stu said:

---

We can get there tomorrow!

---

Is there any chance we make the tournament with one more win? No one seems to think so, but why not? Do we really have to make the final or win it?

There are just too many teams with better records, as well as teams that get automatic berths who don't have as good a resume but either win their conference or win their tournament. Right now Cal is tied for 57th in their Quad 1 record (1-8), and tied for 47th in Quad 2 (3-3). Should Cal beat Syracuse that will help the Quad 2 record, but probably not enough to make a difference (also because Stanford could easily drop in the NET rankings based on today's loss, which doesn't help Cal). Cal is 6-13 against the top 100 teams, tied for 94th. So that's my opinion as to why nothing short of a finals match up in the ACC will get Cal to the March Madness.

Over the years deeper lower-seed selections appear to have some program politics involved. My brain can't yet factor the fact that this is pro-basketball now and 2026 is a colossal transition year.

If they don't win the next game or two and can't make the big tournament I'd think they would be among the favorites to win the NIT and hang a banner.

john1953 said:

---

Over the years deeper lower-seed selections appear to have some program politics involved. My brain can't yet factor the fact that this is pro-basketball now and 2026 is a colossal transition year.

If they don't win the next game or two and can't make the big tournament I'd think they would be among the favorites to win the NIT and hang a banner.

---

Can you define "program politics," vs when a team doesn't recruit good enough to be a better team?

Sure. All merit being close to equal, a team that will bring in higher TV ratings or tournament ticket sales just might bring some committee bias. Also "branding." I believe (and I could be wrong) that seeding and bubble teams come into politics colored by economics. As well as "human" bias. Obviously there are ways to get into the tournament without selection bias. So just win, baby. :-)

john1953 said:

---

Sure. All merit being close to equal, a team that will bring in higher TV ratings or tournament ticket sales just might bring some committee bias. Also "branding." I believe (and I could be wrong) that seeding and bubble teams come into politics colored by economics. As well as "human" bias. Obviously there are ways to get into the tournament without selection bias. So just win, baby. :-)

---

The NET system was supposedly designed to help eliminate those biases. But it has enough complexities that the committee can still choose to ignore it if they want to, especially for the last teams in, where the NET does not consider head-to-head game results.