Selection Committee Academic Affiliation Breakdown

WC Buckeye's picture
October 14, 2013 at 5:36 pm

With the announcement of Jeff Long's appointment as the chair of the tournament selection committee, seeing that he was from an SEC school automatically made me fear for the worst - that yet again we were going to have an SEC "homer" potentially weighing in on important (i.e. tOSU-impacting) decisions. So I decided to do a little investigative research on the academic backgrounds of those on - or likely to be on - the selection committee, and while having an SEC guy chairing could become worrisome if there is an SEC/other conference decision hanging in the balance, overall the spread of degrees/employers actually favor the B1G and PAC12 slightly. Check this out:

# of Relationships/Conference By Type/Conference
Affiliation B1G PAC12 ACC SEC Big 12 WAC NCAC Mtn W WCC NE10 GPAC Mid-Cont
Undergrad 2 2   2 1 1 1 1   1 1 1
JD/PhD 2       1 1     1      
Employer 1 1 1 1 1     1        
Masters 1 1 3       1          
TOTAL 6 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1

The spread across universities is pretty good, but Nebraska is marginally over-represented with 3 affiliations (Tom Osborne with 2 and Barry Alvarez with 1), as are Oregon (Tom Jernstedt 2), USC (Pat Haden, 2) and WVU (Oliver Luck). What's striking is how many small-conference schools are represented by affiliation (WAC, NCAC, WCC, NE10, GPAC and Mid-Continent conferences with 8 total).

The 3 ACC school affiliations? 2 Masters degrees from The U (Dan Radakovich and Jeff Long) and 1 from Notre Dame (Condoleeza Rice).

Not one affiliation with our beloved university. I don't like it, but that's the way it breaks down. I should also mention that these are current alignments - Nebraska is the obvious anomaly here, as Osborne and Alvarez probably don't identify with NU/B1G alignments, although there are others who've switched (Missouri, Notre Dame), as well.

Edit: I should also point out that previous employer affiliations (Tranghese, Osborne, Willingham) are not included in this analysis, only educational or current employers. That would make the picture a lot cloudier...

View 19 Comments