Bracketology Discussion | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Bracketology Discussion

Tuna said:
Equally fascinating is how KU is even eligible to compete in the tournament.
Expand ...

The list of likely tournament teams that likely shouldn't be fielding teams at all is something that's been on my mind for a while:

Kansas
LSU
Arizona
Auburn
LCC
NC St
Maryland
(spot reserved for UNC)

...it's madness.
 
tzznandrew said:
I mean, that has nothing to do with NET or KenPom, but you do you.

And, by Izzo crying every year, do you mean in his 8 Final Fours (3 in the last decade), with an E8 and a number of S16s mixed in?
Expand ...
I presume you appreciate that the starting ranking and weighting factors have a casual effect on the outputs both in the immediate but also longer time frames. It’s a self licking ice cream cone. The reason why the big dance is always is exciting is Cinderellas are not rare. They are in fact fairly common.
 
BlueDogs said:
I presume you appreciate that the starting ranking and weighting factors have a casual effect on the outputs both in the immediate but also longer time frames. It’s a self licking ice cream cone. The reason why the big dance is always is exciting is Cinderellas are not rare. They are in fact fairly common.
Expand ...
I can't speak about NET, but by January all "pre-season" rankings are out of KenPom.
 
pepband99 said:
ESPN now listing Clemson on their bubble watch. What a weird profile...

Losses to Yale, at Wake, South Carolina
Wins (all at home) dook, LCC, and F$U.

Of note - UConn is about 10 spots higher than Clemson in pretty much all metrics.
Expand ...
Clemson is definitely not getting in unless they win the ACC tournament
 
Or our last 8 games, were 6-2 with a 4 point loss @ SMU and a 2OT loss @ Temple. We’re catching fire, if we didn’t hit a slump in January we’d lock up an at large
 
Last edited:
.-.
They need to beat Houston, have Florida become Top 30, and make a run the in the AAC beating at least two of Houston/Cincy/Wichita (and, despite beating the latter two, hope they stay Top 50 NET). And then, just then, we'd have 4 Q1 wins.

I mean, you can't rule it out, but it is about as fringe as you could get.
 
“I used to say all the time,” Bouknight said, “and people looked at me like I was crazy, I still think we can make the Tournament. I think we can win this conference.”

www.courant.com

Shorthanded UConn men fight off foul trouble to win at East Carolina behind 27 points from Christian Vital

UConn, its postseason hopes on the line, was living on the edge Saturday. At times, it looked as if the Huskies, despite leading by double digits, might run out of players and the game could slip a…
www.courant.com www.courant.com
 
I threw this together just for S&G. Just a quick look at the teams "with work to do" according to ESPN Bracket Watch. I wanted to see how UConn stacked up in NET and KenPom metrics. Obviously this doesn't take into account signature wins and other things the selection committee looks at, and it only concerns teams currently on the bubble (plus UConn). But, it shows how tantalizingly close this team is. Converting maybe only as few as two of those seven close losses might well have us firmly in the bubble.

bubble2020.JPG
 
Dream Jobbed 2.0 said:
You know that’s not how the regions work?
Expand ...
Explain...Kansas can opt to play in the Midwest as a potential overall #1 seed. IF they do a team like Dayton will be around six hours closer to INDY giving a homecourt edge to Dayton. Houston is the other option for a regional final in the South. Houston geographically from a distance perspective is farther away from Lawrence. I would assume they will still opt for the Midwest. Right now would you prefer Dayton or Creighton in INDY or another 2 seed in Houston. Maybe Maryland? Tough choice.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
I think the NCAA does reward teams for how they are playing in Feb&March, even though they say they don't. "If" we were to win out and lose a squeeker in the American final to say Houston, I think the NCAA would give us serious consideration for an "at large" bid.
 
Jaker said:
I think the NCAA does reward teams for how they are playing in Feb&March, even though they say they don't. "If" we were to win out and lose a squeeker in the American final to say Houston, I think the NCAA would give us serious consideration for an "at large" bid.
Expand ...
In that scenario, they're 22-13. They'd still need Florida and Houston to stay Top 30, and you'd really hope that you're on the same side of the bracket as Wichita and Cincy, because beating Tulsa does nothing for your profile (83 NET, 80 KenPom).

But that's the sort of low likelihood series of events it would take, and even then it wouldn't be a guarantee.

Let's beat Houston. They do that, they're likely looking at 19 wins. It guarantees an NIT bid, and it at least offers them to chance to do what you suggested.
 
.-.
By the time UConn did what it would need to do to earn an at-large, it would have the automatic bid.

Two too many bad losses, and one too few good wins for an NCAA bid.
 
Looking at Michigan at 18-10 ranked 19th and it makes you wonder. Nothing special.
 
BlueDogs said:
Looking at Michigan at 18-10 ranked 19th and it makes you wonder. Nothing special.
Expand ...
I mean, I guess. If you only look at record. But then you look at what they did and you see they've beaten, including Gonzaga on a neutral site by 18.

They have 7 Q1 wins (more than we've played) and no bad losses. If you took a look at UConn vs Michigan and took the names off, it's embarrassing how much better their resume is.
 
tzznandrew said:
I mean, I guess. If you only look at record. But then you look at what they did and you see they've beaten, including Gonzaga on a neutral site by 18.

They have 7 Q1 wins (more than we've played) and no bad losses. If you took a look at UConn vs Michigan and took the names off, it's embarrassing how much better their resume is.
Expand ...

I wonder if that game, Michigan / Gonzaga, is one of the main causes of the metrics being so crazy this year. It's always a small sample size, the OOC slate.
 
Jaker said:
I think the NCAA does reward teams for how they are playing in Feb&March, even though they say they don't. "If" we were to win out and lose a squeeker in the American final to say Houston, I think the NCAA would give us serious consideration for an "at large" bid.
Expand ...

The committee has proven that they don’t reward anyone from the AAC. The outlier was Tulsa getting an at large a few years back but since then the AAC gets no respect.
 
UofCT2009 said:
The committee has proven that they don’t reward anyone from the AAC. The outlier was Tulsa getting an at large a few years back but since then the AAC gets no respect.
Expand ...
Temple one year too.

Other than SMU that first year, most teams that should have gotten in, did, and 1 to 2 that shouldn't have, did. But, by and large, the seeding has been where the AAC has gotten squashed. The one year that wasn't the case, Cincy crapped itself.
 
Last edited:
.-.
tzznandrew said:
I mean, I guess. If you only look at record. But then you look at what they did and you see they've beaten, including Gonzaga on a neutral site by 18.

They have 7 Q1 wins (more than we've played) and no bad losses. If you took a look at UConn vs Michigan and took the names off, it's embarrassing how much better their resume is.
Expand ...
i see what u mean. michigan has somewhat of a bad loss @minnesota who is 13-15 right now. but overall, big ten has been superior this season. i mean look at indiana and rutgers. 9th and 10th place in the conference and that is just above the bottom 4 of the league and they're bubble teams/last 4 in.

then you look at the American and see a team like Wichita who's 22-7 who's barely in the field and Tulsa who are having the season of their lives at 20-9 and aren't even in contention of bubble talk. the conference disparity is incredible! wichita have also had a good non conference schedule and the fact that they're spot in the tournament was in contention this late in the season says it all.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
By the time UConn did what it would need to do to earn an at-large, it would have the automatic bid.

Two too many bad losses, and one too few good wins for an NCAA bid.
Expand ...
Thats why life in the AAC made every game so important. If we can go back in time and flip any of our losses without asking too much, I wish we could have just beat St Joe’s and Indiana. That would boost our resume by removing one really bad loss while adding another quality win, and 19-10 would look a lot better than 17-12 right now. I think that would have put us on the bubble with a good shot of being able to play our way in without having to win the AAC Tournament.
 
HuskyBoi said:
i see what u mean. michigan has somewhat of a bad loss @minnesota who is 13-15 right now. but overall, big ten has been superior this season. i mean look at indiana and rutgers. 9th and 10th place in the conference and that is just above the bottom 4 of the league and they're bubble teams/last 4 in.

then you look at the American and see a team like Wichita who's 22-7 who's barely in the field and Tulsa who are having the season of their lives at 20-9 and aren't even in contention of bubble talk. the conference disparity is incredible! wichita have also had a good non conference schedule and the fact that they're spot in the tournament was in contention this late in the season says it all.
Expand ...
Minnesota, 13-15, NET 46

Only Wichita (45) and Houston (19) have higher NET rankings in the American.
 
ucawn said:
Or our last 8 games, were 6-2 with a 4 point loss @ SMU and a 2OT loss @ Temple. We’re catching fire, if we didn’t hit a slump in January we’d lock up an at large
Expand ...
If we won just half of our brutal losses we’d be 21-7. It’s a matter of about 10 points in 4 games. Killer
 
tzznandrew said:
Minnesota, 13-15, NET 46

Only Wichita (45) and Houston (19) have higher NET rankings in the American.
Expand ...
Doesn't matter what their rating is, they won't make the tournament. The NET is just a sorting tool.
 
.-.
I believe the committee also uses BPI, I never see that mentioned here.

The thing is, if we beat Houston it would put us smack inside the bubble in all the metrics.
 
king conn said:
I believe the committee also uses BPI, I never see that mentioned here.

The thing is, if we beat Houston it would put us smack inside the bubble in all the metrics.
Expand ...

Agree, but our problem is out Quad 1-4 W/L resume. The computers give us credit for playing really well against good teams and coming up just short. The quad chart doesn’t and that knocks us out of contention.

A win against Houston would almost certainly earn us an invite to the NIT though.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,214
Messages
4,557,488
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom