BACATOLOGY: 2/20 NCAA TOURNAMENT ANALYSIS...UPDATE RUTGERS NOW A 9 SEED AS OF 2/24
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
Id like more. Yet don't rule out getting in at 18-14. That would be on the table. Have to see where everyone else stands
Boise losing might drop them to the Last 4 In area but they've got two Q1 games left, including one against Utah State. So if they lose that second one it's possible they drop out but are simply replaced by Utah State, so a spot isn't gained for the bubble.
Purdue stinks, luckily we also beat Indiana.
Boise State loses at San Jose State. Q2 loss for the Broncos. Their final two are vs. San Diego State and at Utah State. Probably safe with a split of those Q1 games.
Lunardi had Dayton in his longshot range. They lost at home to George Mason so see ya to them.
Lunardi had Dayton in his longshot range. They lost at home to George Mason so see ya to them.
Good, Boise lost Let's push these MW schools to Dayton where they probably belong
Always hard to judge how the committee judges Mountain West vs bloated power 6 schools.
Im tending to think 3..question is who are the 3
Im tending to think 3..question is who are the 3
A “down ACC” put three teams in the elite eight last year and two in the final four.
The league was mediocre in regular season
The Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference also put a team in the elite eight.
Your conference is in very bad shape overall you must admit. Rutgers fans are honest about ourselves (mostly) you should try to be honest about your conference.
Another poster made an interesting point about the additions of RU and Maryland to the B1G cutting off the fertile DC to NYC recruiting grounds that the ACC lived off for many years. I’m sure Duke, UNC, UVA will still get their share but the rest of you have your work cut out.
Congrats on Pitt being good this year though, can’t take that away from you.
There are ebbs and flows to this stuff, just because the ACC is awful this year doesn’t mean it will be long term.
Or better than we thought and very competitive. Metrics not the be all and end all.
I measure conference strength looking at the conference as a whole. If you have 3 teams in the elite 8 and the rest of the conference is really down, do you think that means the conference was strong that year? Or there were there really just a few really good teams in an otherwise pretty mediocre conference?
The big ten has 1 champion in 30 years. It’s crazy that they think they can talk shit to the ACC.
If you measure best conference on who wins the national championship, sure. That would be a really strange way to measure conferences with 12 or so teams though
The 3.5 bet is a bit disingenuous of a bet.
.5 is silly. It’s teams not games. Boise loss hurt them but if New Mexico wins…Utah State and Nevada darn good NETS if committee honest.
It really doesn't matter at all if you're discussing best conference. You can have one excellent team in a conference and win it all. That doesn't make any other team in the conference better
Patriots won a ton of super bowls with the bills jets and dolphins all not great. No one said that meant the AFC East was the best division in football
If Gonzaga wins it all, does that make the MWC the best conference?
Huh? Under 3.5 simply means “less than 4”. If someone says “book it that there will be 4”, I’m simply saying I’d gladly take action that it will be less than that (though New Mexico isn’t hurting their cause at the moment).
Yea but we all know the rest of the ACC is not the rest of the afc East. The conference as a whole routinely plays well in the ncaa tournament to go along with their championships. They were criminally under seeded last year and made the the committee look dumb.
It sounds like you only want to count the best teams in the conference to determine how good a conference is
My opinion is you evaluate the conference as a whole top to bottom
If that's how you want to look at it, that's your opinion. I think that's a flawed way to look at it though. If the bottom half of the conference is bad, that should matter when discussing best conference IMO
Did St Peters also make the committee look “dumb” for under seeding them?
Nothing tilts me more than results based thinking.
You can't have half a team, but you can have.. half.. a game (?)
I'll undercut you.. I'll take the action at under 3.01!
So when almost the entire conference outperforms their seed that means nothing to you? Adorable
If there was some type of legitimate sample size, we might be able to draw some actual conclusions.
Good God, reminds me that I just got into it with someone on our board yesterday that was poo-pooing the win at OSU the other night as “beating the worst team in the conference “…I was laughed at when I said that OSU would be favored by double digits against Minnesota on a neutral tomorrow because OSU is “awful” and since they already lost at home to Minnesota, everyone knows that Minnesota is the better team and OSU has quit.
Last edited:
