BACATOLOGY: NCAA ANALYSIS 3/7......NEW UPDATE 3/12 1PM PAGE 37
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
if the committee does what it is suppose to do.....
one thing some of these guys pushing metrics on twitter and tv and blogs are putting too much emphasis on the those computer rankings which appear on the team sheet.,..they simply appear on the team sheet, there is no instruction to do value or not value any of that, they are simply numbers. If the committee looks at actually results....
alabama, st marys, usc, lsu, houston, colorado state, boise state, uconn
those look like our 8 possibilities if we are 11
if we are 12
texas, uconn, st marys, colorado state, alabama, providence (not likely)
fully agree, never seen something like this
I will chalk it up to a really bad net system
no but they may have stolen Notre Dames bid
How much will committee look at the circumstances of a lot of Rutgers Q1 wins I.e Purdue, Iowa, Ohio St, Wisconsin where the numbers would indicate a loss was just as likely (or more likely) as a win especially a few of those.
I imagine it’s all accounted for in the underlying metrics but do you think Rutgers gets “dinged twice” for it?
I’ll take anybody to play at this point. I also think Rutgers is going to come out with a chip on their shoulder after yesterday.
this is true, people get too caught up in recency...remember its body of work. Two wins including a biggee but their resume overall was weak coming into the week, a few notches below RU. They are still just 8-11 vs Q1/2. RU has better wins. Indiana is only 5-8 vs field while RU is 8-6
The 8-6 wins against the field really does trounce other teams and is a mark no team left out has ever been close to reaching. Teams left out generally are ones that fail to beat enough teams, not ones with strong records against good teams
agree, its an ok resume but only 3 wins vs schools in the field...if you include Va Tech...just 6-8 in Q1/2. If they didnt beat Duke they would be out.
I was told he was tested Bethany
Like I joked yesterday ,even if we beat Iowa the "experts" would next be saying we need to win it all to get in--- it's all bullcrap
No way, people think that teams who win close games "just know how to win" or whatever.
Also we lost close games too, we have a midtier luck rating in Kenpom. Like if you are dinging us for Purdue and Iowa then you have to give us back Lafayette and UMass.
Also, Wisconsin doesn't belong on that list, we were up 10 with 30 seconds left.
2019
St Johns and Arizona State got in....SJU had net around 70, asu in the 60s...they were pitted against each other in the first four
ASU was 22-10 with 2 Q4 losses to Princeton and Washington St, and 2 Q3 losses to Utah and Vandy. Their sos was 57/30 so they were not working with the bad ooc mark that RU has.
3-3 in Q1 and 9-2 in Q2 that was a good 12-5 vs both but yet only 5-3 vs the field
SJU had 2 Q3 losses and was 21-12, 5-7 vs Q1. 5-3 vs Q2, 10-10 vs both sos of 74/207. Only 5-4 vs field
neither had as big wins as RU
St Johns and Arizona State got in....SJU had net around 70, asu in the 60s...they were pitted against each other in the first four
ASU was 22-10 with 2 Q4 losses to Princeton and Washington St, and 2 Q3 losses to Utah and Vandy. Their sos was 57/30 so they were not working with the bad ooc mark that RU has.
3-3 in Q1 and 9-2 in Q2 that was a good 12-5 vs both but yet only 5-3 vs the field
SJU had 2 Q3 losses and was 21-12, 5-7 vs Q1. 5-3 vs Q2, 10-10 vs both sos of 74/207. Only 5-4 vs field
neither had as big wins as RU
Davidson's resume looks pretty weak. This is going to be close. That conference isnt rated as high this year. They only have a win over Alabama
It’s so weird to watch people put forward what basically amounts to seeding conspiracy theories year after year.
As if people are like studying the bracket for “intriguing matchups” before deciding whether to watch the NCAA tournament anyway.. any basketball fan or even casual sports fan is going to watch and anyone who doesn’t like sports isn’t.
We are going to wind up in Dayton . They need to validate the stupid NET rating .
Totally agree but would the Q4 losses if turned into close wins still show a staggering worse performance (underlying metrics) than if the close wins against Q1 turned into close losses? Trying to understand how the committee and underlying numbers interpret Rutgers performance without the mirage of a win/loss result.
I think when you talk about the last four in be the last teams to avoid Dayton, you obviously want to avoid Dayton but you’re in the tournament so you forget about it by Monday.
No one going to Dayton is going to get screwed, you can make a good case why most of these teams should avoid it but it’s not like any of these teams have a 8 seed resume
Further there’s a reason why a Dayton team tends to advance to the second weekend. You have a chance to build momentum
I don't think it's the best case; we have some chance at getting a bye. But if you offered me a 100% chance at Dayton I would take it with no hesitation.
I believe the committee will not put us in the first round because of the net . They need to validate it . So we are going to Dayton for the first four.
I too would sign right now for Dayton
Yeah until the 1pm games tip off and I'll be back to feeling nauseous
It would be glorious if a 2nd place ND at 15-5 in their league is left out largely because of how weak the ACC is despite all their previous raiding of the Big East.
in 105 of 142 brackets on the matrix.. RU is the top 12 seed right now
only 5 on the Matrix have Texas A&M in
only 10 have BYU in
Jerry Palm has both in
only 10 have BYU in
Jerry Palm has both in
Ever been on a bs committee , like parish council etc ? That’s what these things do . They validate nonsense
predictive metrics should play no part in tryng to sort and determine the ncaa tournament.
In reality though, the metrics are only listed, there is no specific instruction to even consider them when evaluating schools
Similar threads
