ESPN Men's Basketball

Originally Published: March 6, 2004

Wins may not remove UW's wart

Email Print Share

By Andy Katz
ESPN.com
Archive

Washington's RPI sits there like a wart the Huskies can't remove. No matter what they do, it won't go away.

Win 12 of 14 games ... it's still there.

Travel across the country during the Pac-10 season for a Sunday night game against the ACC's second-place team and only lose by five to NC State ... it still won't budge.

Clinching second place in the Pac-10, even beating Stanford ... it doesn't improve out of the 70s.

Nothing seems to clear up UW's major NCAA Tournament blemish -- its RPI of 76 as of Sunday -- or at least make it less noticeable on Selection Sunday.

"If the RPI is one of the most important factors (for getting an at-large berth), then we've got a tough chance to make it," Washington coach Lorenzo Romar said Thursday. "But you continue to hear that how you finish is important. We had a winning record on the road in conference at 5-4. You want the best teams in the country in the field of 65 and we can make an argument right now that we should be in that group."

Can they?

If the Huskies don't win the Pac-10 tournament then they will be the most interesting test case in the selection process. But right now, the numbers don't even look close.

Since the NCAA expanded its bracket to 64 spots, no team has received an at-large bid with an RPI higher than No. 74 New Mexico in 1999. Two years ago, Wyoming got an at-large bid to the Dance with an RPI of 63, but the Cowboys did win the MWC regular season title. Minnesota was invited to the '95 Dance with an RPI of 66 and a year earlier, Tulsa was invited with an RPI of 59. The '98 tournament saw a Western Michigan team get a bid despite its 58th ranking.

Washington, however, could blow all those numbers away if it doesn't win the Pac-10 tournament and still hears its name called on Selection Sunday with an RPI somewhere in the 80s or 90s.

"If we beat Cal and Stanford we should be in," Romar said Thursday. "There has to be credit for finishing second in the Pac-10. Our conference is young and therefore there is a lot of parity. Teams have been beating up on each other, but we survived that and finished second."

Romar points to his club's sweep of Arizona as a legitimate reason to put the Huskies in the tournament with Stanford and the only other Pac-10 team projected into the NCAA Tournament -- Arizona.

Arizona was without suspended junior guard Salim Stoudamire last Thursday when the Huskies beat Arizona for the second time, but the selection committee isn't going to hold that against the Huskies, or put an asterisk next to the W. At least one committee member doesn't buy the theory that teams should be given a break if they don't have a player. Losing players to injuries, suspensions, or academic difficulties also shouldn't give the winning team less credit.

"That's part of basketball," according to the selection committee member.

"Arizona should be in, but we should be too," Romar said.

Washington's two wins over Arizona can't hide the fact its RPI remains stuck in the mid-90s.

Romar said beating Arizona gave Washington the necessary separation from Cal and Oregon, and for that matter Arizona, when it comes to NCAA and NIT teams.

"We showed that we're out to get (the bid) by sweeping that trip (to Arizona)," Romar said. "That game with Arizona was for second place and we won it."

Ah, but here's the rub. Arizona's RPI is 35. The Wildcats also have a top 25 win over Texas. The Huskies were 0-3 vs. top 25 teams before Saturday, and their only top 50 wins were over Arizona. And even though the Huskies stand ahead of Cal in the Pac-10 standings, they trail the Bears in the RPI rankings (87).

The rest of the once mighty Pac-10 limps behind with five teams ranked 100 or below in the RPI and Oregon at No. 99. What that means is Washington's record may have improved drastically since an 0-5 start in the conference, but the RPI didn't budge during those 12 conference wins. It's the same Catch-22 mid-major teams face during conference play in places such as the Missouri Valley, WCC or MAC.

Washington's résumé -- at least in computer printouts, and for that matter, on the court -- prior to the start of Pac-10 play doesn't help, either. The Huskies were blown out at Wyoming (92-76) and at Houston (79-64) and lost to Gonzaga by 24 in Seattle. Washington's overall record doesn't necessarily conjure up thoughts of a tourney team at 17-10. The Huskies strength of schedule rating, entering the weekend, was 113. They have the wins over Arizona and, now, over Stanford, but the only other top-100 victories were over Cal and Oregon. The other 12 came against teams rated 101 or higher.

"If you take those three games away -- Gonzaga, Wyoming and Houston -- then we weren't so bad," Romar said Thursday. "That's not the way we're playing now. We're playing closer to 40 minutes of good basketball because guys have accepted their roles."

Yes, Washington's only two losses in its past 10 games are at Stanford and NC State, which should count for something. And that's why beating Cal and Stanford should go a long way toward helping convince the selection committee that UW is worthy of the tournament no matter what the RPI indicates.

But power rating points play a role, no matter how a team is playing in March compared to back in December. So, Washington can expect to be lined up against its West Coast brethren. And, if Washington can get in with an RPI in the 90s or 80s, well what about Nevada (39), UTEP (41), Hawaii (52) or Rice (56) out of the WAC? Even the WAC's fifth team, Boise State (83), has a better RPI than Washington, and none have as many losses as the Huskies.

One of the few West Coast teams without much to worry about is Utah State, which will likely be invited by the committee regardless of what happens in the Big West tournament. The Aggies are 23-2 through Tuesday with an RPI of 39. But what about Pacific's chances? The Tigers are 19-7, beat the Aggies, and with an RPI of 67 could improve their numbers in the conference tournament.

And over in the Mountain West, three more teams sport better résumés than the Huskies. BYU (31 RPI, 17-7 overall), Utah (47 RPI, 19-8) and Air Force (57 RPI, 21-5) all will have something to say if Washington goes dancing and they don't.

Among the questions the committee will certainly be asking itself next week: Why shouldn't the second-place team in the WAC, MWC or even the Big West be given the same consideration as the second-place team out of the Pac-10 this season?

Well, they just might.

Washington is banking on Pac-10 history to carry it into the tourney. But the selection committee isn't supposed to consider past experiences for any conference or team. The 34 at-large bids in 2004 are solely based on this season's results. Washington will get points for a strong finish, but its body of work won't sway many selection committee members.

"If we can get into the tournament, people will be surprised how many guys can make plays," said Romar. Yes, the Huskies' frenetic style and dynamic play of guard Nate Robinson -- who at 5-foot-7 is usually the shortest player on the court but has already become a SportsCenter favorite for his high-flying dunks -- makes the Huskies attractive for television.

"I always believed that this team could be successful, I just didn't know when or if it wouldn't be until next season," Romar said Thursday. "We started out 0-5 in the Pac-10 and if we had a team with bad character then we could have been 0-10 (instead of [now 12-6]). But our guys stayed together."

After beating Cal and Stanford, UW may become the comeback story of the NCAA Tournament.

"They know it's close, but they also know we're not there yet," Romar said Thursday. "But it feels like someone who is playing good enough basketball to get a tryout for the NBA, but they won't give it to you. You know you can make it, but they need to give you a chance."

Washington took advantage of two more chances to cover up that wart. Whether or not the Huskies will be attractive enough in the eyes of the committee remains to be seen.

Andy Katz is a senior writer at ESPN.com.