LSU and Louisville Lose to Unranked Teams (merged)

[Plebe]

Based on this week's upset losses, the committee could make their own lives easier (not having to deal with 4-teams from the same conference among the Top 16 seeds) by simply pushing Oklahoma (lost to Kansas), and Maryland (lost to Indiana), etc. out of the Top 16 (they were pretty marginal already in Monday night's reveal).

Maryland was #12 in the reveal 5 days ago. No way they are dropping that far just because of a loss to Indiana, especially with all the losing that other teams in that range have been doing.

Oklahoma was #16, so for sure their spot is very vulnerable for now. We'll see how they do in the B12 tournament.

 

[TeamFirst!]

Creighton lost today, and Kentucky beat Tennessee. To some degree irrelevant according to bracketology but the upsets continue.

 

[southie]

Maryland was #12 in the reveal 5 days ago. No way they are dropping that far just because of a loss to Indiana, especially with all the losing that other teams in that range have been doing.

Oklahoma was #16, so for sure their spot is very vulnerable for now. We'll see how they do in the B12 tournament.

Obviously, it's the committee's opinion that matters, and not mine; but, Maryland had no business being in the Top 12 in Monday's reveal:

Maryland is 5-8 in NET Q1 wins/losses (3-8 in RPI Q1 wins/losses); NET ranking = 13; RPI ranking = 10. Something is inflating their rankings, but the lack of Q1 wins speak for themselves.

 

[Plebe]

Obviously, it's the committee's opinion that matters, and not mine; but, Maryland had no business being in the Top 12 in Monday's reveal:

Maryland is 5-8 in NET Q1 wins/losses (3-8 in RPI Q1 wins/losses); NET ranking = 13; RPI ranking = 10. Something is inflating their rankings, but the lack of Q1 wins speak for themselves.

You're overly focused on the raw record of Q1 games. But for what it's worth, MD has 6 Quad 1 wins according to what I'm seeing.

Also, 3 of their losses are to the top 3 overall seeds. I hardly think that counts against them in comparisons to the other teams in the 11-20 range.

Maryland also has a win over Baylor, which is a top 5 team.

And Maryland has no losses outside Quad 1, which I believe this committee is valuing.

Arguments can be made that MD was seeded too high, but I can understand the argument the committee seems to be making.

 

[southie]

You're overly focused on the raw record of Q1 games. But for what it's worth, MD has 6 Quad 1 wins according to what I'm seeing.

Also, 3 of their losses are to the top 3 overall seeds. I hardly think that counts against them in comparisons to the other teams in the 11-20 range.

Maryland also has a win over Baylor, which is a top 5 team.

And Maryland has no losses outside Quad 1, which I believe this committee is valuing.

Arguments can be made that MD was seeded too high, but I can understand the argument the committee seems to be making.

Yeah, I can admit I'm comparing teams based on their Q1 wins (but, I have acknowledged they are not all created equal). You pointed out that their losses include South Carolina, NC State, and Stanford; so, that definitely is good for their SOS and helps explain why their RPI and NET rankings are high.

As of Monday's reveal, their NET Q1 record was 5-8; and, it still is today. Perhaps there is one win which keeps fluctuation between Q1/Q2. What I find interesting is that their RPI Q1 record was 3-8. That means 2 of their 5 wins are kind on the low end of Q1 NET; that could be important (as it is to all teams jockeying for position) of a team loses Q1 wins in the next week or so due to general movement.

 

[gold2323]

Before I forget UCONN is like Alabama Football we always get the benefit of a winning tradition from NCAA committee.
I say Bridgeport