|
Post by ProfessorPlum on Nov 26, 2017 0:28:44 GMT -5
Does SOS count very little trollhunter? Looking at teams with an SOS of 165 or 223 getting in just seems off to me. Who were the Top 50 wins for Charleston and N Texas? That Baylor win the beginning of year must factor in huge for Charleston. And multiple +100 losses!!! I just don’t get it.
|
|
|
Post by lionsfan on Nov 26, 2017 0:29:50 GMT -5
I'm beginning to believe Cal Poly could even host they've got a case when compared with Wichita, Iowa State, Wisky, UCLA, & Kansas I just don't believe for a second the NCAA will have USC, UCLA, & Poly all host USC is for sure, and I think it'll also be UCLA and either Kansas or Wisky...I'd be surprised to see Wichita or Poly host.
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorPlum on Nov 26, 2017 0:32:31 GMT -5
Does SOS count very little trollhunter? Looking at teams with an SOS of 165 or 223 getting in just seems off to me. Who were the Top 50 wins for Charleston and N Texas? That Baylor win the beginning of year must factor in huge for Charleston. SOS counts just like W-L, RPI, Head to Head, Common Opponents and Significant Wins/Losses. Each committee may weigh them more or less in priority. Typically if they have a poor SOS, teams have a better W-L or RPI to counter it. Gotta look at entire resume. CofC beat Baylor and JMUx2 (3 top 50 wins in just 5 tries for those counting). North Texas beat Oregon State and Western Kentucky (2 t50 wins in just 3 tries for those counting). Edit - Wow it looks like WKU made T25 unadj! ANd they lost to Southern Miss and Texas Tech...ouch! LSU has no losses like that!
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Nov 26, 2017 0:35:14 GMT -5
After the loss to Purdue, I said Wisconsin would have to win their last 4 matches to host. Looks like I was right. Oh well. That loss to OSU was very costly, and it didn't help OSU one jot in the end. The badgers needed to beat PSU or Minn at least once. I wonder where they will end up. I would guess Iowa state, then Lincoln.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Nov 26, 2017 0:37:12 GMT -5
I'm beginning to believe Cal Poly could even host they've got a case when compared with Wichita, Iowa State, Wisky, UCLA, & Kansas I just don't believe for a second the NCAA will have USC, UCLA, & Poly all host USC is for sure, and I think it'll also be UCLA and either Kansas or Wisky...I'd be surprised to see Wichita or Poly host. yep, after looking at it again I think those last 3 seed/hosts are going to be BYU, UCLA, & Kansas - Wisky & Wichita won't with Wichita getting jumped by all 3, and Wisky probably shouldn't jump Kansas I think Cal Poly has a case over UCLA & Kansas and Wichita - but there's just no way both UCLA & Poly seed/host - too much east going west for the commmittee to stomach, although they'd never admit it it will be interesting to see if Wichita actually does get seeded/host (over Kansas I'm guessing) - just because of their raw/adjusted RPI
|
|
|
Post by Hawk Attack on Nov 26, 2017 0:40:07 GMT -5
Does SOS count very little trollhunter? Looking at teams with an SOS of 165 or 223 getting in just seems off to me. Who were the Top 50 wins for Charleston and N Texas? That Baylor win the beginning of year must factor in huge for Charleston. the SOS doesn't look off at all whatsovever even giving Iowa an extra two wins vs. OSU, they are 3-3 vs. 25-50, NOrth Texas was 2-1 vs. 25-50 sure Iowa got the big SOS boost wih the Big 10, but that's mostly based on losing matches, and their best non-conf win was Coastal Carolino, North Texas beat Oregon State non-conf yeah Iowa lost to a lot of good teams, but their 3 quality wins in conference shouldn't get a team a bid - had Iowa beat Maryland, you could switch those two teams that being said Iowa & Ohio State are likely the two best teams what won't be in the tournament I like looking at the Ave RPI W/L record for the above 3 teams, Iowa’s worst loss of the season was to Maryland... not a terrible L. North Texas and CoC lost to bad teams, and on average neither team beat teams better than who Iowa beat.
|
|
|
Post by southie on Nov 26, 2017 0:43:38 GMT -5
Thanks for posting. So many variables to consider, and unsure which have more value. Based on record against Top 25, UK and UF don't measure up. Based on record against Top 50, Texas and UF do not measure up. Based on record against Top 100, Texas, Stanford, and Nebraska don't measure up.
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Nov 26, 2017 0:44:31 GMT -5
Does SOS count very little trollhunter? Looking at teams with an SOS of 165 or 223 getting in just seems off to me. Who were the Top 50 wins for Charleston and N Texas? That Baylor win the beginning of year must factor in huge for Charleston. And multiple +100 losses!!! I just don’t get it. Look at all the criteria, not just a piece or two and you will understand.
|
|
|
Post by dman on Nov 26, 2017 0:46:15 GMT -5
the SOS doesn't look off at all whatsovever even giving Iowa an extra two wins vs. OSU, they are 3-3 vs. 25-50, NOrth Texas was 2-1 vs. 25-50 sure Iowa got the big SOS boost wih the Big 10, but that's mostly based on losing matches, and their best non-conf win was Coastal Carolino, North Texas beat Oregon State non-conf yeah Iowa lost to a lot of good teams, but their 3 quality wins in conference shouldn't get a team a bid - had Iowa beat Maryland, you could switch those two teams that being said Iowa & Ohio State are likely the two best teams what won't be in the tournament I like looking at the Ave RPI W/L record for the above 3 teams, Iowa’s worst loss of the season was to Maryland... not a terrible L. North Texas and CoC lost to bad teams, and on average neither team beat teams better than who Iowa beat. So what I'm seeing is it doesn't matter how much you lose to poor teams as long as you win the Top 50 matches. To me that says your wins against the bigger teams may be more "flukish" when looking at the schedule as a whole. Would think the committee takes that into consideration other than strictly statistical measures.
|
|
|
Post by southie on Nov 26, 2017 0:49:14 GMT -5
If SOS has any bearing, then Wisconsin and UCLA will both host.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Nov 26, 2017 0:52:34 GMT -5
the SOS doesn't look off at all whatsovever even giving Iowa an extra two wins vs. OSU, they are 3-3 vs. 25-50, NOrth Texas was 2-1 vs. 25-50 sure Iowa got the big SOS boost wih the Big 10, but that's mostly based on losing matches, and their best non-conf win was Coastal Carolino, North Texas beat Oregon State non-conf yeah Iowa lost to a lot of good teams, but their 3 quality wins in conference shouldn't get a team a bid - had Iowa beat Maryland, you could switch those two teams that being said Iowa & Ohio State are likely the two best teams what won't be in the tournament I like looking at the Ave RPI W/L record for the above 3 teams, Iowa’s worst loss of the season was to Maryland... not a terrible L. North Texas and CoC lost to bad teams, and on average neither team beat teams better than who Iowa beat. yep all true it's part of the difficulty when comparing a team (North Texas) that had lots of opportunities to lose to sub 100 teams and lost to a couple, with a team (Iowa) that had lots and lots of opportunities to beat really good teams and couldn't do it Maryland and Iowa really didn't do a heck of alot to earn a bid, so where I differentiate is NOrth Texas won the big matches they had to - Iowa didn't and Iowa had a heck of lot more opportuntity to do so than North Texas - like I said Iowa beats Maryland and they are in North Texas beat Western Kentucky & Oregon State - that is just as good as Iowa's wins over Ohio State or Michigan I guess one could justify putting Iowa in - but why? it's like rewarding them just for being in the Big 10 - sure they are a good team, but hardly have a great case
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Nov 26, 2017 0:54:19 GMT -5
Here is why LSU loses the Significant Win/Loss criteria:
LSU has a single top50 win versus a team that will not be in tournament #40 High Point, 1/9 vs t50.
CofC beat a top 25 team (Baylor #12) and twice beat JMU #48, both who will be in tournament, 3/5 vs t50.
North Texas beat Western Kentucky #24 and Oregon State #32, both will be in tourney, 2/3 vs t50.
Committee values t25 wins highly, t50 medium, +100 losses a bit less than t50 win.
Having t25 win is way more important than bad losses, so clearly LSU is behind the others.
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorPlum on Nov 26, 2017 0:57:56 GMT -5
And multiple +100 losses!!! I just don’t get it. Look at all the criteria, not just a piece or two and you will understand. I am. Terrible losses. Terrible SOS. They have a couple early season nice wins. That doesn’t offset enough for me. I mean horrendous SOS. Like you have to try to make a bad schedule to get that bad an SOS. So they have two nice wins. Draw the line at 60 instead of 50 and LSU has a ton of wins. And they have a better RPI.
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Nov 26, 2017 1:02:05 GMT -5
Look at all the criteria, not just a piece or two and you will understand. I am. Terrible losses. Terrible SOS. They have a couple early season nice wins. That doesn’t offset enough for me. I mean horrendous SOS. Like you have to try to make a bad schedule to get that bad an SOS. So they have two nice wins. Draw the line at 60 instead of 50 and LSU has a ton of wins. And they have a better RPI. well, North Texas ......WON....a LOT yeah, the SOS is poor, it's hard to evaluate
|
|
|
Post by Hawk Attack on Nov 26, 2017 1:03:19 GMT -5
I like looking at the Ave RPI W/L record for the above 3 teams, Iowa’s worst loss of the season was to Maryland... not a terrible L. North Texas and CoC lost to bad teams, and on average neither team beat teams better than who Iowa beat. yep all true it's part of the difficulty when comparing a team (North Texas) that had lots of opportunities to lose to sub 100 teams and lost to a couple, with a team (Iowa) that had lots and lots of opportunities to beat really good teams and couldn't do it Maryland and Iowa really didn't do a heck of alot to earn a bid, so where I differentiate is NOrth Texas won the big matches they had to - Iowa didn't and Iowa had a heck of lot more opportuntity to do so than North Texas - like I said Iowa beats Maryland and they are in North Texas beat Western Kentucky & Oregon State - that is just as good as Iowa's wins over Ohio State or Michigan I guess one could justify putting Iowa in - but why? it's like rewarding them just for being in the Big 10 - sure they are a good team, but hardly have a great case That’s why I liked looking at the non-conference slate for Iowa/NT/CoC, it takes the B1G out of the equation. On average, Iowa beat better teams and lost to better teams than both NT and CoC.
|
|