BACATOLOGY: NCAA ANALYSIS 2/14 UPDATE 2/19 ON PAGE 17

[bac2therac]

I still think the issue isn't our schedule. It was losing to UMASS, DePaul and Lafayette.

UMASS game is perfect. A bus ride that is an away game against a better foe (normally) than NJIT.

Clemson, at Depaul, at UMASS, and at SHU along with 2 B1G games early. That is plenty

Not a fan of early B1G games, but I like 20 games and I like 2 games per week so that is only solution.

our non conference schedule is 301, that is pretty bad

296
304
306
310
342
354

yes losing to Lafayette is a killer because it makes our net average loss number shoot up to 110 and that is on the team sheet for the selection committee. Indiana has a 40, Iowa has a 35, North Carolin 43

 

[bac2therac]

Why does his updated bracketology on the website have us as last four in then?

no it doesnt

 

[bac2therac]

I still think the issue isn't our schedule. It was losing to UMASS, DePaul and Lafayette.

UMASS game is perfect. A bus ride that is an away game against a better foe (normally) than NJIT.

Clemson, at Depaul, at UMASS, and at SHU along with 2 B1G games early. That is plenty

Not a fan of early B1G games, but I like 20 games and I like 2 games per week so that is only solution.

i dont think you are realizing what other schools are scheduling. You have been conditioned by 25 years of ridiculously bad scheduling and having 18 RAC home games a year.

scheduling SHU a middle of the pack Big East schools and a traditional 2nd tier ACC school, a bottom feeder from the Big East and a 2nd tier A10 program and 6 sisters of the poor...lol

 

[Scangg]

What is Iowa's OOC SOS for example? They look like they played no one.

Average B1G OOC SOS ?

 

[RUChoppin]

Most important​

• Games by quadrant, listing results and upcoming games
• Records by quadrant, away and neutral

Not nothing, but not very important​

• NET and other computer rankings

Here's the thing, though... the "not very important" NET rankings are what determine the "most important" quadrant data.

If the NET rankings aren't accurate/important (Houston is 4th overall, with no wins over a Top 50 team and only one win over a Top 70 team that is sub-.500), then the quadrants really can't be too accurate/important either.

Houston is a signature win for SMU and Memphis, based on a NET ranking gained from beating mediocre/bad teams. Iowa is a signature win for every tourney-bound team that has played them.

Everything gets skewed when the model is funky.

 

[bac2therac]

Iowa is 274. They won their ACC challenge game on the road and won a neutral site game. 2Q1 non conference wins to RU's zero

 

[bac2therac]

Here's the thing, though... the "not very important" NET rankings are what determine the "most important" quadrant data.

If the NET rankings aren't accurate/important (Houston is 4th overall, with no wins over a Top 50 team and only one win over a Top 70 team that is sub-.500), then the quadrants really can't be too accurate/important either.

Houston is a signature win for SMU and Memphis, based on a NET ranking gained from beating mediocre/bad teams. Iowa is a signature win for every tourney-bound team that has played them.

Everything gets skewed when the model is funky.

yes but I think the committee looks deeper. Just because Fresno State is a Quad 1 win and Rutgers isnt, doesnt mean that RU isnt a better win.......

for my evaluation, I find the NCAA values RECORD VS TEAMS IN THE FIELD. RU has 7 wins right now. That is big time. Iowa has 1, UNC has 1.

The NET can come into play for seeding evaluation and thats where RU will get dinged. Do not expect RU to be seeded above 8/9 unless they really do something ridiculous and win the Big 10 tourney or win out

 

[DHajekRC84]

I couldn't watch more than 10 minutes of the game listening to Walton. Clownish.

Same here. He's a freakin moron.

 

[RUChoppin]

What is Iowa's OOC SOS for example? They look like they played no one.

Average B1G OOC SOS ?

Big Ten OOC SOS, per the warren nolan site:
24 - MSU
32 - Michigan
40 - OSU
48 - Wisconsin
81 - Illinois
141 - Minnesota
172 - Nebraska
217 - Maryland
219 - Purdue
229 - Penn State
247 - Northwestern
274 - Iowa
301 - Rutgers
318 - Indiana

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

i dont think you are realizing what other schools are scheduling. You have been conditioned by 25 years of ridiculously bad scheduling and having 18 RAC home games a year.

scheduling SHU a middle of the pack Big East schools and a traditional 2nd tier ACC school, a bottom feeder from the Big East and a 2nd tier A10 program and 6 sisters of the poor...lol

It was the worst possible scheduling we could have ended up with. True road games to bad but losable programs (DePaul and UMass). A bad ACC team at home (thank goodness we won that one). A slate of cupcakes that seriously couldn’t have had worse computer numbers if we tried (you listed them). Seton Hall was the headliner.

I don’t think there’s all that much risk in trying to schedule more mid majors that are projected to finish towards the top of their conferences. Why do we always have to schedule the worst ones? We beat SFA when they came to us - didn’t we? Sprinkle in a few of those along with a neutral tourney and we’re in much better shape.

 

[DHajekRC84]

The Athletic's latest Bracket Watch did a breakdown of NET vs seeding using the top 48 seeds from 2019 and 2021, removed a few crazy outliers and found that the NET more or less equals your seeding. Seed and NET fall within 5.4 spots of each other. Unless we get our NET up in a big way we could really be looking at the Play In game here.

or be one of those "outliers"?

 

[Scarlet Blind]

In 2020-21, all 37 at large teams had 0 Q4 losses.

In 2018-19(last full season), 3 teams had Q4 losses,

Auto qualifier 7 seed #27, Cincy(28-4) lost @ ECU(10-21) 71-73 #258
Q1 5-4 Q2 8-1 Q3 9-0 Q4 6-1, NET #25

At large 9 seed #35 Baylor(19-13) lost Home Tx. Southern(21-13) 69-72 #230,
Home SF Austin(14-16) 58-59 #309, Home Ok. St(12-20) 64-67 #79
Q1 4-9 Q2 8-1 Q3 2-1 Q4 5-2, NET #39

Play-in 11 seed #45 Arizona St(22-10) lost @ Vandy(9-23,0-18) 65-81 #155, Home Princeton(16-12) 66-67 #180, Home Utah(17-14) 86-96 #105, Home Washington St(11-21) 71-91 #206,
Q1- 3-3 Q2 8-3 Q3 5-2 Q4 6-2 NET #63

St John's #47 last play in 5-7, 5-3, 8-0, 4-0, NET #73

That was the 5 factors, capped wins/losses days.
3 Examples of the records and seeds.

 

[kcg88]

no it doesnt

It does. https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/s...ology-projecting-2022-march-madness-men-field

"UPDATED: 2/18/2022 AT 7:00 A.M. ET"

 

[bac2therac]

Big Ten OOC SOS, per the warren nolan site:
24 - MSU
32 - Michigan
40 - OSU
48 - Wisconsin
81 - Illinois
141 - Minnesota
172 - Nebraska
217 - Maryland
219 - Purdue
229 - Penn State
247 - Northwestern
274 - Iowa
301 - Rutgers
318 - Indiana

as a whole the Big 10 does not schedule strong enough and its reflected in our overall ratings. Look at the Big 12 they have found the formula to manipulate the NET....Big East as well

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

i dont think you are realizing what other schools are scheduling. You have been conditioned by 25 years of ridiculously bad scheduling and having 18 RAC home games a year.

scheduling SHU a middle of the pack Big East schools and a traditional 2nd tier ACC school, a bottom feeder from the Big East and a 2nd tier A10 program and 6 sisters of the poor...lol

i agree that 300s should be 1/2 our OOC. I also realize you don't know how bad a team will be when you schedule them.

Replace 3 of the 300s with a 220, 150 and a 80 and we might be closer to where you as a bactologist would feel better. I still want the 300s, just not 6 of them

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

What is Iowa's OOC SOS for example? They look like they played no one.

Average B1G OOC SOS ?

In fairness to BAC that could very well be the reason they are the 1 seed...............in the NIT

 

[bac2therac]

It does. https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/s...ology-projecting-2022-march-madness-men-field

"UPDATED: 2/18/2022 AT 7:00 A.M. ET"

it doesnt have us at last 4 in, it has us at last 4 byes which we are although I will agree it doesnt match up with his new seed list he put out...we are the 8thg school in the field and are a 10 and not the 6th school in

 

[bac2therac]

i agree that 300s should be 1/2 our OOC. I also realize you don't know how bad a team will be when you schedule them.

Replace 3 of the 300s with a 220, 150 and a 80 and we might be closer to where you as a bactologist would feel better. I still want the 300s, just not 6 of them

there are people in the AD whose job is to figure this out, other schools have them

 

[RUtrumpet92]

Iowa is 274. They won their ACC challenge game on the road and won a neutral site game. 2Q1 non conference wins to RU's zero

What is your definition of a Q1 non conference win when the NET ranking shows they are 0-6 in Q1 games?

Their non conference schedule schedule stinks too. The difference is we lost on last second shots 3x to mediocre or bad teams, and they beat their similar opponents soundly.

 

[RUChoppin]

as a whole the Big 10 does not schedule strong enough and its reflected in our overall ratings. Look at the Big 12 they have found the formula to manipulate the NET....Big East as well

Looks like the goal of those conferences is to stay in the 100-200 range, primarily.

Big 12:
68 - Kansas
98 - Baylor
128 - WVU
132 - Oklahoma St
143 - Texas Tech
144 - Oklahoma
146 - Kansas St
159 - Texas
234 - Iowa St
278 - TCU

Big East
7 - Villanova
31 - Marquette
58 - Seton Hall
109 - Xavier
119 - UConn
140 - Butler
157 - Georgetown
120 - Providence
224 - Creighton
255 - SJU
273 - DePaul

 

[Scangg]

Big Ten OOC SOS, per the warren nolan site:
24 - MSU
32 - Michigan
40 - OSU
48 - Wisconsin
81 - Illinois
141 - Minnesota
172 - Nebraska
217 - Maryland
219 - Purdue
229 - Penn State
247 - Northwestern
274 - Iowa
301 - Rutgers
318 - Indiana

The bottom 3 in OOC SOS are all projected in the tournament currently.

It just shows the B1G has so much strength with 20 games that all you really need to do is take care of business in conference and you'll get in

 

[bac2therac]

It was the worst possible scheduling we could have ended up with. True road games to bad but losable programs (DePaul and UMass). A bad ACC team at home (thank goodness we won that one). A slate of cupcakes that seriously couldn’t have had worse computer numbers if we tried (you listed them). Seton Hall was the headliner.

I don’t think there’s all that much risk in trying to schedule more mid majors that are projected to finish towards the top of their conferences. Why do we always have to schedule the worst ones? We beat SFA when they came to us - didn’t we? Sprinkle in a few of those along with a neutral tourney and we’re in much better shape.

nothing is accomplished by playing bottom feeders from the Big East and A10 on the road....they are for the most part Q3 games at home or on the road fortunate that De Paul is not totally terrible so it moves to Q2. I hate the Umass series, its pointless.

we dont have to schedule schools from the Northeast, I dont know why we do.

 

[fluoxetine]

If we replaced NJIT and Merrimack with tougher opponents and lose bc we were so bad early on.... our SOS is better, but we have 2 more losses... are our tournament hopes better at 14-11 in that scenario than they are now at 16-9?

That's the point FIG is making... overall yes we should be scheduling better OOC. I think mostly everyone agrees....

but this particular year we were sooooo terrible early we likely would have taken so many losses early the season might have been over before it began

Yes, it's hilarious how people keep assuming the games that we replace on the schedule are the losses.

I think the real question is always do we need to?
We aren't exactly hurting this year for Quad 1 games.
Personally as a fan I don't mind playing creampuffs

The bigger argument that can be made is the creampuffs hurting you in the 1st 2-3 games against real teams. Nothing to do with NCAA talk. The lob to Cliff that works against CCSU gets stolen vs Purdue.

there are people in the AD whose job is to figure this out, other schools have them

I mean, we got hit with a perfect storm of shit on the scheduling this year:

- All of our cupcake teams have been extra terrible. I don't really buy that most ADs have someone trying to figure out whether Lafayette will be #265 or #320 so they can schedule accordingly.
- We ended up with Depaul in the Gavitt and they are not good.
- We ended up with Clemson and they suck
- Even Seton Hall is a little worse than they have been recently
- The Big Ten is down a little compared to the last couple years

Still though, if you just win the ****ing games it doesn't matter.

 

[bac2therac]

Looks like the goal of those conferences is to stay in the 100-200 range, primarily.

Big 12:
68 - Kansas
98 - Baylor
128 - WVU
132 - Oklahoma St
143 - Texas Tech
144 - Oklahoma
146 - Kansas St
159 - Texas
234 - Iowa St
278 - TCU

Big East
7 - Villanova
31 - Marquette
58 - Seton Hall
109 - Xavier
119 - UConn
140 - Butler
157 - Georgetown
120 - Providence
224 - Creighton
255 - SJU
273 - DePaul

exactly because then their conference play makes the overall schedule go way up. Even RU's schedule is at 43 which is a huge move up from where it started when conference play began.

RU had alot coming back this year, it should have been tougher but again I dont like we are hamstrung by these challenge games either. Rather not have them.

 

[bac2therac]

a bit dated at 2012 but it still applies

Katz: The art of nonconference scheduling

Nonconference scheduling is in many ways an art. Coaches have different philosophies and different restrictions and it can be an often-frustrating game.

www.espn.com

another good one here

The art of scheduling: Building the perfect college basketball slate is an imperfect science

To build the perfect schedule, one must be fast. Take this story as caution from the basketball offices at Oklahoma State’s Gallagher-Iba Arena.

tulsaworld.com

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

there are people in the AD whose job is to figure this out, other schools have them

not sure how much input Pike has. I'd think a lot. I think there is an emphasis on getting home games for $ purposes and probably trying to minimize the $ we pay schools to play us.

 

[RU23]

Piss poor analysis/comparison from Wachtel. Bac and others picked some of it apart in the comments.

Bottom line is he’s placing way too much emphasis on the flawed NET rather than the other objective metrics he listed.

We are not in the play-in game right now, or if we lose to Purdue. That ship has sailed Brad, for now. If we lose to Mich and Wisconsin as well? Sure, then we’d get super bubbly.

 

[Scarlet Blind]

Last year, it wasn't a problem, only had 4 OOC(16.7%), FDU, Sacred Heart from NEC, Hofstra from Colonial, and Syracuse ACC/B1G, 20 B1G. NET #38

19-20, we finished 20-11(1 Non D1), NET #30
Q1 4-9 Q2 5-1 Q3 3-1 Q4 7-0
310 NJIT, 309 Niagara, 242 Bryant, 237 Drexel, 223 Lafayette, 132 UMass, N 122, St Bonaventure, 77 SF Austin, *109 @Pitt*, 15 Seton Hall, No Gavitt.
Rutgers struggled out of the gate against Bryant and Drexel, lost to SBA that year first 4 games til SF Austin, NJIT and UMass.

 

[bac2therac]

View embedded media

Piss poor analysis/comparison from Wachtel. Bac and others picked some of it apart in the comments.

Bottom line is he’s placing way too much emphasis on the flawed NET rather than the other objective metrics he listed.

We are not in the play-in game right now, or if we lose to Purdue. That ship has sailed Brad, for now. If we lose to Mich and Wisconsin as well? Sure, then we’d get super bubbly.

he is a numbers guy. Bracketville Dave who has won the Matrix two of the last 5 year has RU as a 9 seed. ASU didnt have those wins and I dont know how Brad can actually compare that resume with 2 Q4 losses to RU plus how horrific the Pac 12 was that year.

He is playing catch up and I hope he isnt asked to be on RU podcasts because its going to create a lot of negativity and fear that really shouldnt happen yet. Ride the wave right now which has us above the last 4 in....if RU loses the next two..then yes RU drops back to last 4 in and thats when the NET comes into play

These guys get too comfortable with their starting positions and then do not adjust enough. He literally is behind the curve on Iowa and Indiana right now. Iowas resume is plummetting by the minute

 

[bac2therac]

 

[kcg88]

These guys get too comfortable with their starting positions and then do not adjust enough. He literally is behind the curve on Iowa and Indiana right now. Iowas resume is plummetting by the minute

Bingo. Lunardi has moved us up without us even playing because he's finally actually looking at our resume and giving it critical thought vs. other resumes. The only teams that have lost are Oregon and UNC and we've moved up more than two spots.

 

[kcg88]

View embedded media

Has anyone actually looked at the top 16 reveal vs the final bracket and shown that it reveals any sort of thinking by the committee? My default assumption is it's done for TV and has little to no bearing on what ends up happening. The football committee goes through this every year.

 

[Zak57]

View embedded media

Piss poor analysis/comparison from Wachtel. Bac and others picked some of it apart in the comments.

Bottom line is he’s placing way too much emphasis on the flawed NET rather than the other objective metrics he listed.

We are not in the play-in game right now, or if we lose to Purdue. That ship has sailed Brad, for now. If we lose to Mich and Wisconsin as well? Sure, then we’d get super bubbly.

Hey Brad we have double the amount of Q1 wins and 1 less Q4 loss than that resume. Not even close.

 

[BillyC80]

If we replaced NJIT and Merrimack with tougher opponents and lose bc we were so bad early on.... our SOS is better, but we have 2 more losses... are our tournament hopes better at 14-11 in that scenario than they are now at 16-9?

That's the point FIG is making... overall yes we should be scheduling better OOC. I think mostly everyone agrees....

but this particular year we were sooooo terrible early we likely would have taken so many losses early the season might have been over before it began

I generally agree with this except I do believe we were stifled and unready to play against a zone defense back in November. If we played better teams in OOC that were primarily man D, I think we’d have at least the same record as we do now, but against better competition.

 

[kcg88]

I generally agree with this except I do believe we were stifled and unready to play against a zone defense back in November. If we played better teams in OOC that were primarily man D, I think we’d have at least the same record as we do now, but against better competition.

I also think some of it was flat out disinterest in playing those teams. I know we've had the "effort" discussion a million times but still.

 

[bac2therac]

Has anyone actually looked at the top 16 reveal vs the final bracket and shown that it reveals any sort of thinking by the committee? My default assumption is it's done for TV and has little to no bearing on what ends up happening. The football committee goes through this every year.

I think its a good insight to how conferences are being evaluated at the moment. Like to see the thinking on Big 10 and how Duke is thought of. In general I think the Big 10 has been undervalued seeding wise the past few years.

 

[bac2therac]

Bingo. Lunardi has moved us up without us even playing because he's finally actually looking at our resume and giving it critical thought vs. other resumes. The only teams that have lost are Oregon and UNC and we've moved up more than two spots.

Indiana and Michigan have better resumes than Iowa right now, its not even close. Yet Iowa has the net ranking that some fall in love with.

 

[kcg88]

Indiana and Michigan have better resumes than Iowa right now, its not even close. Yet Iowa has the net ranking that some fall in love with.

Iowa right now is the biggest Virginia fan out there.

 

[kcg88]

DeCourcey (I know, I know) has us inside, above the Last Four In

 

[BillyC80]

Pretty confident that if the season ended today we’d be in the tournament field. The issue is that we have 4 Quad 1 games left to play, with 3 of them on the road.

We’re a much better team now, and as such we should win at least 2 of our last 5 games, which likely keeps us in the tournament. Then a win in the first round of the B1GT will cement it.