Bubble Watch (2/25) | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Bubble Watch (2/25)

Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
12,546
Reaction Score
67,036
Here’s a question regarding the First Four since Hall, Nova, Providence, and Butler are all in that range- if the committee determines that those four are the last four in, would they be able to violate the rule that teams from the same conference can’t meet until the Sweet 16? Or would they have to swap in two of the other 11 seeds from the main draw to avoid it? It seems unfair that two teams would need to play an extra game to adhere to bracketing rules. If it happened I don’t think we’d know (unless the committee left those conference matchups as-is) but I’d be interested to hear what the committee has said about that scenario.
I heard on a podcast. They would only violate if there are 3+ teams in last 4 in, but would not pull other teams in.
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2021
Messages
659
Reaction Score
1,965
That’s terrible. The NCAA can package the play-in games as though they’re part of the tourney but many (or most?) of the legions of CBB laypeople who tune in Thurs and Fri don’t even know the Tues and Weds night games even exist.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
14,667
Reaction Score
81,733
Their record v Q1 teams this year is 9-2.

(take your snark and get kinky with yourself).
You might want to back off that. :)

This does not look like the resume of an NCAA Tournament team. They need to win the AAC Tournament and get the automatic bid.


Scared Homer Simpson GIF by reactionseditor
 

Fishy

Elite Premium Poster
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
18,147
Reaction Score
132,009
Their record v Q1 teams this year is 9-2.

(take your snark and get kinky with yourself).

Oh, sweet pea, you’ve fumbled it.
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
13,778
Reaction Score
72,110
Their record v Q1 teams this year is 9-2.

(take your snark and get kinky with yourself).

Two teams in America have 9 Quad 1 wins. One is Purdue and I'll let you guess the other one but it's not USF.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,258
Reaction Score
33,166
I'm literally looking for an example of what people are talking about, because I don't know how you game these models. You always have to do better than the model predicts to move up, it's not enough to just beat some bad team by a lot. I looked at some mid B12 teams on Bart Torvik since that site gives you a score by game, and the B12 seems to be the conference where people bring this up the most.

Using Oklahoma as an example, one of the games that impacted their ranking most positively was beating #244 Texas St. by 39. 3 of the games that impacted their rating most negatively were beating #336 Central Arkansas by 16, beating #324 UT Rio Grand Valley by 24, and beating #330 Arkansas Pine Bluff by 21. Those are 3 of their worst 7 games of the year in the Bart Torvik model, even though they won all of them easily. The rest of their buy type games were scattered somewhere in between.

People act like all you have to do is play some crap teams and beat them by 20-25 and then the models will think you're amazing, when that's not close to true. Our 2 worst game this year on Torvik are losing to Creighton and Seton Hall. Our 3rd worst game is beating Mississippi Valley State by 34.

If NET is an accurate representation of the season the Big 12 teams had, then it has to be the same for the MWC. In that case, the MWC has 5 locks (Utah State, SDSU, Boise, CSU and New Mexico) and Nevada is close at 42.
 

Online statistics

Members online
368
Guests online
2,754
Total visitors
3,122

Forum statistics

Threads
157,379
Messages
4,097,264
Members
9,986
Latest member
LocalHits


Top Bottom