|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Nov 25, 2017 18:04:43 GMT -5
heck, making the last seed/host UCLA or Poly (with Kansas losing) makes it easy-schmeezy for the committee
set everything up with UCLA/Poly paired, then if UCLA loses, Poly hosts or vica versa
and that assumes WIchita is just not seed material, and Kansas has played their way out today - which is not a foregone conclusion
|
|
|
Post by flyingMoose on Nov 25, 2017 18:24:59 GMT -5
Wichita's Creighton & Marquette wins which were both at Wichita Wichita State's win over Marquette was neutral-site at IUPUI.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Nov 25, 2017 18:39:41 GMT -5
Wichita's Creighton & Marquette wins which were both at Wichita Wichita State's win over Marquette was neutral-site at IUPUI. ok, cool, still doesn't change the conclusion comparing Wichita with Poly no fault of Wichita their conference opponents were flat out horrific for their resume, just don't have the resume of a seed/host team
|
|
|
Post by southie on Nov 25, 2017 18:42:04 GMT -5
It’s hard to imagine a team that’s 8th in their conference (wisky) getting seed. If that’s what the commitee decides to do then I believe you almost have to put Nebraska ahead of Texas barring they don’t lose tonight Committee will look at Wisconsin's body of work for the season; 8th place finish in conference, yes, but had to face Nebraska (1-1), Penn State (0-2),and Minnesota twice (0-2); not many B1G teams had to do that, I don't think.
|
|
|
Post by brybast on Nov 25, 2017 18:52:25 GMT -5
It’s hard to imagine a team that’s 8th in their conference (wisky) getting seed. If that’s what the commitee decides to do then I believe you almost have to put Nebraska ahead of Texas barring they don’t lose tonight Committee will look at Wisconsin's body of work for the season; 8th place finish in conference, yes, but had to face Nebraska (1-1), Penn State (0-2),and Minnesota twice (0-2); not many B1G teams had to do that, I don't think. Yes, this. The committee most definitely is aware of, and takes into consideration, the unbalanced conference schedules. This is why conference standings mean very little to the committee. This is why Washington State is a lock for a bid even with a 6-14 conference record. Wazzu had to play 16 of its 20 conference matches against the RPI top 30.
|
|
|
Post by southie on Nov 25, 2017 18:57:42 GMT -5
Committee will look at Wisconsin's body of work for the season; 8th place finish in conference, yes, but had to face Nebraska (1-1), Penn State (0-2),and Minnesota twice (0-2); not many B1G teams had to do that, I don't think. Yes, this. The committee most definitely is aware of, and takes into consideration, the unbalanced conference schedules.
This is why conference standings mean very little to the committee. This is why Washington State is a lock for a bid even with a 6-14 conference record. Wazzu had to play 16 of its 20 conference matches against the RPI top 30. That's it right there. Committee proved last year that conference standing are trumped by overall SOS and RPI.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Nov 25, 2017 19:04:28 GMT -5
I won't be surprised if UW does not get a seed, but we'll see. It's hard for me to gauge them against the other teams that might also get one. That match against OSU was the damaging one. Hughes played great, but they should not have lost that one.
|
|
|
Post by fetchin on Nov 25, 2017 19:12:48 GMT -5
Committee will look at Wisconsin's body of work for the season; 8th place finish in conference, yes, but had to face Nebraska (1-1), Penn State (0-2),and Minnesota twice (0-2); not many B1G teams had to do that, I don't think. Yes, this. The committee most definitely is aware of, and takes into consideration, the unbalanced conference schedules. This is why conference standings mean very little to the committee. This is why Washington State is a lock for a bid even with a 6-14 conference record. Wazzu had to play 16 of its 20 conference matches against the RPI top 30. My problem with washington state is their winning percentage against all these top 30 matches is less than 20 percent . I think a tournament team should be up over 20/25 percent and at least win more than just 3 out of 16, and one of those was over a slumping Oregon. washington State had all these chances for top 30 wins that a team like North texas does not and still North Texas has just one less top 30 win.
|
|
|
Post by brybast on Nov 25, 2017 19:18:37 GMT -5
My problem with washington state is their winning percentage against all these top 30 matches is less than 20 percent . I think a tournament team should be up over 20/25 percent and at least win more than just 3 out of 16, and one of those was over a slumping Oregon. washington State had all these chances for top 30 wins that a team like North texas does not and still North Texas has just one less top 30 win. But that becomes a bit unfair because North Texas played three matches in the 26-30 range (going 2-1), while Washington State played most of its top 30 matches against teams much higher. I'm counting 8 matches against teams currently in the RPI top 12. Then there's also the fact that North Texas has no quality road wins, which WSU does.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Nov 25, 2017 19:32:26 GMT -5
My problem with washington state is their winning percentage against all these top 30 matches is less than 20 percent . I think a tournament team should be up over 20/25 percent and at least win more than just 3 out of 16, and one of those was over a slumping Oregon. washington State had all these chances for top 30 wins that a team like North texas does not and still North Texas has just one less top 30 win. But that becomes a bit unfair because North Texas played three matches in the 26-30 range (going 2-1), while Washington State played most of its top 30 matches against teams much higher. I'm counting 8 matches against teams that are North Texas also has no quality road wins, which WSU does. ok, so then how to compare Wazzou with North Texas how do they compare in 26-50 & 51-100 matches - that's a fair comparison I agree should be somewhat circumspect about the absolute # of quality wins - winning % is the fair comparison North Texas is 2-1 (67%) vs. 26-50 Wazzou is 2-3 (40%) vs. 26-60 so in the most direct comparison of North Texas and Wazzou, North Texas looks alright - now please someone tell why in rationale terms why North Texas couldn't or wouldn't knock off a few of the teams Wazzou did? !!!! the selection process is rigged for the big boys & ACC/SEC in particular - anyone that thinks otherwise is delusional
|
|
|
Post by brybast on Nov 25, 2017 19:45:44 GMT -5
But that becomes a bit unfair because North Texas played three matches in the 26-30 range (going 2-1), while Washington State played most of its top 30 matches against teams much higher. I'm counting 8 matches against teams that are North Texas also has no quality road wins, which WSU does. ok, so then how to compare Wazzou with North Texas how do they compare in 26-50 & 51-100 matches - that's a fair comparison I agree should be somewhat circumspect about the absolute # of quality wins - winning % is the fair comparison North Texas is 2-1 (67%) vs. 26-50 Wazzou is 2-3 (40%) vs. 26-60 so in the most direct comparison of North Texas and Wazzou, North Texas looks alright - now please someone tell why in rationale terms why North Texas couldn't or wouldn't knock off a few of the teams Wazzou did? !!!! the selection process is rigged for the big boys & ACC/SEC in particular - anyone that thinks otherwise is delusional Where are you gettin 2-3 vs. 26-60? I see 3-2. And what about this range, where they played about the same number of matches: North Texas 3-2 (60%) vs. RPI 101-150 WSU 5-1 (83%) vs. RPI 101-150 That should matter as well, no?
|
|
|
Post by wudrwu on Nov 25, 2017 19:52:48 GMT -5
I'm so over hearing about quality !!!!###$$$!!!ing losses. I've got no problem with Wisky in the tourney. I've got a problem with them hosting and not just over WSU (that's Wichita State. Washington State is Wazzu).
Cal Poly should host. No way one league should have 8 hosts. Or even 7. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Nov 25, 2017 20:00:49 GMT -5
ok, so then how to compare Wazzou with North Texas how do they compare in 26-50 & 51-100 matches - that's a fair comparison I agree should be somewhat circumspect about the absolute # of quality wins - winning % is the fair comparison North Texas is 2-1 (67%) vs. 26-50 Wazzou is 2-3 (40%) vs. 26-60 so in the most direct comparison of North Texas and Wazzou, North Texas looks alright - now please someone tell why in rationale terms why North Texas couldn't or wouldn't knock off a few of the teams Wazzou did? !!!! the selection process is rigged for the big boys & ACC/SEC in particular - anyone that thinks otherwise is delusional Where are you gettin 2-3 vs. 26-60? I see 3-2. And what about this range, where they played about the same number of matches: North Texas 3-2 (60%) vs. RPI 101-150 WSU 5-1 (83%) vs. RPI 101-150 That should matter as well, no? Wazzou was 2-3 vs. Oregon/Oregon State/Mizzou St (26-50) 101 +, it's relevant, but shouldn't matter as much as 26-50 the thing is teams like North Texas have a greater opportunity for bad losses, just like the Wazzou's have a greater opportunity for quality wins so if you balance the 26-50 & 101-150, then Wazzou & North Texas are actually fairly comparable there's really nothing to compare 1-25 between the two teams, because North Texas doesn't get the opportunites Wazzou had....I know, I know, they need to schedule tougher, the usual dilemma a mid-major has, have to schedule hard and make your season essentially the first 4 weeks of the season - just the way it is - while all the BCS teams get the full 13 weeks to make their case.....nice! my point is look at the win % of what's comparable to get a better sense, when looking at that North Texas compares well, having said that I think Wazzou is a better team - when one factors in Massey
|
|
|
Post by brybast on Nov 25, 2017 20:13:55 GMT -5
Where are you gettin 2-3 vs. 26-60? I see 3-2. And what about this range, where they played about the same number of matches: North Texas 3-2 (60%) vs. RPI 101-150 WSU 5-1 (83%) vs. RPI 101-150 That should matter as well, no? Wazzou was 2-3 vs. Oregon/Oregon State/Mizzou St (26-50) 101 +, it's relevant, but shouldn't matter as much as 26-50 the thing is teams like North Texas have a greater opportunity for bad losses, just like the Wazzou's have a greater opportunity for quality wins so if you balance the 26-50 & 101-150, then Wazzou & North Texas are actually fairly comparable there's really nothing to compare 1-25 between the two teams, because North Texas doesn't get the opportunites Wazzou had....I know, I know, they need to schedule tougher, the usual dilemma a mid-major has, have to schedule hard and make your season essentially the first 4 weeks of the season - just the way it is - while all the BCS teams get the full 13 weeks to make their case.....nice! my point is look at the win % of what's comparable to get a better sense, when looking at that North Texas compares well, having said that I think Wazzou is a better team - when one factors in Massey But WSU actually played more matches (6) in the 101-150 range than North Texas (5) but suffered fewer losses. Oregon is in the top 25 of adjusted RPI. College of Charleston is in the top 50. That makes WSU's record 2-2 vs. 26-50. I'm not saying that the comparison isn't close, but the committee doesn't want to have to "guess" that North Texas would get some top 25 wins if given the chance. If NT was serious about building an at-large resume, they wouldn't end up with 9 of their 14 OOC matches vs. teams outside the top 150.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Nov 25, 2017 20:29:21 GMT -5
Wazzou was 2-3 vs. Oregon/Oregon State/Mizzou St (26-50) 101 +, it's relevant, but shouldn't matter as much as 26-50 the thing is teams like North Texas have a greater opportunity for bad losses, just like the Wazzou's have a greater opportunity for quality wins so if you balance the 26-50 & 101-150, then Wazzou & North Texas are actually fairly comparable there's really nothing to compare 1-25 between the two teams, because North Texas doesn't get the opportunites Wazzou had....I know, I know, they need to schedule tougher, the usual dilemma a mid-major has, have to schedule hard and make your season essentially the first 4 weeks of the season - just the way it is - while all the BCS teams get the full 13 weeks to make their case.....nice! my point is look at the win % of what's comparable to get a better sense, when looking at that North Texas compares well, having said that I think Wazzou is a better team - when one factors in Massey But WSU actually played more matches (6) in the 101-150 range than North Texas (5) but suffered fewer losses. Oregon is in the top 25 of adjusted RPI. College of Charleston is in the top 50. That makes WSU's record 2-2 vs. 26-50. I'm not saying that the comparison isn't close, but the committee doesn't want to have to "guess" that North Texas would get some top 25 wins if given the chance. If NT was serious about building an at-large resume, they wouldn't end up with 9 of their 14 OOC matches vs. teams outside the top 150. I was using real-time RPI 'if NT was serious about ....' that gets so tired, but yeah I'm sure they wish they had just one or two more top 50 (or even top 100) matches... regardless of what some think, it's not simple to schedule always. yep, the committee shouldn't have to guess...at the same time they should really look at the winning %s in the 25-50 & 50-100 for these mid-majors vs. the BCS middle-pack teams, it's the only way to make the comparison on more of a level playing field, and then giving 'bonus' points for top 25 rigs the system even more in favor of the BCS and again, the way not to guess is not to compound the flawed use of RPI by adding these bonus points for absolute # of wins - I'm fine with bonus based on winning %, not on absolute #s of wins in a category - kudos for the Big 10 & Pac-12, but the mid-majors are at a real distinct disadvantage here in mulitple ways
|
|