Mid 30s is fair. The 15-20 ranking was always ridiculous. They just loved our 40 point wins over scared heart and central Connecticut thought.
BACATOLOGY: 2/20 NCAA TOURNAMENT ANALYSIS...UPDATE RUTGERS NOW A 9 SEED AS OF 2/24
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
So you think
(a) mid 30s is fair now, post a 1-4 stretch of absolute garbage
(b) the higher, pre-garbage ratings were "always ridiculous"?
OK, new question:
What would a proper ranking for us have been post the MSG game?
If your answer is somewhere close to the mid 30s, why haven't you updated your ranking at all for the 5 game stretch of garbage?
If your answer is somewhere much above that.. well you think that's ridiculous so it must not be.
We should have been punished not rewarded for going 1-3 in OOC play against teams that weren’t cupcakes. I feel like I can’t be more clear about this. Also I only feel we were absolute garbage vs Nebraska and Michigan. Indiana was a 3 point game with 2 minutes left and Illinois is a game we just aren’t good enough to win. We should have been around 45 starting conference play and around 25-30 after the msu win at msg.
Because 2 of those losses were against teams better than us on the road and neither were blowouts
Wisconsin win here would all but close door on Michigan hopes (they play at Indiana & at Illinois after). Would be great for Rutgers to get the last laugh by making the tournament & Michigan not.
(Of course RU needs to take care of their own business, starting with tonight)
(Of course RU needs to take care of their own business, starting with tonight)
The ACC beat the Big Ten in the challenge this year. This hasn’t been the best year for the ACC, but claiming that the Big Ten is superior is ridiculous. Even Purdue is overrated. Their guards are average at best. Indiana is probably the best team in the league. The rest of the league is decent, but claiming that a Rutgers or Iowa is much better than North Carolina or Clemson is ridiculous. And the fact of the ACC was dominant in last year’s tournament supports the fact that they should be given a little more respect.
The B1G is far superior to the ACC, mainly because you have so many dregs and we have... Minnesota.
The upper halves of the conferences are more evenly matched, agreed there (still an edge to the B1G though)
Congrats on a decent season by the way.
The acc has at least 6 piss poor dregs
Louisville. GT. ND and BC are bad. If Purdue is overrated so is Virginia.
New Mexico lost a heartbreaker to San Diego State at home. Some great wins ooc and on road but at the end of the day they are sub 500 at 7-9 in the Mountain West
I want Whisky to win and help solidify a Q1 win on them on the road. I hate Michigan but they are a very talented team.
If we are comparing overrated Top teams in conferences than Purdue and Virginia would be at the top of lists.
I do think Purdue would wipe the floor with Virginia in that scenario of a game
If we are comparing overrated Top teams in conferences than Purdue and Virginia would be at the top of lists.
I do think Purdue would wipe the floor with Virginia in that scenario of a game
It’s not just one team tho. It’s unc. Duke. Virginia.
Big 10 gets 8-10 teams in every year and suffers some of the worst upsets and barely puts any teams far into tourney.
That's 3 teams out 15. They have more bad teams than the B1G by far. Why do so many people just discount the bad teams in a conference and only discuss the top when this topic comes up?
Yes this year they are down but how can you justify the b10 being so great when last year Purdue, Iowa, Wisconsin all lost to double digit seeds. The year before Illinois (1 seed), Michigan (1 seed), Iowa (2 seed), osu (2 seed), Purdue ( 4 seed) all lost to low seeds in big upsets. The b10 beats up on each other but clearly is outmatched every tournament against other conferences
The b12, acc, big East, sec have all won multiple titles in last 20 years. B10 hasn’t won one in over 20 years and only 2 in last 35 years.
Because conference strength isn't defined by tournament success? There's an entirely separate conversation to be had about tournament performance across the subset of teams that make the dance.
Yeah but how strong are the teams really in the conference if they’re all losing to mid majors and other major schools that barely qualified. Maybe their resumes were inflated from beating up on other perceived good b10 teams.
Wisconsin isnt necessarily out with the loss but I am getting more confident thar Michigan will stay in although that can change with a Penn State win
Full scrub tomorrow
Full scrub tomorrow
Last year, the Metro Atlantic went 3-1 in the tournament, with three wins against higher seeds.... does that make them a stronger conference than the Mountain West, who went 0-4? Or did their 1 team just perform better than the MWC's 4 teams in that particular month of the year?
Tournament performance is tournament performance - it doesn't really say much about the strength of the conference as a whole, because a lot of conference teams don't make the tournament in the first place.
There was an article published before March Madness in 2019 that showed how well each conference fared in the tournament since 1985.
Adding in the last three tournaments, the top ranked current conferences are:
ACC: 66.10% (351-180)
BE: 60.94% (298-191)
SEC: 60.00% (255-170)
B1G: 59.81% (308-207)
B12: 58.77% (191-134)
AAC: 57.89% (22-16)
P10/P12: 56.80% (188-143)
Of course, these records include games Maryland won for the ACC, that Pitt won for the Big East, that Missouri won for the B12, etc. I'll try to go back at some point to look at a more recent cut of data that is mostly based on the current alignment of teams.
Conference wars are stupid. What makes a good conference? There’s no objective right answer. I generally agree with the Scangg approach of looking at the whole thing top to bottom. But if someone only wants to look at the top half, or if you want to give bonus points for having truly elite teams, or whatever, who am I to say that’s wrong?
The Big Ten seems to be doing quite well where it matters (TV $)
The Big Ten seems to be doing quite well where it matters (TV $)
Rutgers can go a looooooooooong way to inching closer to a NCAA bid with a win today
I’ll say it again
A win today is great because it’s a quad one win , but the real must game is Minnesota …a loss there , even with a win today …wrecks our net ranking by 10 spots plus …..
Rutgers is my third 9 seed coming into tonights game, Penn State is my 2nd team out
Rutgers will likely remain on the 9 line after tonight, could maybe make the last 8 seed, we will see when everything is scrubbed and but I am tending to lean toward 9 now, probably the next up team ready to be declared a lock.
Penn State remains out of the field, where that falls on the pecking order still to be determined.
Update coming late tomorrow afternoon or early evening
Penn State remains out of the field, where that falls on the pecking order still to be determined.
Update coming late tomorrow afternoon or early evening
I dont think we are a lock but I think we have over a 60% chance of making it even with a Minnesota loss. Lets just win it and not worry about it and secure a spot no worse than 10th seed
likely 9 but have to see when everything is scrubbed, wouldnt rule out last 8.
As I said before the game
Minnesota is the game we cannot afford to lose …
So let’s go up there and get this done
Minnesota is the game we cannot afford to lose …
So let’s go up there and get this done
Let's just go in and beat Minnesota... no fooling around... games in Minneapolis have been barnburners
Finishing 5-5 on the road in the B1G is something I don't think anyone predicted
Finishing 5-5 on the road in the B1G is something I don't think anyone predicted
With regard to the B1G Tournament, I believe this win precludes any chance of us having to play on the first night.
We are in now dufus. You have no idea what you are talking about
Correct. Head to head tiebreakers over Penn State and Wisconsin in the very unfortunate possibility that we are all tied at 10-10.
