Bubble talk

[tzznandrew]

I'm pretty sure that Georgia team won the SEC tourney. I do agree with your premise though.

We need 2 more wins.

They did not. They only have won 2 SEC titles: 1983 and 2008. The 2008 team got in with a losing overall record, but in 2000-01 Georgia got an at-large bid with a 16-14 (9-7) record. They had 7 Top-50 RPI wins (4 Top-25), and the #1 SOS.

 

[Ts5034]

All i know is. Every year there are those 1 maybe 2 teams that everyone is positive they make it in but when the bracket comes out they are left out. I just hope we are not that team this year. If by some chance we are, Jeff Hathaway will have to answer to a lot of questions because im sure a lot of people even outside Uconn will claim it was a conspiracy.

 

[RS9999X]

All of the bubble teams need 2 wins minimum and 3 wins to feel safe.
Anything else lets the selection slugs (led by Hathaway) have an easy out.
WVU and USF play Saturday. Huge game for both. Possibly the elimination game.

 

[HuskyHawk]

They did not. They only have won 2 SEC titles: 1983 and 2008. The 2008 team got in with a losing overall record, but in 2000-01 Georgia got an at-large bid with a 16-14 (9-7) record. They had 7 Top-50 RPI wins (4 Top-25), and the #1 SOS.

That's the one I was thinking of.

 

[tzznandrew]

That's the one I was thinking of.

I had a vague recollection of this (and I remember being somewhat annoyed that Georgia got in, as UConn was also on the bubble and both lost in the first round of the conference tournaments), but I couldn't find the information for a while.

That has to be the worst record of an at-large team, right?

 

[HuskyHawk]

I had a vague recollection of this (and I remember being somewhat annoyed that Georgia got in, as UConn was also on the bubble and both lost in the first round of the conference tournaments), but I couldn't find the information for a while.

That has to be the worst record of an at-large team, right?

I think it was at the time and still is. I was not happy about it either, but I think they played fairly well once they got in. In any event, there is a precedent for our situation. Strong SOS, poor record, and in our case, perhaps some leeway for missing Boatright and Calhoun for so long.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

No bad losses. That is all that matters right now.

 

[HuskyHawk]

No bad losses. That is all that matters right now.

Given the talent we have, Rutgers is a bad loss. Cincy at home is a bad loss. UCF was a bad loss. Tennessee was a bad loss. Even @SH is a weak loss. Should have beaten at least one of Cuse, Marquette and ND at home. I still think we're in with two wins, but this team has under-performed pretty badly.

 

[businesslawyer]

Given the talent we have, Rutgers is a bad loss. Cincy at home is a bad loss. UCF was a bad loss. Tennessee was a bad loss. Even @SH is a weak loss. Should have beaten at least one of Cuse, Marquette and ND at home. I still think we're in with two wins, but this team has under-performed pretty badly.

Bad losses in terms of underperforming your potential is different that NCAA bad losses, which means losing to a team that bubble teams shouldn't be losing to.

 

[tzznandrew]

Given the talent we have, Rutgers is a bad loss. Cincy at home is a bad loss. UCF was a bad loss. Tennessee was a bad loss. Even @SH is a weak loss. Should have beaten at least one of Cuse, Marquette and ND at home. I still think we're in with two wins, but this team has under-performed pretty badly.

I think he meant "no bad losses going forward, and we're in."

But, to respond: by NCAA standards, only really the @Rutgers game is a "bad" loss, which is defined as sub-100 RPI.

@PC would be one.
Pitt is currently 97, so with a loss to St. Johns or so could classify as so.
DePaul would be a bad loss.