Friday, March 03, 2006

Friday's Games to Watch

MVC Conference Tourney
Bradley vs. Creighton
Braves need a win to have a chance at a bid. Bluejays need a win or else they will be sweating it out next Sunday. Biggest game of the night.

Evansville vs. Southern Illinois
Aces have a nice little three game winning streak going. Could they beat the Salukis again?

Northern Iowa vs. Missouri State
The loser of this one should still get an at-large bid, but it would be a tough 9 days waiting around to hear their name called.

Lipscomb vs. Gardner-Webb
Winner of this one is the favorite to take the A-Sun title.

Seton Hall at Pittsburgh
Win for Hall makes the a lock for a bid regardless of the Big East tourney.

30 comments:

Anonymous said...

I read all these people complaining about how some teams don't have tough ooc schedules i.e. florida state....which is a fine argument, but you can't use that for a basis as to why the MVC should get at least 5 bids, because the only team in that conference that played tourney teams ooc was northern iowa, who beat iowa, lsu, and bucknell, the rest of the teams in that league play bad teams 80% of the season. Southern Illinois should not make the tourney unless they win the conference tourney....any team with 10+ losses from that conference should not be in, when you lose to Montmouth, Alaska Anchorage, and St. Louis with no good wins ooc, there's no way you deserve a tourney bid...the only reason they're being mentioned is because they've won a couple games in the tourney over the last few years, thats a dumb reason, your selection should be based on what you do in the current year, just ask MD last year, who beat Duke twice and didn't get in, and has done very well in the tourney for years, so the committee would be hypocritical to give the salukies a bid after a very weak season

Eric Z said...

Look, if you want to make the argument that Southern Illinois shouldn't be in because of their bad losses, that's fine - and that's a valid argument.

I think your 10 loss argument is bogus, however - if you don't want to take a 10 loss team from the MVC - the 6th rated conference, then you're not taking a 10 loss team from the 7th rated conference, are you? Goodbye, Arizona, then.

But your SoS argument, which is essentially that "no one is playing tournament teams, so basically they are all equal" is misleading. The non-conf Strength of Schedules are NOT equal.

Here are the records and SoS for non-conference games of these bubble teams:

Team A: 8-1, SoS #42
Team B: 8-3, #78
Team C: 9-1, #39
Team D: 7-2, #85
Team E: 7-3, #114
Team F: 7-2, #136
Team G: 10-1, #278
Team H: 10-1, #317

Do I really have to tell you which teams are the MVC teams and which are the major conference teams (Fla St and Colorado)? The difference is large.

One more thing: have you looked at the records vs. the top 50? Florida St has had 6 games vs top 50 opponents -they have won 1. Southern has had 10 games vs top 50 - they have won 6. Hell, Bucknell has more top 50 wins than Fla St.

The point here is not to say Southern is clearly ahead of Fla St - they aren't. But it's to show that they are very close as we go into the home stretch.

And, again I ask - if you are against having 5 MVC teams in, who then are you putting in? Did you watch Syracuse last night?

Bracketology 101 said...

There is still a very good chance for the MVC to get 5 bids if things go their way this weekend in the conference tourney. Wichita State is in regardless of what they do this weekend. The winner of the Missouri State-UNI game is a lock and the loser will still most likely get a bid barring a lot of upsets. If Creighton losses they can still get a bid too. If SIU can get to the finals (so they would have to beat the winner of the UNI-Missouri State game) then they will get a bid. If Bradley can beat Creighton then they will right in the mix for a bid as well. So obviously there is a lot of basketball left to be played. Six bids might be impossible though. If Southern Illinois and Bradley both do what they need to do to get bids then they might just end up stealing a bid from Creighton or the loser of the UNI-Missouri State game (obviously what goes on throughout the rest of college bball will matter too).

Anonymous said...

Maryland choked down the stretch last year. They lost 3 times to Clemson. The Terps were 3-7 against teams that made the big dance. They were 3-7 in their last 10. Maryland also lost to Va. Tech who was 112th in the RPI. Maryland did not belong in the big dance last year. They fell apart at the end of the year against NIT teams. Maryland was only 3-7 against NCAA teams. Terp fans really need to quit crying about last year.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the fact that MD choked down the stretch, and didn't win games they needed to, hence why they did not get a bid....trust me, i'm not crying about it, to me, the fact that a bubble team can sweep a 1 seed, they can play with anyone in the country, and could make a special run in the NCAA's, but for some reason, we're all about these mid majors in recent years....this year especially, i just don't think those programs have an honest shot at making a long run in the tourney, last year's MD team(not deserving of a bid) had a better chance of beating high seeds than any of these mid major at large's who win 20+ games beating 6 teams who's RPI is like at best #30, and then people make this argument about top 50 RPI wins, when none of them come against top tear teams, who really cares if you beat so so teams that happen to have some computer ranking better than 50....so this year, FSU hands down would have a better shot at upsetting high seeded teams than a team like Bradley, while these teams may win a first round game, i guarantee by the end of the first weekend, there might be one left, so i guess CBS, NCAA both love these cinderalla stories, but as a big cbball fan, would rather see the best teams, with the best chance of parody in the tourney...we all know if any of those MVC teams played in the ACC or Big Ten or Big East, we wouldn't even be talking about them right now, just think about it....

orson said...

No team that lost 3 times to Clemson deserves an at large bid. that MD. fan needs his mommy to hand him a kleenex

andrew said...

What will happen if BYU wins the MWC tournament? The Cougars look poised to take the crown.

Eric Z said...

What, then, is your criteron for picking the best 34 at-large teams? Does "best" mean:
- capable of beating higher seeds,
- consistently playing at a higher level than other teams

I think the committee has a different definition of "best" than you do.

And I really have to disagree with your last statemnt. We have no idea where N Ia, or S Ill, or Creighton would be if they were in a big conference.
Yes, they'd have to play Duke, UConn, etc., but they would also get home games vs. the middle of the pack teams (Maryland, Syracuse, Wisconsin) that can't play on the road.
And we do have a few examples from this year:
N Iowa winning vs Iowa and AT LSU
Creighton beating Nebraska
Bucknell beating Syracuse IN SYRACUSE
(and then there is Wichita's 55-54 loss to Illinois on a neutral court).

These teams would then finally have the chance to play games at home. They're not going to be on the road for all 16 games in conference.

Given that, it's reasonable to think that these teams could finish 9-7 or so in the ACC, Big Ten, etc.

If you don't think so, then why don't we just invite South Florida, Penn St. and Virginia Tech to the big dance and call it a day.....

Pikachu732001 said...

To the FSU-is-better-than-any-MVC-bubble-team koolaid drinker, in the words of the late Ronald Reagan, "Well, there you go again".

We get you anti-MVC spiel, and we disagree with it(at least I do). Call me when you beat Miami, in Miami which if they don't, makes it harder for them to be actually in the field, barring an ACC tourney run.

Anonymous said...

ok.....if you want to leave them out if they lose to miami on sunday with an 18-9 record and 8-8 in the ACC, thats fine.......as long as you think that Southern Illinois and Bradley or Creighton should not get in as well, because all 4 have similar overall records, SIU, Bradley, Creighton teams have no top 25 wins, while fsu beat duke once, and outplayed them twice.....comparing conference records is invalid because Drake, Indiana St., Illinois St. and Evansville are not even close to Wake Forest, GT, Clemson, and Virginia Tech

Anonymous said...

I've been comparing UCLA and Georgetown this week, especially in light of the number of brackets that have them meeting in the second round (UCLA a #4 and Georgetown a #5). If you look deeper than the RPI number, Georgetown appears to have a stronger (or at least as strong) resume. I can understand many people have them winning the PAC-10 tourney, and factoring one or two more quality wins I can certainly consider them ahead, but look at the profiles right now:

UCLA
Record 23-6
vs. RPI top 100: 7-5
RPI: 16
SOS: 28
Top 25 (RPI) Wins: 3 (Arizona x2 (19), Nevada(25))
Losees outside Top 25: 4 (Washington (29) x2, Cal (62), USC (110))

Georgetown:
Record 19-7
vs. RPI top 100: 8-7
RPI: 21
SOS: 49
Top 25 Wins: 2 (Duke (1), Pitt (7))
Losees outside Top 25: 1 (Vanderbilt (60))

It certainly appears to me that you can't rank UCLA higher on quality wins, nor can you rank them higher on bad losses. The only justification I see for ranking UCLA higher is their better record, which in this case is merely a function of:
1) UCLA has played 3 more games
2) UCLA has played 17 teams with RPI 100+

These are just my thoughts, I'd appreciate other's opinions.

RT Miller said...

3 points:

1: the rpi looks less credible every year.

2: I'll take WAKE, Ga Tech. Va. Tech, & Clemson (bottom 4 ACC)anytime versus any 4 MVC teams you want to pick. I'll take them regardless of who the home team is!

3: if the 6 teams that are being considered for NCAA births from the MVC played Duke twice instead of Drake (laugher) twice: what would the outcome be? How about next year we have an MVC/ACC challenge played exclusively in MVC arenas? That would let all you mid-major, mid-westerners know what major basketball is really like!

I prey the selection committee gives us some 1st round ACC/MVC match ups!!!

acc > mvc said...

RT Miller!!!!!!!!!!!


finally someone agrees with me on here, for a while i was thinking only Mid major fans were on this blog, nice to know someone out there agrees with me

JT Miller hates Mid majors said...

Great win for Bradley today. It will be a long 9 day wait for Creighton but I think they will get in as an at large.

Anonymous said...

If Creighton is in, Bradley has to get in then, regardless of whether they beat the Shockers tomorrow. They beat Creighton 2 out of 3. SOS will be almost identical. Wins vs top 50 will be better. Last 10 record is better. RPI will be almost identical. How can you let in Creighton without Bradley too?

duke referees said...

Is there a chance Stanford could get in ahead of Cal if they finish ahead of them in PAC 10 standings? Cal has a very poor resume. They have 3 top 50 wins but also have 3 very bad losses. Nobody who loses to Arizona State & Oregon State belongs in the bracket!! DO you think they should Chris/Craig?

Bracketology 101 said...

The Bradley win today makes it much more difficult to put Creighton in without Bradley, but not impossible. Bradley has played much better of late than Creighton (8-2 last 10 games vs. 6-4), and beat Creighton twice. On the other hand, where Crieghton has a slight advantage is in their OOC wins. Creighton beat George Mason and Nebraska OOC, which is better than Creighton's wins over Western Kentucky and DePaul. Creighton was also a game better in conference and will have an RPI that is slightly higher (8 or so spots in the end probably). There is still a lot of basketball to be played, but right now Bradley is looking better and better (an absolute lock with one more win), and Creighton has to hope their late season struggles are overshadowed by some good conference and pretty good OOC wins.

The Cal-Stanford argument is a good one. If Stanford beats UCLA and Cal loses to USC, Cal would probably still have the slightest of edges going into the Pac-10 tournament for a couple reasons: Cal would have one more top 50 win than Stanford, Stanford would have worse "bad" losses (UC-everyone is worse than Oregon State and Arizona State), and Cal would have the best win of the two - a win at UCLA, where Stanford lost big. Remember, there is also a chance that these two teams could play in the Pac-10 tourney, which if your scenario unfolded, would obviously be an elimination game for both.

Anonymous said...

You ACC guys are a farce. Back up your arguments with facts instead of throwing bombs.

As for Bradley, huge win. They also played a portion of their schedule without O'Bryant, which is when they tanked. They are hot, and if they do beat Wichita, they are in. A team no 2 or 3 seed wants to see in the second round.

Nice job Syracuse.

Anonymous said...

Seton Hall is in!

pokerplayr said...

rt miller...

I did not know the NCAA gave birth ???

biased said...

Northern Iowa & Seton Hall punched their tickets for the big dance. I still think Creighton will get an at large. If SIU & Bradley both lose tomorrow, IMO they are both out. I have been crunching the numbers & Colorado is not going to make it.

Bracketology 101 said...

UNI is definetly in now. SIU needs a win over Wichita or they are done. Bradley though might be in regardless now. They took 2 out of 3 from Creighton, split with Missouri State, and already beat UNI twice. With the way Bradley finished they are ahead of Creighton at this point. Missouri State should feel pretty safe. They split with UNI, Creighton, Bradley, and SIU in the regular season and didn't have any bad losses so they are in. Creighton has to chear hard for Wichita to beat SIU tomorrow because if the Salukis can pull off the upset tomorrow they will be ahead of the Bluejays because of the head to head sweep and given the fact that they are in the tourney championship game. At this point I think the order is 1. Wichita State 2. UNI 3. Missouri State 4. Bradley 5. Creighton 6. SIU. The conference is looking good for 5 bids right now but that sixth bid will probably get squeezed throughout the rest of championship week.

Anonymous said...

I see a lot of talk on this board about the merits of "good wins" vs "bad losses." To me, "good wins" should be given much more weight than bad losses. Seton Hall is a good example. In their last 6 games of the season, they played West Virginia, Notre Dame, St. John's, DePaul, Cincy and Pitt.

They went 3-3. The 3 wins were 2 top 10 RPI wins and 1 top 25 RPI win. The three losses were bad losses. If they had beaten the bad teams and lost to the top teams, I think they would still be on the bubble. Beating 3 top 25 RPI teams in the last 3 weeks of the season is an indication that you can compete with the quality of teams that will play in the NCAA tournament. There are no "bad losses" in the NCAA tournament at the seeding that Seton Hall will get.

Good wins, (ie handing Pitt there only home loss of the season) speak volumes about the ability of a team to step its level of play to compete in the NCAA tournament. A team like Colorado, that generally takes care of business, but can't beat anyone on the road and rarely beats a team ahead of it in the RPI, is little threat at tourney time.

Anonymous said...

Seton Hall walks in with win over Pitt. Now lets hope the committee does the right thing with Syracuse and sends them to the NIT. Talking head Majerus said Thursday night that the Orangemen deserve to get in because of his respect for Jim Boeheim. What criteria is that? Plus, if you listen to Bilas and Digger on ESPN they have everyone getting in -- The tournamet will have 90 teams.

Anonymous said...

I agree, give me a team with 5 good wins (including a couple of good road wins) and 5 bad losses, over a team with 0 good wins and 0 bad losses. There are no home games in the tournament, and any win is a good win.

RT Miller hates mid majors said...

Syracuse would save their season with a win over Nova tomorrow. Have any of you actually compare Seton Hall & Syracuse Big East schedule. Seton Hall had much easier home-home games.

Seton Hall Syracuse

Rutgers UConn
St. Johns Villanova
South Florida Cincinnati

While Seton Hall got to play bottum feeder 2 times, Syracuse had to play 2 #1 seeds twice & a very good Cincy team

Anonymous said...

Hey Genius.

Seton Hall BEAT Syracuse by 6 AT Syracuse.

RT Miller hates mid majors said...

Did you compare their schedule to Syracuse. Seton Hall played St. johns, South Florida, & Rutgers twice. Syracuse played UConn, Villanova, & Cincy twice. Records can be very deserving. But who care that Seton Hall played the cupcakes twice? right "genius"?

Anonymous said...

Why would you bother analyzing two teams schedules in the same conference to determine who is more deserving, when the two teams met head to head, and Seton Hall BEAT Syracuse ON THE ROAD.

Not only will Seton Hall BEAT Syracuse straight up on the road, but they will finish 2 games ahead of Syracuse in the Big East, but they have 5 top 50 RPI wins to Syracuse's 2 top 5 RPI wins.

If Syracuse had a tougher schedule than Seton Hall, wouldn't that mean that they had MORE opportunities for quality wins?

How is it that Seton Hall has 5 top 50 RPI wins if Syracuse had so many more opportutnies. This is another case of misplacing the importance of good losses over good wins.

Luckily, since the Hall and Cuse played each other head to head, you can actually see how they match up against each other. The fact that Seton Hall took the Orange to the woodshed in the Carrierdome says it all. If you can't understand that, you should stand in a corner with a dunce cap on.

Anonymous said...

FSU should be in after today's win, but a loss to Wake in the ACC tourney would put them out, and deservedly so. I think they have bumped Syracuse and Creighton to the NIT unless the deacons pull the upset.