TourneyBubble recently got a rare opportunity to interview the new Chairman of the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee, Mike Silve. Rest assured, we asked Mr. Silve the tough questions every college hoops fan should.
TourneyBubble: Thanks for taking the time to talk with us.
Mike Silve: Great to be here.
TB: Tell me how this year’s NCAA Tournament is shaping up.
MS: Well, it will be very difficult to top the overall crappiness of last year’s tournament, but we are trying our best. We have an eye on several undeserving, overrated teams with high prestige that will hopefully get at-large bids. Also, we are thrilled that we will be able to exclude countless mid major teams from the tournament, for the simple fact that they couldn’t schedule any games against power teams in the nonconference season. If somehow teams like Siena, St. Mary’s and Creighton get into the tournament, we will be sure to make them play each other in the first round to prevent any unattractive teams from advancing to the Sweet 16.
TB: You mention undeserving, high prestige teams as possible at-larges. Which ones specifically are under consideration?
MS: We like the overall mediocrity of teams like Michigan, Notre Dame, Kentucky and Arizona. While they have lost plenty of games already, we are hoping they continue to lose games to their more deserving peers to ensure that there will be absolutely no plausible explanation for giving them at-larges. Notre Dame is an interesting case, because their combination of a soft schedule and lack of quality wins may complicate whatever bogus defense we have for giving them a bid.
TB: What asinine ranking will be used to exclude deserving, non-big name schools from the tournament?
MS: This year I believe we are going to use the average RPI of a team’s wins and losses. It is an extension of our completely asinine “quality loss” formula, where we reward teams for doing what a group of trained apes could do: lose games to good teams. The goal is to apply arbitrary standards to some teams, those that will not get good television ratings, and not the other, more marketable teams.
TB: Let me give you a hypothetical here – Team A has lost games to Cal, UCLA, Creighton, Syracuse, UConn, Pittsburgh, Marquette, West Virginia and Louisville – where do they stack up?
MS: That is an outstanding profile. It is exactly what the committee will be stressing, scheduling tough games. Who is it?
TB: Its DePaul.
MS: Oh…never mind. We always have other criteria irrelevant to basketball, including if a team passes the Nantz Second Glance factor…
TB: Nantz Second Glance?
MS: Yes, that is what happens when Jim Nantz looks at one of our boring first round matchups and says things like “Wow – look at that! Can you believe Tubby Smith and Minnesota drew Kentucky in the first round!”
TB: That explains a lot. Any final statements before getting to work on the bracket?
MS: It is a hard job disappointing everyone. That is why CBS is contractually obligated to congratulate me after the bracket is revealed, even if the matchups are as exciting as getting punched in the nuts. Just when you think you have seen all of the blatant favoritism you can handle –wait until you see what we have in store on Selection Sunday!
