	products recent interviews FastScripts archive about ASAP Sports

Our Clients:

Browse by Sport

Find us on

Subscribe to RSS

Click to go to
Asaptext.com

View our
e-Brochure

NATIONAL COLLEGE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION MEDIA CONFERENCE

March 8, 2006

Craig Littlepage

DAVID WORLOCK: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us. Welcome to the second teleconference with Craig Littlepage, director of athletics at the University of Virginia, and chair of the Division I Men's Basketball Committee.
Craig, you're in Indianapolis, in the room where the committee will begin meeting over the next day. As happens every year, there's great talk of surprise outcomes in the conference tournaments this year.
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: Welcome, everybody, on today's call.
I think that we're going to have to spend some time talking about how we might develop a philosophy or a system to determine selecting the 34 best at-large teams, comparing a full range of at-large candidates from all over the country with very different schedules, most conference and non-conference.
I think also trying to compare teams that may have started the year very hot and tailed off, and conversely, teams that might have started off modestly, but have caught fire and come on strong in the last 10 games of the regular season in their post-season tournaments.
Some of the player issues related to suspensions, there are at least two teams that may be impacted in some way by players not playing in either the conference tournament or the NCAA post-season championship play.
Finally, trying to project how many at-large bids beyond the 34 there might be available based on how conference tournaments are going.
Those are the kind of burning questions and topics that the committee at the outset will be dealing with. Certainly, as we talked about several weeks ago, the last games of the regular season and post-season are going to be an opportunity for many teams to play their way in or out into consideration. A lot of that has already taken place, but there are still quite a few positions up for grabs.
DAVID WORLOCK: Thank you, Craig. We'll open it up to questions.
Q. How much will teams help themselves by winning a couple of games in their respective conference tournaments? Conversely, how much do they hurt themselves by losing early in those tournaments?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: That all depends on the resume they have at that point in time. There may be teams that are already locked in, in some committee members' minds as far as having done enough to be included in the field at this point in time. There are other teams that may have to win a game or win two games. Some teams may have to go all the way through to the championship and win a championship.
There's not a finite answer to that based on what it is that each and every team might have done thus far.
Q. Could you give an indication of either how settled or unsettled the No. 1 line is, just in your mind, at this point? Last year conference tournament's outcomes played into at least a couple of 1 seeds. Could you talk about that complication?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: I think the results of some of the late-season conference games and some of the losses that took place for teams that many considered to be on that first line certainly does open up the opportunity for teams in the post-season tournaments to solidify a 1 seed or maybe to open the door for other teams.
Obviously, the conference tournaments will, indeed, be a factor that we'll take into consideration when we start to do the seeding and the bracketing later on in the weekend.
The potential for one of the late games on Saturday, or Sunday, I should say, there's always the potential that those games are going to be impacting our decisions. Certainly we go into Sunday many times looking at contingencies for those sorts of circumstances. I don't anticipate anything different this time around.
Q. This year the Missouri Valley as five or six teams, given their RPIs, has very much the look of a power conference, an ACC, SEC. How much will the Missouri Valley's lack of a reputation impact at all their chances of getting maybe as many as five or even six teams in this tournament?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: The discussion about any one league will not go into our discussions when it comes time to select the at-larges. We are going to look strictly at teams, what teams have done. Certainly there's a level of discussion as it relates to the conferences only to the extent that they're playing within a family, if you will, a family of colleagues.
To look at it in terms of Missouri Valley being comparable with any other league, we don't look at it in terms of that. We'll look at it in terms of what each and every school has done. I think we've become pretty sophisticated about being able to ascertain the kinds of schedules that people have played and the kind of resumes that schools have put together.
Q. There has been a lot of talk about how many teams are getting in. I was wondering the committee's opinion of conferences like the WAC, Mountain West, teams like BYU.
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: I'm not sure I understand your question.
Q. With the strength of the conferences, how does the committee look at the teams in those conferences?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: We'll look at the teams as they will present a profile of games over the course of this year. We'll try to come to some sort of conclusion about the relative rigor of the schedule that they played and how they've fared in those games they've played. We'll look at where the games were played. We'll look at trends in terms of the ebb and flow of early-season success and later-season success as well as the conference tournaments in which they might play.
Q. Over the course of the next year, the committee will be selecting Final Four sites. Considering the circumstances, how do you feel the committee will be regarding New Orleans?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: We'll, we've had great times in New Orleans over the past, with Final Fours, regionals, opening rounds. Certainly there is a tremendous amount of faith and confidence that we have in New Orleans' ability to put together a solid presentation, a solid package. When we get to that point later on in the year when we start to evaluate some of these things, I'm sure New Orleans, once again, will do an outstanding job.
In the past, they've been awarded sites on the basis of earning it. I would assume that they're going to be squarely in the mix once again this next go-around. Again, we've had just wonderful experiences both from the standpoint of the committee, and I think that the championship overall has been enriched by coming to New Orleans.
Q. Is the RPI any more important or less important than in past years? Can you explain how big a factor the RPI is in selecting the at-large teams?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: The way I've answered questions similar to that is that each of the 10 committee members with different personalities, different preferences, will be using all the different tools that are available to us to varying levels of confidence. Whereas one person might rely more heavily on quantitative measurements, another committee member might rely much more heavily on qualitative measurements and qualitative tools. Certainly there will be committee members somewhere in between.
I think what has made our selections and our deliberations, discussions, and votes so good, is that the outcomes of the 10 people and what it is they prefer, how they evaluate teams, teams end up being selected based on composites of all 10 people in the room, the people that are voting on the particular team.
The RPI is one of those factors. Depending on the level of comfort that one has, one committee member might rely on it heavily, whereas another one might rely on it less heavily.
Q. How do you look at the situation where a guy is suspended for one game?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: Well, the players that aren't particularly starters or players of significance for their teams, that aren't in games either because of injury or suspension, could have impact in terms of, first of all, selection, and then, secondly, in terms of how a team is seeded.
We do rely on having to do surveillance, needing the cooperation of conferences, conference staffs, to a lesser degree going to the schools themselves to find out about injury status, how quickly a player might be back, the relative strength of that player.
It's a factor that could be thrown into the mix when it comes for either selection and/or seeding. In the two situations we're dealing with, I think the one difference, although both player suspensions, one team is going into its conference tournament without a key player, and I don't know that a decision has been made whether the player would return should the team make it to the NCAA championships. On the other hand, the team that's already through its conference tournament, the key player might not be available during the NCAA championships. In both situations it will have to be considered precisely what that means. It would be hard to tell and too early to tell at this point.
Q. We understand that you like to avoid first-round match-ups that would be rematches of games earlier this year. Would there be any take by the committee on a game that would be a rematch of a first-round match-up in the 2005 tournament?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: It's something that would be looked at. I don't think that there's anything in our policies and procedures that would prevent it. But certainly I think that we would prefer to have fresh match-ups throughout the tournament, not only during regular-season play, but even as far as past tournament games, but sometimes we just can't get there. We would prefer to avoid that.
Q. The new wave of power conferences, not all team are playing each other. One team's conference record may not match up to another's. How do you determine what are the better conference wins? Do you just look at the quality of the conference in determining how a team may be seeded?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: I think we would need to take a look at where the games are played, particularly in situations where there would be one play between two conference members with identical records. The statistics in all circumstances would favor the home team. So, if two teams with 9-7 records played each other once, chances are the home team is going to win that game. We would have to continue to dig in terms of trying to come up with some sort of tiebreaker that would allow us to come up with some determination as to which is the better team.
It may be that it is a matter of who went out and scheduled a better-quality, non-conference schedule or who played the other better teams in that particular conference, whether they played the better teams in that conference one time or twice, or in some cases maybe they didn't play one of the top teams in that conference at all.
We do have to go through this pretty intensely as far as everybody that they played both in and out of conference, I think, keeping an eye in particular on what they've done with their non-conference scheduling and where those games were played.
Q. I'm doing a story on one of your members, Jon. Any observation you might offer that would distinguish him, a particular characteristic or strength, or maybe even a story, funny or otherwise?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: I would say that Jon is a very valuable member of our committee. On a personal level, I've known Jon since his days back in the '80s as a staff member of the ACC. I regard Jon very highly in terms of his administrative abilities, what he's done with his conference.
I just think that he's a solid administrator. I would have to say he has a very good feel for college basketball, a high respect for college basketball. He's a guy that listens, processes information, then makes very good judgments in terms of the things we may be discussing at a particular point in time.
Q. When the committee is looking at No. 1 seeds, how do you compare teams from power conferences like Duke and Ohio State to teams like Gonzaga and Memphis?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: I would say that we would take a look at what transpired over the second half of the season, what has transpired over the last 10 games, what transpired in the conference tournament.
One of the key drivers, at least for me as one committee member, would be what they have done and what they have decided to do in terms of their non-conference schedule. I would say in the case of the schools that you mentioned, over time they have stepped up and gone out and played good people out of conference. They played teams that are considered to be in the top 10, top 15 in the country. They've both played some of these teams both at home and on the road. I would say that they, as much as any schools in the country, have done a great job in terms of the quality of schedule.
Q. Could you talk about injury situations, specifically where it's not a season-ending thing, Cameron Bennerman, the season finale against Wake Forest. If he doesn't play in the ACC tournament, yet they say we hope to have him back, how do you consider what his participation might be and how does that go into the situation?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: We would be reaching out to get as much information as the institution and/or the conference might be able to share and willing to share. We let the schools know throughout the course of the year that we do rely on contemporaneous feedback, accurate feedback. It's a situation that's really hard to be precise in terms of how much that weighs into any of the decisions that we may make.
We want to be able to select, seed and bracket all these teams based on who it is that's going to be entering the tournament potentially.
I think in the situation of the program that you just mentioned, they've had a great year. To the degree that a key player might not be available will go into our discussions and we'll have to come up with some sort of determination as to whether it has potential impact as far as their ability to play as they have played for the most part during the regular season or not.
Q. In regards to San Diego State's hopes for an at-large bid, how much do you think losing to a low seed in the conference tournament would hurt their chances? What do you think a regular season title in the Mountain West would be worth?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: People that win regular-season play for their respective leagues will get them on our consideration board without regard to their performance in their post-season tournaments. Certainly at this time of the year winning games is a lot more beneficial than not winning games.
As you posed the hypothetical, they would be well-advised to win as many games as they can. That's about as definitive as I can be.
Q. Can you talk evaluating and seeding a team like Penn from the Ivy League, no conference tournament, RPI numbers, but they've been dominant in the league and have a respective coach.
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: As a league champion, they will be thrown in the mix with the other 65 teams. They will be seeded on the basis of quality team that we, as a committee, believe that they are. That doesn't consider at all scholarships, not scholarships, being from Philadelphia as opposed to being from San Antonio, Texas. I think that over time this is a program that's done a good job, has represented its conference well, as the other teams have in the conference.
We'll look at what they've done throughout the course of this year and seed them according to what we feel they've done in comparison to the other 64 teams.
Q. A couple weeks ago when we talked, you talked about how there seemed to be fewer locks, that it was muddled. Has anything cleared up in the last few weeks or is it still as muddy as it was a few weeks ago?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: I can speak to my own evaluation, having had enough conversations with other committee members to know how they might be feeling. But certainly the last two and a half weeks or so have helped in many situations. In some situations, it hasn't helped teams. If I was pressed, I would say right now I could come up with maybe 23 or 24 teams that I personally feel have done enough without regard to what might happen in post-season tournaments to say they would be in the tournament. That's probably around the average that the committee over time has come up with upon tabulating the initial votes that we do on Thursday night.
I feel pretty comfortable with the teams at least that I have put down on a sheet of paper. But still there's a lot up for play. As I look at the types of schools that are still under consideration, many of them are still playing in some of the tournaments that are being hosted, either currently or in the coming days.
Q. I don't know if you saw the Syracuse/Cincinnati game, how does a dramatic finish like this game help a team that's on the bubble?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: It's a win. The fact that they won at the buzzer versus if they won going away doesn't really have much of an impact. I would say from my standpoint doesn't have any more impact as a buzzer-beater than winning by 10 or 12 points. It's another win for them. It's a win against a quality opponent, an opponent that itself was under, I think, a little bit of pressure to win a game, as well.
We'll see what happens as they proceed through the remainder of that tournament.
Q. In recent years there's been talk about the number of teams in the field, maybe look at expansion. Is this something that the tournament committee will be looking at in the future? What are your thoughts about this?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: I don't anticipate they will be talking about it in the future. My personal opinion is that 65 teams, we have a pretty special event.
Q. Beyond that figure of 23 or 24 teams that you just mentioned, do you have a working number as far as the size of the pool that could possibly put itself in position later this week to do enough to get in?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: Yeah, probably 28, 29. Could be more. But less than the 34, the minimum that we would have.
Q. With the regional finals being in Washington, D.C., how would that affect Georgetown or George Washington?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: We will look at the policies and procedures. We'll look at the relative seeding of both of those institutions, as you would any other institution that might be similarly situated. The placement will be on the basis of the seeding, and then ultimately the bracketing, the policies and procedures that we have for all that.
Q. In the seeding process, could there be any weight given not on the computer but on a gut level to margin of victory, looking at a team that perhaps you might be expecting to win more convincingly but is just kind of getting by and still winning?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: I'm not terribly influenced by that generally. The other committee members, I think, we don't have much of a discussion about that on an ongoing basis. There may be some anomalies that come up from time to time, but it's rare that something like that would come into our discussions.
Back to the previous question as it related to Georgetown specifically being a team that plays their home games in the MCI Center. They would certainly not be assigned to the region there in Washington, DC. I should have pointed that out.
Q. We have a number of teams that are from outside the big six conference, put together good RPI numbers; whether that accurately reflected how good they are. How will you guys evaluate teams that have done what you guys have asked from a scheduling standpoint and not scheduled the bottom of Division I versus some of the teams from bigger conferences who are sort of relying on a marquee win or two late in the season?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: Well, I think it's been pretty clear that the committee over time has sent the message that it will not be impressed by records that are artificially built on the basis of scheduling lesser-quality opponents. If a situation is tight, if we're comparing six to eight teams, and two of those six to eight teams have put together a schedule with rigor, and they've been balanced in terms of playing games both home and away from home, the tiebreaker in that kind of situation is going to go with the teams that have scheduled and have challenged themselves.
Q. How would the suspension of the Arizona player affect the committee's decision if they were to lose early in their conference tournament?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: It would depend on who else is under consideration at the time. In other words, it wouldn't be a matter of saying one of those two teams, do we take this team without the suspended player versus another. It's going to be how those teams would be considered among the grouping of five or six other schools.
Q. There was a situation earlier this year in the ACC where ACC officials received a penalty for their performance in the Florida State game against Duke, in which Florida State eventually won in overtime. An FSU player was mistakenly ejected with nine minutes to go in the game, technical foul. FSU ended up losing a real tight game. Would something like that be given consideration to FSU, either giving them possibly a slightly higher seed based on that circumstance or would consideration at all be given to that when evaluating Florida State?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: Just as a point of clarification, Duke won the game in question. I think you might have inadvertently said Florida State won the game. I assumed you knew what you were talking about, but maybe just misspoke.
It would be discussed. There's not a precise or specific weighting that would be attached to that sort of scenario because the minute that you try to do that, then you have to look at the other equation, which would be how you would assess demerits to Florida State's opponent in that situation. But it's something that certainly could be perceived as a factor in the game. It will be taken into consideration at some level in our discussions. Just how much it would influence either the selection of one team or the seeding of another, I would not be able to give you a real definitive answer on that because there is none.
Q. There's been some discussion about the Missouri Valley this year. Basically they've unlocked the secret of the RPI and that's one of the reasons they've been able to play so many teams with high RPIs. Do you have any reaction when you hear things like that? What is the secret of the RPI?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: Well, I think it has more to do with quality coaching and quality players as it has to do with manipulating the RPI or any other one of the tools. They have quality coaches in that league, one end of the standings to the other. I know they've done a great job in terms of trying to schedule throughout the country against teams in many of the other conferences. They've been fortunate enough to win some of those games along the way.
I think as much as anything, it's been the fact that they've had the high level of coaching and play that they've had which is, in the minds of many, elevated their profile this year in particular.
Q. What type of seed is Horizon League champion Wisconsin-Milwaukee looking at?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: It would depend on the other teams that are in the field. Certainly they've had a good year. They've had a good history. Whether they're a 12th seed, higher or lower, will depend on who else will ultimately make the field.
Q. How much fun is had by the committee over the course of the weekend? Can you offer any examples?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: I think there's a great deal because we're all doing something we love in terms of contributing something to intercollegiate athletics and contributing something to what is arguably the most popular sporting event in the world. As such, we take our job seriously, we dedicate a lot of time to it throughout the year, not only during the course of this weekend.
When it comes time to the work we will do over the course of this weekend, there will be constant reminders from the chair, from the NCAA staff, that part of doing our work is about looking at the fun that it is, that we need to have, as we go through some very, very tense discussions and debates. It's a situation where many of us will disagree with the opinions of others around the room. I think with regards to the times that we meet throughout the course of the year, we have tremendous respect and love for each other. Some of the most rewarding professional experiences and relationships that I've had have been as a result of the three and a half, now into my fourth year, on this committee. I enjoy seeing other members of the committee. I enjoy talking with former members of the committee in terms of guidance and advice along the way.
Just the fact that I had an opportunity to talk to my colleagues on an ongoing basis throughout the year, former colleagues that have served prior to, that makes it fun for me; the opportunity to continue to develop relationships.
For me, as much as anything, having some level of impact on college basketball, this tournament, is somewhat secondary to the relationships that I've been able to develop with such good people.
Q. How much is a team like Utah State, which has a lesser non-conference schedule, but was very competitive, would that be a team that would have to win its post-season conference to be considered for the tournament?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: They are a team with a profile that has to be under consideration. Just what they would need to do would be relative. We'll be looking at as many as 30 schools that have similarly put together pretty solid resumes, precisely what Utah State has done. They've had a good year. Let's see what they do in their conference tournament.
But it would be what they do in comparison to the other nominees when it comes time to make those selections.
Q. Does the committee generally embrace the changes that have been made in the RPI in the last year in terms of giving more weight to road victories?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: I think we are comfortable at this point in time that the modifications have done a lot of what we had hoped it would do. But I think alternately, as a college basketball community, we really do have to take a look at the topic of non-conference scheduling and what that does in terms of the overall good of the game.
I would hope that one of the unintended consequences of the RPI, as we've tweaked it by giving benefit to playing games away from home, we encourage teams to feel much more comfortable playing teams from other parts of the country and having a willingness to play some of those games away from home. I think that's good for college basketball, and I think it's good for the student-athletes, the young people who participate, to be able to experience new things, see different parts of the country as a part of their basketball and intercollegiate athletics experience.
Q. Last year Bucknell came away with one of the biggest upsets beating Kansas. Would that help out their seeding this season?
CRAIG LITTLEPAGE: What they did a year ago will not factor into how they are seeded, if selected, this year. If they by chance win their conference tournament, they will be seeded on the basis of how we feel as though they stack up against the other 65 teams that are in this year's field.
DAVID WORLOCK: I want to thank Craig for sitting in on this call today, and thanks as well to all of those who participated in this afternoon's call.
We'd like to remind you that Craig is available to the media for another teleconference Selection Sunday. You're also welcome to attend the Sunday night conference, which will be right here in the committee room in Indianapolis. There will be another call with Craig on Monday the 13th at 3 p.m. eastern. The pass code for Monday's call is 6841884.
We appreciate you joining us and look forward to visiting with you again Sunday night. Thank you.

End of FastScripts...

ASAP Sports, Inc. | T: 1.212 385 0297