There is a defense to be mounted for that oversight, including the proximity of our selections to UConn's disastrous American Conference trip through Texas and the small sample size to that point of Huskies games against heavyweight competition.
The truth of the matter is: We whiffed.
It happens. Even to, say, Big Papi, whose real name I never can recall when it's time to reach for a baseball analogy.
The midseason stuff is for amusement purposes only, though. Teams' schedules vary so widely it can be a challenge to compile a definitive list. When we compose the real Sporting News All-America team at the end of the regular season, we have a full complement of performances and data upon which to draw. No striking out then.
After what we've witnessed over the ensuing month, it is fair to say we shall not repeat our misstep regarding Napier. He has been so routinely terrific he is a much greater threat to make the first team than to be excluded from the third.
There may be no player more important to his team's success, and Napier operates as though he is entirely comfortable with this circumstance.
With Memphis doing defensible defensive work on every other UConn player Saturday, Napier had to be nothing less than brilliant for his team to win an essential home game. And so he was. His career-best 34 points included the three-point play to tie the game, the 3-pointer that broke open the game in the final two minutes of overtime and the last of the free throws to seal.
"To be the player I want to be, you have to step up in these moments," Napier said following the game, and he is precisely right. These sorts of performances win games, earn NCAA Tournament bids, maybe even comfortable seeds. They also are elements that inform an All-America debate.
Napier leads the Huskies in scoring (18.0), rebounding (5.8) and assists (5.5). Given that he is listed at 6-1, 180 pounds, we can definitively say: This is not normal. As versatile as UCLA's Kyle Anderson is, and nearly a foot taller, he is second on his team in scoring while leading in rebounds and assists.
Napier's willingness to find the precise area of the game he needs to control for UConn to succeed — and the impact of his success in these endeavors — is evident in numbers: six games of more than 25 points (UConn 5-2), 10 games of more than six rebounds (9-1) and 12 of more than five assists (11-1).
"He's an All-American player," Huskies coach Kevin Ollie said. "I know I might be biased, but he's the best guard in America, to me, hands down. He just keeps focusing in on the things we need to do to win. He knows when it's time to take over the game."
There are a lot of things that go into be an All-American. Stats are a big part. Contributing to a winning team is another. But nothing seems more important than impact: How much do you matter?
Not many players have Napier beaten.
North Carolina's turnaround
The most uncomfortable aspect of this week's NCAA Tournament mock selection process, aside from the considerable challenges of my drive home through the snow, was the fake committee's decision to place North Carolina in the Raleigh site despite identifying the Tar Heels as a No. 7 seed.
If that were to occur in real life, it would be a heck of a second-round "reward" for the No. 2 seed in the region, which in our scenario happened to be Villanova.
At the point when it became apparent that North Carolina would slide into that sweet little 20-minute commute, I stood up and declared that if I were on the real committee, this would be the point at which I would throw a hissy fit. Second-round home games for middling teams do not violate the committee's bracketing principles; for more than a decade, the panel has needed new principles in this regard.
As a 3 seed, Pitt had to play No. 6 Wisconsin in Milwaukee in 2004. No. 3 Texas A&M had to play No. 6 Louisville in Lexington in 2006. It doesn't matter that the Panthers and Aggies won; it matters that it was unfair.
The best news about all this folderol is that North Carolina is unlikely to be stationed in Raleigh as a No. 7 seed. Why? Because the Tar Heels are not playing like a 7, and their schedule suggests they are capable of better.
Four of their remaining seven games are on the road, but one of those is at Virginia Tech, which owns Miami (Fla.) but has lost every other game to ACC opponents. The Heels' season could be defined by Thursday's rescheduled game against No. 8 Duke and a Feb. 26 visit to their other rival, N.C. State.
Carolina won seven of its past eight games, and it won playing as close to Carolina basketball as it can get. None of victories included fewer than 70 points, and the defense is the 12th most efficient in Division I.
Once a common punchline in college hoops — though not at Sporting News, mind you — James Michael McAdoo has not endured a single-figure scoring game since Dec. 4 and averaged 16.1 points and 8.4 rebounds in ACC play.
"We're definitely a talented team and we are starting to figure it out," said point guard Marcus Paige, whose five 3-pointers against Pitt made him 11-of-16 over the past three games. "People always got on us at the beginning of the year and we were on ourselves about being consistent and we are starting to find our groove a little bit, especially about playing defensively. It's good to finally be putting it together."
It's possible climbing the seed lines might lead to the Heels not opening the tournament in Raleigh. It's possible they could stumble into a 7 seed and still not be placed there. It's just how things worked out for our committee.
If the Tar Heels keep coming, though, they could earn preferential treatment.
Bubble or not?
Most everyone thinks of Valentine’s Day in terms of chocolate, flowers and fighting the crowds at every half-decent restaurant in town. Some of us recognize its real meaning: the unofficial start of bubble season.
You can compile all the bracket projections you want, but no one really has a legit idea who is likely to be fighting for an NCAA Tournament bid until the Ratings Percentage Index picture starts to make some sense, and the RPI doesn’t have enough data in the bank until we’re midway through February.
February being a 28-day month, Valetine’s Day it is.
Having gone through the NCAA’s Mock Selection exercise last week, I can tell you one thing: If you think your team is on the bubble, there’s a good chance it’s safely in the field. If you think your team is done, there’s a chance it’s on the bubble. And if you think your coach should be fired, well, you probably have a lot of company. Selecting one team from the most prominent conferences, let’s look at how this all breaks down:
Probably fine: SMU (American); UMass (A-10); Pitt (ACC); Xavier (Big East); Minnesota (Big Ten); Cal (Pac-12) and Missouri (SEC).
There are no locks in that group. Everytime SMU starts to appear genuinely dangerous, for instance, the Mustangs do something silly like losing on the road to South Florida or Temple. But all those teams need only to avoid complete disaster in order to make it. Some might be marginal enough to be involved in a complete disaster, but it’s unlikely in all cases.
Starting to worry: George Washington (A-10); Clemson (ACC); Oklahoma State (Big 12); Providence (Big East); Boise State (Mountain West) and Tennessee (SEC).
It’s not about momentum or “last 10 games”. It’s about needing to accomplish enough to be included in the selection debate. Each of these teams either seemed attractive at one point or had the potential to be serious candidates — but collectively they are 6-18 over their past four games.
Tennessee missed a huge opportunity when its defense shut down Florida late but its offense reacted with impatience and immaturity. Oklahoma State’s losing streak was exacerbated by Marcus Smart’s Big 12 suspension. Boise had three consecutive losses against solid (or better) by a combined 10 points.
Again, these teams not need to win because finishing strong in and of itself will help charm the committee. They need to finish strong because at some point or other in the season they didn’t get enough done.
Pretty much a goner: Indiana (Big Ten); Oregon (Pac-12) and LSU (SEC). Each of these teams could in by winning all of its remaining games and then making a deep conference tournament run. Seem likely?
Rallying to relevance: Saint Joseph’s (Atlantic 10); St. John’s (Big East); Nebraska (Big Ten); UNLV (Mountain West); Arizona State (Pac-12).
There was a point in the season when it might have seemed outlandish to include any or all of these teams in a serious NCAA Tournament discussion. OK, that’s not really true. Because as we’ve said, there are no serious NCAA Tournament conversations before this point in the calendar. This is why it makes sense to wait to debate.
As a group, these teams have won 16 of their past 20. Arizona State’s surge to six victories in the past seven, including the double-overtime escape of No. 2 Arizona, has the Sun Devils firmly in the field. St. John’s revival includes a road win at Providence and an essential upset of Creighton. UNLV has recovered from an uninspiring pre-conference performance but faces a huge week with a home game against New Mexico following a Saturday trip to Boise State.
A team such as Nebraska still has a lot of ground to cover before it’s any sort of NCAA candidate. The Huskers are only 14-10 overall. They’re 3-7 against the RPI Top 50. They are not going to do much over what remains to add to the high-level achievement element of their resume. Their only remaining game against the Big Ten elite is the season-ender at home against Wisconsin. But they do have a chance to improve their appeal with a series of games against the low end of the league. It’s a long way home from here, but at least they’re in the discussion.
And now’s the time to have that talk.
Don't hate on Wichita State
College football has made it nearly a sacrament to hate the little guy, so it seems inevitable for some of that to spill over the narrow aisle separating it from college basketball. Thus Wichita State should not feel aggrieved at those who manage to overlook that less than a year ago the Shockers were ending last season in the Final Four and over the past few months they’ve started this one with 27 consecutive wins. The criticism of their achievements is almost reflexive.
It’s all wrong, of course. Slagging Wichita for its schedule is cheating the truth. Yes, the Shockers own one victory against the top 25 of the Ratings Percentage Index. Virginia, which very well might be playing Syracuse for the ACC title in its penultimate conference games, has zero. UCLA, second-place in the Pac-12, has zero. Kentucky, second in the SEC, has zero.
All those teams, of course, have something Wichita State does not: They’ve all lost.
The only team that has a right to look at the Shockers’ perfect record and sneer is Syracuse, and one can feel fairly comfortable the Orange would not, because their experience just this weekend is a demonstration of how terribly difficult it is to maintain a perfect record. In N.C. State, they were playing the No. 51 RPI team at home and had to concoct a miracle or two to remain uneaten.
The constant refrain regarding what the Shockers’ record would be if they played in the (your favorite power conference here) ignores the fact they defeated the last Big Ten team they played, and the past two SEC teams they played, and the last Big East they played although that team is now in the ACC.
Basketball people know the road win at Saint Louis was an impressive achievement. WSU also defeated NCAA contender Tennessee and own more road wins than any other team.
Wichita State coach Gregg Marshall told Sporting News he tried to arrange home-and-home series with more than a handful of major opponents who declined. The promoter of the season-opening extravaganza at AT&T Stadium wanted Wichita State involved but essentially couldn’t find a big-time opponent who’d agree to the game. This shouldn’t be a rigged debate.
The Shockers are ranked No. 6 in the Ratings Percentage Index. If the schedule were so abominable — it falls in the upper third of Division I programs — the most schedule-intensive rating system ought not to be so rewarding. But they also fare well in performance-based metrics such as the Pomeroy Ratings (No. 11), ESPN’s BPI (No. 10) or Kevin Pauga’s KPI (No. 6).
It’s widely presented that if WSU continues its undefeated run and is awarded a No. 1 seed then that will be the region everyone wants to enter, which ignores the fact Syracuse has been close to beatable several times, or that Arizona is diminished by injury, and so on. Others will tell you the Shockers surely will become the first top seed to lose, as was the case with Gonzaga’s somewhat controversial seed in the West last year. There’s a 25 percent chance it will be true, so there are worse bets.
In 2010, though, Kansas was the No. 1 team in the polls and the RPI, the Big 12 champ and the top overall seed in the tournament. And the Jayhawks still lost to Northern Iowa. Don’t think anyone was griping about KU’s seeding then.
