Big Bubble Night Discussion

[DaveHuskiesFan]

I'm defending not adding games right now. You're the one who isn't making the distinction between the B1G's earlier OOC games and the ones being added now. Big difference.

UConn should have a game against NC State and Nova on the board. If those 2 happened, this wouldn't even be worth discussing.

And BYU

 

[businesslawyer]

Last night John Fanta opined that we wouldn't be higher than an 8 even if we we won the BE tournament. I think that's crazy, but that is even coming from a knowledgeable UConn advocate. I heard that elsewhere channel flipping, so I wouldn't be so fast to say that just reaching the final 'definitely' makes us a better seed than 8. Keep in mind my own opinion is that we should be a 6 winning this week and being a finalist, and maybe even a 5 if we win and other 5's and 6's struggle.

I think you are closer to the truth than the experts that you are worried about. But we will have to see. At the end of the day, all anyone can do is predict how other human beings will process the available information.

 

[Hi-Low]

Updated Lunardi bracket this am.....UConn still in same spot & Xavier / S Hall remain in his field.

If you look at his last 8 teams "out" there really isn't much going on except teams that have been doing a lot of losing with not many games left besides conference tourney's to win quality games.

Zach Edey returning to Purdue shakes up Bracketology in a big way

Kansas remains the clear preseason No. 1, but the Boilermakers have slipped in behind the Jayhawks as a probable repeat 1-seed with revenge on their minds.

www.espn.com

 

[businesslawyer]

A perfect night would be Clemson, Tulane, UConn, UNM, NW, and USC. i waffle a bit on Wichita for AG, but not much.

Honestly, if UConn wins I’m not sure what anyone else does matters.

 

[auror]

Great point. The Selection Committee only cares about numbers, the fact that UConn only has 1 win over a Tournament team won't hurt our seedings at all.

BTW, if UConn loses to Seton Hall, you will have been proven catastrophically wrong about UConn's NCAA strategy. I can't remember the last time a poster's credibility was as all in on one game as yours is.

Lol. Find me a post I made about scheduling/adding games that would have stakes this large.

This is the only one I can find:

Most of the metrics are per possession (all the predictive advanced stats) or per game schedule-based (all the strength of record stats and WAB). The NET is a combo of the two so doesn't factor raw games in at all. As mentioned, Colgate has only played 12 games total and is inexplicably in the top 13 of NET.

The obsession with quadrants is the one area that playing more games may help, assuming you're playing good teams and winning. But we don't know for sure that the committee actually obsesses over the quadrants like all the horse race bracketologists and "experts" do.

Which is just laying out facts, uncertainty, and agreeing with you? There are no declarative statements here at all. Am I on the hook for seppuku if lose tonight? You may have me confused with someone else.

 

[Waquoit]

Honestly, if UConn wins I’m not sure what anyone else does matters.

Thank you

 

[6xChamps]

Boise State, Xavier, Duke, and Indiana all lose pushing UConn further into the bracket.

Tomorrow is UConn gameday so that takes priority but things to keep an eye on before and after the game:

Syracuse (NET 55) v. Clemson at 5 on ACCN

• A must win for a Cuse squad that is 0-6 in Q1 games. I hope they lose by 1,000. This is a Q2 game but would be a good scalp for them to get and maybe give them a shot of making it in without necessarily winning the ACC Tourney (but still at minimum need a deep run)

Wichita State (NET 66) v. Tulane at 6 on ESPN+ (LOL)

• A no win game for the Shockers. Nothing like a nice Q3 game on the road in conference when you need to keep your head above water on the bubble. A loss ends the Shockers season.

Your University of Connecticut Huskies (NET 34) v. Seton Hall (NET 52) at 6:30 on FS1

• A win for UConn likely cements a tourney bid for the first time since 2016. A loss is not ideal but should be OK (really hoping for revenge here). Seton Hall needs this game badly. They sit in the Last Four In of most brackets. A loss at home doesn't sink them but would require them to beat SJU over the weekend and probably win at least 2 in the Big East tourney and even then it's no guarantee.

Colorado State (NET 39) v. New Mexico at 8 on MW Network???

• Judging by the fact I'm not even sure how to watch this game, it's a no win game for CSU. A win does nothing, a loss puts them in dangerous territory.

Maryland (NET 28) v. Northwestern at 9 on BTN

• Terrapins are off the bubble, but losing this game is a good way to get back on it

Stanford (NET 61) v. USC at 10:30 on FS1

• UConn's best win of the season takes on a Cardinal team on the outside looking in. Stanford needs this win or else a PAC 12 Tourney Title to go dancing.

Thanks for the breakdown @Storrs South. I'll also be keeping my eye on the Big East games tonight obviously, including St Johns v Providence. It'll be tough for both those teams to get above the 75 NET Line but we want at least one of them to be there at the end of the day. Additionally, I think there's a very outside chance that the winner of that game could make a bubble push with a BET run.

Also, I'll be checking in on Mizzou v Florida and Oregon v UCLA. If things continue to break our way I could see us competing with those guys for seeding come selection Sunday.

And lastly, I think Minnesota is already dead but a loss to State Penn tonight would be the final blow.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Lol. Find me a post I made about scheduling/adding games that would have stakes this large.

This is the only one I can find:

Which is just laying out facts, uncertainty, and agreeing with you? There are no declarative statements here at all. Am I on the hook for seppuku if lose tonight?

I am saying we should have played more mid-majors in January and February. You are saying we shouldn't. So yes, you should probably start working on one of those Samurai death poems, just in case.

 

[auror]

I am saying we should have played more mid-majors in January and February. You are saying we shouldn't. So yes, you should probably start working on one of those Samurai death poems, just in case.

Great point. The Selection Committee only cares about numbers, the fact that UConn only has 1 win over a Tournament team won't hurt our seedings at all.

BTW, if UConn loses to Seton Hall, you will have been proven catastrophically wrong about UConn's NCAA strategy. I can't remember the last time a poster's credibility was as all in on one game as yours is.

?? What do mid majors (your examples were Fairfield and Hartford I think) have to do with beating tournament teams to increase our seed? You don't make any sense at all dude. I didn't even say I was opposed to playing them. Just made a semi-joke that we may not have beaten them with Bouk and Jackson out.

You got caught thinking I had been more strong on this than I was, and now you're trying to put two different arguments together to make me look bad. Well, I kinda think it's having the opposite effect.

 

[Hi-Low]

?? What do mid majors (your examples were Fairfield and Hartford I think) have to do with beating tournament teams to increase our seed? You don't make any sense at all dude.

You got caught thinking I had been more strong on this than I was, and now you're trying to put two different arguments together to make me look bad.

Yes....we are 7-0 in Q3 & Q4 so we really didn't need to improve on that anymore by playing Fairfield or Marist.

If a Q1 or Q2 mid-major (wouldn't be many playing at Storrs) wanted to come here in Jan / Feb then we should have said yes if it was workable but I don't think that happened. We did try try to get Nova on Feb 25 and they declined I believe.

 

[Get a Job]

I am saying we should have played more mid-majors in January and February. You are saying we shouldn't. So yes, you should probably start working on one of those Samurai death poems, just in case.

This post is the first time I ever understood you to be making this statement. If you were saying it before, you either communicated poorly, or I read poorly. It seems that the others in this conversation are in the same boat as me, so I tend to think @auror is on the right track: You have finally realized your argument is indefensible, and you're scrambling.

 

[pepband99]

This post is the first time I ever understood you to be making this statement. If you were saying it before, you either communicated poorly, or I read poorly. It seems that the others in this conversation are in the same boat as me, so I tend to think @auror is on the right track: You have finally realized your argument is indefensible, and you're scrambling.

...because that's not really what he said. He said "local" - which really means a Q3/Q4 game OOC game. Which won't help our bid chance / SOS / team at all.

He's backtracking because his questionable position becomes even worse with mounting data.

 

[Hi-Low]

The #1 Bracketologist over the past 5 years has Uconn as a 10 seed and team #38 overall...just updated today.

Interesting note: has St. John's & Providence at the very edge of his "teams out" bubble at #79 & #80.

Dave’s Bracket

This is where you will find my bracket projections for the 2025 NCAA Tournament. At the time of publication, the bracket reflects an overview of where the NCAA landscape currently stands. Bra…

bracketville.wordpress.com

Seed List

Below are two tables that display the current Seed List (at the time of publication) – a tool used for my bracket projects and by the actual Selection Committee to seed teams into the bracket…

bracketville.wordpress.com

 

[Get a Job]

After the 'Nova game, I thought for sure that, if we could win out and win the BET, we'd easily get a 7-seed or better. Heck, I thought a 3-seed was possible in that scenario. However, between then and now, we have won all our games and seen teams ahead of us lose, but many bracketologists think we still need to jump 10+ teams to reach the 7-seed level. I still think 5 more wins, including @Seton Hall and neutral Villanova and Creighton victories, will get us there, but I am much less certain than I was a couple weeks ago.

 

[Jbirdp5]

The #1 Bracketologist over the past 5 years has Uconn as a 10 seed and team #38 overall...just updated today.

Interesting note: has St. John's & Providence at the very edge of his "teams out" bubble at #79 & #80.

Dave’s Bracket

This is where you will find my bracket projections for the 2025 NCAA Tournament. At the time of publication, the bracket reflects an overview of where the NCAA landscape currently stands. Bra…

bracketville.wordpress.com

Seed List

Below are two tables that display the current Seed List (at the time of publication) – a tool used for my bracket projects and by the actual Selection Committee to seed teams into the bracket…

bracketville.wordpress.com

Judging off of his list, I would think that by beating seton hall and then beating creighton getting to the 7 line is certainly feasible and a 6 not out of the question.

 

[auror]

After the 'Nova game, I thought for sure that, if we could win out and win the BET, we'd easily get a 7-seed or better. Heck, I thought a 3-seed was possible in that scenario. However, between then and now, we have won all our games and seen teams ahead of us lose, but many bracketologists think we still need to jump 10+ teams to reach the 7-seed level. I still think 5 more wins, including @Seton Hall and neutral Villanova and Creighton victories, will get us there, but I am much less certain than I was a couple weeks ago.

If we won out and beat both Creighton and Nova, we'd get between a 4 and 6. Pretty confident on that.

The reason we haven't been jumping is lack of Q1 wins. We'd get 3 in that stretch. Our profile would have very few holes and our profile with just Bouk would be even stronger.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

This post is the first time I ever understood you to be making this statement. If you were saying it before, you either communicated poorly, or I read poorly. It seems that the others in this conversation are in the same boat as me, so I tend to think @auror is on the right track: You have finally realized your argument is indefensible, and you're scrambling.

If a bunch of teams only play 3 non-conference games next season, I will admit I was wrong, apologize to the whole board and never post here again. Will you do the same if the P6 conferences play their normal 9+ game non-conference schedule?

 

[pepband99]

If a bunch of teams only play 3 non-conference games next season, I will admit I was wrong, apologize to the whole board and never post here again. Will you do the same if the P6 conferences play their normal 9+ game non-conference schedule?

Keep digging.

What orifice did you pull this logic out of? We're talking about adding (or subtracting) games voluntarily. Do try to keep up...

 

[JustbrewitMan]

 

[navery12]

If a bunch of teams only play 3 non-conference games next season, I will admit I was wrong, apologize to the whole board and never post here again. Will you do the same if the P6 conferences play their normal 9+ game non-conference schedule?

It's amazing how you just continuously create fake arguments that people are making. Not one person has suggested teams should schedule 3 out of conference games per season. At this point you're just being obtuse and it has to be intentional, there's no other explanation

 

[Get a Job]

If a bunch of teams only play 3 non-conference games next season, I will admit I was wrong, apologize to the whole board and never post here again. Will you do the same if the P6 conferences play their normal 9+ game non-conference schedule?

Don't be silly. Everyone on here (as far as I can tell) agrees that the computer rankings will do a better job of rating the teams in a season where all teams play 10ish OOC games. This season, it's all out the window. More games could help, but it's not a given. Look at Colgate. Adding games late could help, but it's not a given. Look at UNC-Marquette for an example.

I have understood you to be saying, in a nutshell, that UConn is guilty of shooting themselves in the foot by not scrambling to stuff more games into the final 2 weeks of the season. My critique of that position is not that adding more games will definitely hurt. My critique is that:

1. Our current schedule is sufficient to get us in.
2. I don't think it was as feasible to schedule these games as you think it was (and it certainly isn't feasible at all anymore).
3. Side critique: You are responding to everyone's arguments with wild strawmen.

 

[ucawn]

We missed out on 2 home games against teams that are some of the worst road teams in conference(Nova and Xavier)

Those would’ve been resume boosting wins. Now we need to pick up 2 resume wins (Hall, Creighton) to get lower than a 7 seed.

 

[Jbirdp5]

@nelsonmuntz I can’t keep up with the changing points now. Your argument was we put all our eggs in beating seton hall. Playing 2 or 3 mid majors wouldn’t have changed that, and Nobody will ever play 3 non conference games in a normal year. Why even bring that up? I know you usually go against the grain but this is extreme.

 

[tzznandrew]

@nelsonmuntz I can’t keep up with the changing points now. Your argument was we put all our eggs in beating seton hall. Playing 2 or 3 mid majors wouldn’t have changed that, and Nobody will ever play 3 non conference games in a normal year. Why even bring that up? I know you usually go against the grain but this is extreme.

Nobody thinks that playing only three OOC games is a good idea. Everyone is in agreement.

Just following the basics of the NET, a few more wins over the course of the season—especially wins of more than 10 points—would actively help that number.

So the questions become:

• did the program think 3 games was good?
• were there times when we could actually and reasonably have played games—i.e. were we on pause or our opponents?
• were there reasonable, available teams to replace teams we didn't play while we still could? Was the timing good?

The program obviously doesn't think 3 OOC games was good. They have at various times tried to reschedule.

A number of the cancelled games were due to our own covid protocols, particularly in the early OOC portion.

When the team could reschedule early we were coming off a long break and Hurley was reluctant because he wanted practice time. Given how poorly we've performed after our own Covid breaks, this seems wise. More games are better than fewer, but losses are worse than more games.

We only know a few of the teams they reached out to. Everything else is speculation and projection not based in the facts of the matter. For the last few weeks it would not have been possible to actually schedule games, so the discussion is not even really relevant.

Ultimately it would have been nice to get a few more games in. We have no evidence that—outside of early December maybe—the program didn't try themselves to do that.

 

[ucawn]

Cuse on in 5 minutes. They’re at large hopes are shot with a loss.