Bubble Watch....

[jibsey]

So much of game outcome depends on the refs, I just hope if we have to play a tough front line in a neutral setting things change. In the beginning of the season it was barely a touch being called and now a game like Cincy.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Those were "bad" losses to me. Teams we should be able to beat. Unfortunately, Temple and Cinci are more or less the same team. They punch you in the mouth and keep punching (and fouling). They are what Pitt often used to be in the Big East. If they get in the NCAAs and land referees who call games they way the ACC or Big XII call games, they are a quick out. I'm not really feeling nostalgic for the fact that the American seems to have the referees from the old Big East, who let every game devolve into a rock fight. There is a reason why UConn looks better in out of conference games, and thrives in post-season when we finally get real officiating.

That's a pretty absurd definition of a "bad loss."

 

[mauconnfan]

That's a pretty absurd definition of a "bad loss."

Giving up 55 points in our first loss to Temple and losing is a bad loss. Being up 12-14 with 6 minutes left the next meeting and losing is also a bad loss. Not sure how anyone could believe they are "good" losses?

 

[auror]

Giving up 55 points in our first loss to Temple and losing is a bad loss. Being up 12-14 with 6 minutes left the next meeting and losing is also a bad loss. Not sure how anyone could believe they are "good" losses?

This is the Bubble Watch thread. Relatively, they are not bad losses in the eyes of the selection committee. They're losses below our standards, but fortunately our standards are higher than the committee's.

 

[upstater]

Giving up 55 points in our first loss to Temple and losing is a bad loss. Being up 12-14 with 6 minutes left the next meeting and losing is also a bad loss. Not sure how anyone could believe they are "good" losses?

The two Temple losses are 2 of the 4 most memorable games of the season, unfortunately. The SMU game is the 3rd most memorable, and the 4th is the Cincy loss. Now, as bad as the 2 Temple losses were because of the complete meltdowns, the worst loss of the season for me is the first Cincy game. I was livid at the refs for that one. Just can't understand how you can call a foul at one end with 12 seconds left, and then swallow your whistle at the other end.

 

[mauconnfan]

This is the Bubble Watch thread. Relatively, they are not bad losses in the eyes of the selection committee. They're losses below our standards, but fortunately our standards are higher than the committee's.

I get that and agree on those terms but being a UConn fan really hard to determine those to be anything but bad, that's all. But point well taken.

 

[Leebo]

No I'm not I'm "arguing" something different than the actual meaning on this post. Therefore I am just stating how I look at this losses, not sure what's so tough about that to understand?

I deleted my post because I hadn't seen that someone already addressed the selection committee aspect of it. You said you weren't sure how anyone could think these are "good" losses... and the answer is obvious.

 

[Hi-Low]

American: Work left to do: Connecticut, Tulsa, Cincinnati, Temple
As bubble entities go, the American may not have the world-is-flat wackiness of the Pac-12, or the who's-the-new-bubble-team-this-week volatility of the SEC. What the American is instead is consistent: Four teams in the mix, none on the cusp, nobody safe, and everybody with a lot to play for in the final two weeks of the regular season.
Connecticut [19-8 (9-5), RPI: 38, SOS: 41] Before Saturday, Connecticut was at least a half-step -- and probably more like a full step -- ahead of its tournament eligible American conference brethren. In other words, Cincinnati had more on the line when the Huskies came to town on Saturday, and the Bearcats' 65-60 win did more to buoy their chances than sink UConn's. That said, whatever bubble separation UConn has is minimal. It's flirting with double-digit seed territory as it is. A loss at USF (RPI: 205) on Thursday night would be disastrous.
Tulsa [18-9 (10-5), RPI: 42, SOS: 38] Plenty of bubble teams lost over the weekend. Tulsa wasn't one of them. Tuesday's home date against Temple probably offers more upside for the visitors than for the Golden Hurricane, but when you're as close to the cut line as Tulsa is, it's just about wins, plain and simple.
Cincinnati [20-8 (10-5), RPI: 56, SOS: 99] Before losing to Tulsa last week, 70-68 on the road in overtime, the Bearcats had won six of seven games. On Saturday, they completed a regular-season sweep of Connecticut. The Huskies aren't exactly the safest tournament bet right now, but they are in better shape than anyone else in this league, and sweeping them absolutely has to count for something. What's more? If the committee is watching closely, it'll see a Bearcats team that is exceedingly difficult to beat. Five of Cincy's eight losses have come by two points. At first glance, this looks like a totally mediocre bubble team. Dig further, though, and it's clear Cincinnati -- particularly its defense, which is top-10 good -- is much better than its team sheet lets on.
Temple [17-9 (11-3), RPI: 58, SOS: 64] The Watch is used to Houston being irredeemably awful. Which is why, if this were last season, we'd be roundly chiding Temple for needing to rally from a 10-point deficit to sneak out of Hofheinz Pavilion with a 69-66 win. We had a sentence to that effect half-written out of sheer force of habit before we remembered the Cougars are vastly improved in their second season under Kelvin Sampson. Anyway, Temple is on the road again on Tuesday night at Tulsa. It's an even tougher challenge, but one with a potential true road win over a fellow bubble team on offer. After last week's dismal home showing against Villanova, and with no help from UCF, Memphis or Tulane in their final three regular-season games, it's one of the more important games of the Owls' season.

 

[storrs15]

American: Work left to do: Connecticut, Tulsa, Cincinnati, Temple
As bubble entities go, the American may not have the world-is-flat wackiness of the Pac-12, or the who's-the-new-bubble-team-this-week volatility of the SEC. What the American is instead is consistent: Four teams in the mix, none on the cusp, nobody safe, and everybody with a lot to play for in the final two weeks of the regular season.
Connecticut [19-8 (9-5), RPI: 38, SOS: 41] Before Saturday, Connecticut was at least a half-step -- and probably more like a full step -- ahead of its tournament eligible American conference brethren. In other words, Cincinnati had more on the line when the Huskies came to town on Saturday, and the Bearcats' 65-60 win did more to buoy their chances than sink UConn's. That said, whatever bubble separation UConn has is minimal. It's flirting with double-digit seed territory as it is. A loss at USF (RPI: 205) on Thursday night would be disastrous.
Tulsa [18-9 (10-5), RPI: 42, SOS: 38] Plenty of bubble teams lost over the weekend. Tulsa wasn't one of them. Tuesday's home date against Temple probably offers more upside for the visitors than for the Golden Hurricane, but when you're as close to the cut line as Tulsa is, it's just about wins, plain and simple.
Cincinnati [20-8 (10-5), RPI: 56, SOS: 99] Before losing to Tulsa last week, 70-68 on the road in overtime, the Bearcats had won six of seven games. On Saturday, they completed a regular-season sweep of Connecticut. The Huskies aren't exactly the safest tournament bet right now, but they are in better shape than anyone else in this league, and sweeping them absolutely has to count for something. What's more? If the committee is watching closely, it'll see a Bearcats team that is exceedingly difficult to beat. Five of Cincy's eight losses have come by two points. At first glance, this looks like a totally mediocre bubble team. Dig further, though, and it's clear Cincinnati -- particularly its defense, which is top-10 good -- is much better than its team sheet lets on.
Temple [17-9 (11-3), RPI: 58, SOS: 64] The Watch is used to Houston being irredeemably awful. Which is why, if this were last season, we'd be roundly chiding Temple for needing to rally from a 10-point deficit to sneak out of Hofheinz Pavilion with a 69-66 win. We had a sentence to that effect half-written out of sheer force of habit before we remembered the Cougars are vastly improved in their second season under Kelvin Sampson. Anyway, Temple is on the road again on Tuesday night at Tulsa. It's an even tougher challenge, but one with a potential true road win over a fellow bubble team on offer. After last week's dismal home showing against Villanova, and with no help from UCF, Memphis or Tulane in their final three regular-season games, it's one of the more important games of the Owls' season.

Well yes that's pretty spot on. A loss to any team that isn't SMU up until the tournament would be disastrous

 

[HuskyHawk]

I deleted my post because I hadn't seen that someone already addressed the selection committee aspect of it. You said you weren't sure how anyone could think these are "good" losses... and the answer is obvious.

I get the selection committee side of it. But even there, these aren't good losses, they just aren't terrible. Maryland is likely our best loss. I do also hope that they take into account Brimah's absence, but the follow-up losses with him in the lineup may mitigate that effect.

 

[Leebo]

I get the selection committee side of it. But even there, these aren't good losses, they just aren't terrible. Maryland is likely our best loss. I do also hope that they take into account Brimah's absence, but the follow-up losses with him in the lineup may mitigate that effect.

I'm not sure if anyone actually said that the losses are good losses. Mau basically implied that we think they're good because people said they're not bad. The committee basically doesn't call anything a good loss, just bad or not bad.

 

[Hi-Low]

I (& the committee I believe) would classify a loss as bad if it's to a team outside the top 100 rpi. One of the best things UConn has going for it is none of those.....we have 3 potential bad losses left to avoid...Houston (92) near borderline but losing to them at home would be a bad loss.

Avoid any bad loses at this point and we are in....simple as that I think. That being said can't play USF, Houston & UCF not to lose, must go out and try to beat the crap out of them & SMU.

 

[Paesano]

Well yes that's pretty spot on. A loss to any team that isn't SMU up until the tournament would be disastrous

There is a 19.4% chance of that happening. I agree that it would be disastrous. While far from probable, it is not a "crazy" scenario. Now, some might disagree that it would be disastrous. What if we go 2-2 and then 1-1 or better in the conference tournament? Would we still be in? It is possible but, with the way the NCAA committee has treated the AAC I the past, I wouldn't be too confident in that.

 

[storrs15]

There is a 19.4% chance of that happening. I agree that it would be disastrous. While far from probable, it is not a "crazy" scenario. Now, some might disagree that it would be disastrous. What if we go 2-2 and then 1-1 or better in the conference tournament? Would we still be in? It is possible but, with the way the NCAA committee has treated the AAC I the past, I wouldn't be too confident in that.

If Houston was at Houston I would say that that could possibly be looked at as a highly needed win but not a crushing one. However it's at home. If we go 2-2 down the stretch it doesn't bode well for our AAC tournament championship run either. I'm not worried but I think we just need to win the games we should and we'll be ok.

I was just reading some old posts from 2014. All of them thought we were a 5 or 6 seed. I just don't want to see us be a hypothetical lock at a 10 seed then all of a sudden get dropped because the committee doesn't go our way.

 

[Paesano]

I just don't want to see us be a hypothetical lock at a 10 seed then all of a sudden get dropped because the committee doesn't go our way.

Exactly!

 

[tcf15]

 

[Drew]

I'm really struggling to understand what about Temple is more appealing than Tulsa and/or Cincinnati

 

[BUHusky]

I'm really struggling to understand what about Temple is more appealing than Tulsa and/or Cincinnati

Lunardi is a Philly guy. He always inflates Big 5 teams when given the chance.

 

[pepband99]

Updated this morning:

Connecticut [20-8 (10-5), RPI: 44, SOS: 64] UConn had no problems dispatching South Florida on Thursday night, finishing with an 81-51 win in front of 4,668 of the Bulls' most die-hard fans. A couple hundred more lost souls through those turnstiles and the Sun Dome would have been 50 percent full. Good times. Anyway, things should be slightly more lively in the greater Hartford area this weekend as the Huskies look to keep a home loss to Houston off the resume before turning their attention to a March 3 trip to SMU.

 

[Paesano]

I'm really struggling to understand what about Temple is more appealing than Tulsa and/or Cincinnati

Re:Tulsa...Temple beat UConn...TWICE!
I'm still struggling to understand how UConn lost to Temple...TWICE!!!

 

[Paesano]

BTW, the idiotic RPI is going to kill our seeding. The power ratings that actually have some value as an evaluation and prediction tool have us closer to 20!

 

[methodology]

I'm really struggling to understand what about Temple is more appealing than Tulsa and/or Cincinnati

committee values regular season champs. Started putting more weight into it to protect small/mid conference reg season champs who lost in conference tourney

 

[pepband99]

Updated this morning...

Connecticut [20-9 (10-6), RPI: 53, SOS: 59] What, exactly, are we to make of this Connecticut team? The per-possession numbers -- both the BPI and Ken Pomeroy's adjusted efficiency rankings -- think UConn is a top-30 team with a top-10 defense whose 20-9 record would be far better were it not for some of the worst "luck" in Division I. (Luck, in this usage, is another way of saying: "Close losses which could have gone either way in the final moments and contribute to a team's real record falling short of what its statistical performance otherwise expects.") On the other hand, it is also a team that has looked totally lost in close games and which is just 3-6 against the top five teams in its league -- a league which, real talk, isn't very good. Ultimately, the lack of truly bad losses should keep UConn in decent shape even if it loses at SMU and holds serve against UCF on Saturday. But in this space, "decent shape" means a 10-seed, as opposed to directly on the cut line. Either way things are tenuous.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Updated this morning...

Connecticut [20-9 (10-6), RPI: 53, SOS: 59] What, exactly, are we to make of this Connecticut team? The per-possession numbers -- both the BPI and Ken Pomeroy's adjusted efficiency rankings -- think UConn is a top-30 team with a top-10 defense whose 20-9 record would be far better were it not for some of the worst "luck" in Division I. (Luck, in this usage, is another way of saying: "Close losses which could have gone either way in the final moments and contribute to a team's real record falling short of what its statistical performance otherwise expects.") On the other hand, it is also a team that has looked totally lost in close games and which is just 3-6 against the top five teams in its league -- a league which, real talk, isn't very good. Ultimately, the lack of truly bad losses should keep UConn in decent shape even if it loses at SMU and holds serve against UCF on Saturday. But in this space, "decent shape" means a 10-seed, as opposed to directly on the cut line. Either way things are tenuous.

[GROAN]

 

[upstater]

Updated this morning...

Connecticut [20-9 (10-6), RPI: 53, SOS: 59] What, exactly, are we to make of this Connecticut team? The per-possession numbers -- both the BPI and Ken Pomeroy's adjusted efficiency rankings -- think UConn is a top-30 team with a top-10 defense whose 20-9 record would be far better were it not for some of the worst "luck" in Division I. (Luck, in this usage, is another way of saying: "Close losses which could have gone either way in the final moments and contribute to a team's real record falling short of what its statistical performance otherwise expects.") On the other hand, it is also a team that has looked totally lost in close games and which is just 3-6 against the top five teams in its league -- a league which, real talk, isn't very good. Ultimately, the lack of truly bad losses should keep UConn in decent shape even if it loses at SMU and holds serve against UCF on Saturday. But in this space, "decent shape" means a 10-seed, as opposed to directly on the cut line. Either way things are tenuous.

Pretty fair analysis.

The Cincy, Temple and Houston home losses are just shake-my-head WTF! boneheadedness. As is the Temple loss on the road.

Four losses that have caused big meltdowns.

Combine this with the Syracuse loss earlier in the season, and UConn has lost 5 games that have left us upset.

If it had won just 2 of these games (2 of 5) and thereby reduced the so-called "luck" factor to a coin flip, then we'd be talking about a 22-7 team. Perhaps a top 25 ranked team.