rewarded. On the other hand, I don't think either team is good enough to win more than 1 out of 4 games against the 4 8-10 Big 12 teams. Should they be in? Should the at large teams almost all come from the P5 conferences, or do you want to include teams like those two, so that some of the smaller conferences have more than just 1 representative? Personally, I think you want the most competitive teams in the field, and if those teams couldn't win their conference, they should be out of luck. But, I can see both arguments.
2). The Big 12 has 4 teams that were 8-10 in conference play. All 4 of them lost to better seeded teams today/yesterday. The end result is that all 4 teams look to be pretty much on the same level. OSU has the best combination of wins and losses, but the worst metrics. OU had the best first half of the season and the worst second half. Baylor was up and down, but mostly up over the last month, and has some nice wins in their pocket. Texas has battled illness/injury all season but looks to have a healthy Bamba back in the fold. It seems really hard to justify leaving just one of the 4 teams out unless it is OU (Terrible 2018) or OSU (terrible RPI). If I am on the committee, I think I would be tempted to include all 4 of them and say that they were simply too close to cut any one of them out.
It is tough to discuss this without bias, but if it is up to me, I'm taking OSU, UT and BU before OU, and I'm taking OU before St Marys or MTS.
1). St Mary's and Middle Tennessee. Both programs won a ton of games and lost very few. They don't have the quality wins that some of the P5 bubble teams have (specifically OSU), and they have losses to some really bad teams (unlike OSU). But, if I am on the committee, I think I would be conflicted about these 2 teams. On the one hand, they had dominant seasons, and should (maybe) be rewarded. On the other hand, I don't think either team is good enough to win more than 1 out of 4 games against the 4 8-10 Big 12 teams. Should they be in? Should the at large teams almost all come from the P5 conferences, or do you want to include teams like those two, so that some of the smaller conferences have more than just 1 representative? Personally, I think you want the most competitive teams in the field, and if those teams couldn't win their conference, they should be out of luck. But, I can see both arguments.
2). The Big 12 has 4 teams that were 8-10 in conference play. All 4 of them lost to better seeded teams today/yesterday. The end result is that all 4 teams look to be pretty much on the same level. OSU has the best combination of wins and losses, but the worst metrics. OU had the best first half of the season and the worst second half. Baylor was up and down, but mostly up over the last month, and has some nice wins in their pocket. Texas has battled illness/injury all season but looks to have a healthy Bamba back in the fold. It seems really hard to justify leaving just one of the 4 teams out unless it is OU (Terrible 2018) or OSU (terrible RPI). If I am on the committee, I think I would be tempted to include all 4 of them and say that they were simply too close to cut any one of them out.
It is tough to discuss this without bias, but if it is up to me, I'm taking OSU, UT and BU before OU, and I'm taking OU before St Marys or MTS.
