Thursday, March 10, 2011

Bracketology 101's Field of 68 - March 10

Wednesday Recap
Here are six things we learned from Wednesday's games:

1. All Big East Tournament games last 40 minutes, except when the referees are tired and just want to go home.

2. The Big East is going to get 11 bids, thanks to Marquette's win over West Virginia. The Golden Eagles are up to a 9 seed in today's bracket.

3. There's a very good chance that Villanova ends up the lowest seeded Big East team.

4. Colorado is the last Big XII bubble team left standing. Baylor and Nebraska are done after losing to Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, respectively.

5. If the Buffs want to stay on the right side of the bubble, they probably need to beat Kansas State today - and they definitely need to play better than they did against Iowa State.

6. Long Island (from the Northeast) and Northern Colorado (from the Big Sky) are going dancing. Both are on the 15 line in today's bracket.

Thursday Preview
Today is shaping up to be the biggest day of Championship Week for about a dozen residents of Bubbleville. Just about every major conference has games going on that feature teams fighting for tourney bids.

We'll start in the ACC, where Boston College and Virginia Tech will look to avoid upsets that would surely ensure them of top seeds in the NIT. Both teams will need two wins this week to ensure that their name is called on Sunday, but both will first need to get by ACC bottom feeders Wake Forest and Georgia Tech.

The Big Ten conference tourney also gets started today and features Penn State and Michigan State both playing for their bubble lives. As long as the Spartans avoid an upset against Iowa, they should be safe. Penn State, meanwhile, will need to beat Indiana today and then take down Wisconsin tomorrow to get any serious consideration.

The SEC tourney kicks off today with Georgia looking to take care of Auburn, which would set up another bubble battle against Alabama for tomorrow. Tennessee also needs to take care of Arkansas (who already beat them earlier in the year) in order to avoid being talked about in the same breath as Virginia Tech's and Michigan State on the bubble.

A few weeks ago, it looked like there would be no bubble battles in the Pac-10 tourney. Since then, the bubble has gotten even softer and USC won five of six down the stretch to finish above .500 in conference. Washington State also picked up wins over Washington and USC to keep their name in the mix. USC faces off with Cal today (who can also climb onto the bubble with a win), and if the Trojans can pick up the win, they will be in decent shape for a bid. A win over Arizona on Friday would likely lock down their spot. If Washington State is able to take down Washington for the third time this season, that could create an interesting scenario and potentially put Washington in danger.

Elsewhere on the bubble, Colorado will attempt to take down Kansas State for the third time this season and, in the process, solidify their tourney bid. In the MWC, Colorado State faces off against New Mexico in what is an at-large elimination game. In C-USA action, UAB needs to avoid an upset at the hands of East Carolina to stay in the at-large mix. If they do that, we like their chances to go dancing. Memphis, meanwhile, opens up with Southern Miss. The Tigers will need a deep tourney run (probably a trip to the finals) to get at-lare worthy. Fans of bubble teams throughout the country need to root hard against UTEP this week. The Miners are playing the C-USA tourney on their home floor, where they went 16-2 this year, and are looking like the best bid-stealer candidate left out there.

Bracket Breakdown
Last Four In

Michigan State, Alabama, Boston College, Colorado

First Four Out
Virginia Tech, Clemson, USC, Missouri State

Next Four Out
Penn State, VCU, Colorado State, Washington State

---------------------------------------------------------------

Conference Breakdown
Big East (11), Big XII (6), Big Ten (6), SEC (6), ACC (4), A-10 (3), MWC (3), Pac-10 (3), Colonial (2), Conference USA (2), WCC (2)

America East - Boston University

ACC - Duke, North Carolina, Florida State, Boston College

Atlantic Sun - Belmont

A-10 - Xavier, Temple, Richmond

Big East - Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Louisville, St. John's, Connecticut, West Virginia, Cincinnati, Georgetown, Marquette, Villanova

Big Sky - Northern Colorado

Big South - UNC-Asheville

Big Ten - Ohio State, Purdue, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State

Big XII - Kansas, Texas, Kansas State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Colorado

Big West - Long Beach State

Colonial - Old Dominion, George Mason

Conference USA - UTEP, UAB

Horizon - Butler

Ivy - Princeton

MAAC - St. Peter's

MAC - Kent State

MEAC - Bethune-Cookman

MVC - Indiana State

MWC
- BYU, San Diego State, UNLV

Northeast - Long Island

Ohio Valley - Morehead State

Pac-10 - Arizona, UCLA, Washington

Patriot - Bucknell

SEC - Florida, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama

Southern - Wofford

Southland - McNeese State

Summit - Oakland

Sun Belt - Arkansas-Little Rock

SWAC - Texas Southern

WAC - Utah State

WCC - Gonzaga, St. Mary's

----------------------------------------------------------------

The Seeds
The 1s

Ohio State, Kansas, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame

The 2s
Duke, BYU, Syracuse, Purdue

The 3s
North Carolina, San Diego State, Florida, Texas

The 4s
Louisville, Wisconsin, St. John's, Kentucky

The 5s
Connecticut, Xavier, Arizona, Kansas State

The 6s
West Virginia, Cincinnati, Temple, Texas A&M

The 7s
Georgetown, UCLA, Vanderbilt, Old Dominion

The 8s
UNLV, Missouri, Utah State, George Mason

The 9s
Illinois, Florida State, Tennessee, Marquette

The 10s
Villanova, Gonzaga, Butler, Washington

The 11s
Richmond, Michigan, Georgia, St. Mary's

The 12s
UAB, Michigan State vs. Alabama (FF), Boston College vs. Colorado (FF), UTEP

The 13s
Belmont,
Princeton, Oakland, Kent State

The 14s
Bucknell, Indiana State, St. Peter's, Wofford

The 15s
Morehead State,
Long Beach State, Long Island, Northern Colorado

The 16s
Boston University, UNC-Asheville, McNeese State vs. Texas Southern (FF), Bethune-Cookman vs. Arkansas-Little Rock (FF)

The Bracket
(Bracket courtesy Matt Reeves)
















Questions? Comments? E-mail us at bracketologyblog@yahoo.com or send us a tweet at twitter.com/Bracketology101.

438 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 400 of 438   Newer›   Newest»
Dustin said...

That Colorado win does more than just put them in the tournament. K-State was looking at a 5 seed and now probably a 7. Big difference in second round matchups.

Mike said...

Wow Iowa came to play today, bye bye Michigan state!

B101, you think that if penn state puts themselves in the 6th spot of the B10 they get a dance spot? especially with their 6th SOS?

Anonymous said...

And Mike jinxes Iowa

Bracketology 101 said...

Nothing has changed on Penn State. Beat Indiana tonight and Wisconsin tomorrow and we'll talk.

Dustin said...

Michigan State just locked up a berth by beating Iowa in a close game. I wonder how many people are going to scream about that.

Anonymous said...

I will

GoBlue1980 said...

If Michigan State gets a berth in the NCAA Tourney, Michigan is coming along too. We beat them twice, tied with in conference and have a better overall record.

Anonymous said...

And worse profile

Dustin said...

Not that I would like it, but theres a bigger chance Michigan gets left out right now than Michigan State. Michigan probably needs to win its next game more than Michigan State does, although they are both safe in my bracket.

Anonymous said...

"0-6 is 0-6 my friend."

Dumb comment. 0-6 against RPI Top 50 is not the same as 0-6 against a bunch of teams over 100. Arguing otherwise is pointless.

As for Sparty getting in and Michigan being left out, not sure how that would happen. Can't ignore the H2H sweep between the 2. Same for the PSU argument. Illini result aside, if one of those teams is in, then it's a crime if UM is left out.

Mike said...

PSU is not close to in yet. UM is out with a lose to Ill. And MSU is still barely in but probably wants to win their next game.

JGibson said...

Head-to-head is ignored all the time. Check out the ACC in 2000. Virginia and North Carolina had identical ACC record and UVa swept UNC. UNC got a #8 seed (and went to the final 4), and Virginia was left out entirely.

Mike said...

Over 100? Memphis is top 50, So. Miss is 53 and UTEP is 64. Your comment sounds "dumb".

Anonymous said...

GOD I can't wait til Michigan makes the tournament and then gets destroyed in the First 4 game. Pretenders.

Anonymous said...

What is with the hate for Michigan.

Trent said...

Anonymous, would that bring meaning to your life? And would Michigan making the tournament and winning a game send you running for the razors? Think you are taking this a bit too seriously bud.

Anonymous said...

Regardless of the committee not considering how many bids a conference should get, the Big 10 will not only get 4. Mich and MSU are likely both, with PSU being a real long shot.

Anonymous said...

The question was based on the amount of comments about Michigan not deserving to be in compared to other bubble teams

Jack Mchoffa said...

If Penn State gets to the Big Ten semis and loses by 8 points or less they should get a bid.

Trent said...

Why 8?

Anonymous said...

WHy is Michigan discussed so much on these boards?

Anonymous said...

"Over 100? Memphis is top 50, So. Miss is 53 and UTEP is 64. Your comment sounds "dumb"."

And again you've missed the point. 0-6 against Group A is not necessarily the same as 0-6 against Group B. Plain and simple.

@JGibson-You're right, but as it pertains to Mich,MSU and PSU, you can't make the argument that either MSU or PSU's resumes or so much better than Michigan's that they deserve a bid over them, in spite of the season sweep. That's what I'm getting at.

@7:23-Haters and Michigan go hand in hand. If people don't hate you, you're doing something wrong.

Bonnie Beaver said...

I bet the Great West conference feels slighted because they dont get a bid. Utah Valley won at Oregon State, they also beat UND in 4 OT in what was the game of the year that nobody knows about. Utah Valley should get a bid if they win the Great West tournament in Orem, Utah.

Anonymous said...

I think there is so much hate towards Michigan because they obviously are the #1 represented school on this board fan wise so it turns everyone else off. Especially when their view of their team is often far from reality.

Trent said...

What exactly is the reality for Michigan? People aren't exactly saying they should be a protected seed or even anywhere above a 10? I fail to see how your "reality" is any more real than thiers.

Anonymous said...

@Trent

A lot of people look at Michigan's body of work and say not a tournament team. And if this was last year with a stronger bubble and 65 teams then they'd probably be right.

But it isn't, the field's larger and the bubble teams suck and almost all bracketologists see Michigan as a tournament team. People can't deal with that.

Anonymous said...

Why is there Michigan hate?

Simple: Too many scUM fans on this site. They have a wrong perception about themselves and they think they're good. No, losing a close game to Wisconsin doesnt give you a 'good win'. You're 0-6 against the top 5 teams
in the Big 10.

If your best win is Penn State away, you're not a lock. Period.

Hell, I don't think Penn State is a great team.. but swap B10 schedules and Michigan is probably 8-10.

Tom said...

Also, Michigan is the best academic school in the B10 that also has decent sports teams (sorry Northwestern), so it tends to get a lot of hate in that regard. No one likes uppity yuppies who drive Mercedes and manage mutual funds or work in BigLaw yelling about a sports team. Especially not the blue collar fanbase of many B10 schools.

Maybe I'm off and that's not part of the reason, but it seems to follow that people hate the good academic schools that also have good sports (Duke, Stanford, Michigan, Notre Dame).

Mark said...

A lot of haters on this site... if Michigan beats Illinois we're looking at a 7/8 seed. Knock O$U off and we're about a 5 seed. Win the Big 10 tournament and we're potentially a 3/4.

Anonymous said...

Tom makes a good point. People don't like the academic schools and their fanbases.

FWIW, the Michigan fans on here talking about close losses and saying they're a lock are morons. But to say that Michigan should be nowhere near the field is just as dumb.

They're probably properly seeded right now, on the cusp of the first four in and an 11 seed. They would be best served to beat Illinois but that might not be necessary depending on other results.

Anonymous said...

Northwestern is the best academic program in the Big Ten, not Michigan - nice try.

Rick said...

How far does K-State fall?

Anonymous said...

*last four in.

Trent said...

scUM? Anyone who throws that out probably isn't the most reasonable of sources. Good to know where you stand. At least you could have been a bit more witty and gone with "Meatchicken" or "Missagain".

Michigan wins tomorrow, it's in. If it loses, it's a coinflip that's dependent on the rest of the bubble. Not really hard to come to grips with.

Trent said...

Mark, stay off the drugs. That's the type of comment that will get irrational Michigan haters like anonymous over there to whip out the baby's arm.

Dustin said...

Michigan IS NOT a 7/8 if they beat Illinois. Highest would be a 9 with just that win, and thats pushing it.

Anonymous said...

What people see is a team that has had 7 chances to get a signature win and they have failed all 7 times.

Then they see Mich fans say "Oh but we are HOT right now". So they look at Mich's schedule and see that all they've actully done is beat the worst teams in their league.

So Mich fans say "we are in" and everyone else says unless you beat Ill you are not.

Thats what people see.

Tom said...

Northwestern doesn't have a football or basketball program of any note, so no they don't fall into the category. And Michigan could easily be argued as a superior school to Northwestern (UM has a better law program, med school, engineering program, most sciences; NW has a better business school, education program, and journalism program).

I didn't go to either school, FWIW.

I honestly think that the academic reputation of the program weighs heavily on how much people dislike the school's sports program.

Anonymous said...

@7:49

"So Mich fans say "we are in" and everyone else says unless you beat Ill you are not."

Almost everyone knowledgeable that does a bracket would disagree with you.

Entitled to your opinion though

mike said...

Also, Michigan is the best academic school in the B10 that also has decent sports teams (sorry Northwestern), so it tends to get a lot of hate in that regard. No one likes uppity yuppies who drive Mercedes and manage mutual funds or work in BigLaw yelling about a sports team. Especially not the blue collar fanbase of many B10 schools.

Maybe I'm off and that's not part of the reason, but it seems to follow that people hate the good academic schools that also have good sports (Duke, Stanford, Michigan, Notre Dame).

You can't lump Michigan in with Duke, Stanford. LMAO.

And lets talk programs. Northwestern has a MUCH better football program than Michigan.

Michigan is a great academic school but it's nowhere near Northwestern. Northwestern is a top 10 school Michigan will be anywhere from the low 20's to high 30's. Penn State, Wisconsin and Illinois are very similar academically with most in the 30's.

Ohio State is slightly below in the 40's and then you have a good drop off with the other schools: Purdue, Minnesota, Indiana, MSU and Iowa all in the high 60's low 70's. Nebraska is by far the Big 10's worst academic school almost near 100.

Dustin said...

The scUM moniker is about as clever as the gaYtor moniker. The dumb puns show your intellect quite nicely.

Trent said...

Anonymous,

That's what you see. That's not what everyone sees. Right now, most have Michigan in. I'm not sure why that makes you rage so much. Kind of makes me think there are some deep-seeded issues locked somewhere in your subconscious.

Mike said...

To put Michigan in the class of Duke Stanford is laughable

Trent said...

Big Ten academic ratings:

Tier 1: Northwestern
Tier 2: Michigan, Wisconsin
Tier 3: Penn State, Illinois, Ohio State, Purdue
Tier 4: Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan State, Indiana
Tier 5: Nebraska

Trent said...

Mike,

That was a little much, but it's in the same class as Cal, UNC, UVa, UCLA, etc. It's regarded as a "Public Ivy" for a reason.

Mike said...

Thats funny. Im not the same mike that posted before me and I thought the same thing. UM is not stanford or duke.

Anonymous said...

Comparing Michigan to Duke and Stanford is absurd. Go to the Michigan forums and have your circle jerk over there.

Dustin said...

To change the subject away from Michigan, Texas is trying to erase all of the recent bad memories by pummeling Oklahoma. Up 43-20 at the half.

Tom said...

I didn't realize that the only academic rankings were undergrad.

Just to put it to rest, Michigan has better overall graduate programs than Northwestern in money making disciplines (Medicine, Law, Sciences). The Ross school isn't far from Kellogg in ranking. Same with the education school. I was an admissions counselor in grad school and worked with most of these programs.

And I'm not saying Michigan is equal to Duke or Stanford academically (although, on a grad level Michigan and Duke are probably equal), but insofar that they are all academically-inclined schools with good sports programs and catch heat for it.

Anonymous said...

UM is not in the same league as Cal, UCLA, UVA either. You have to be from Michigan to think that.

Why are we arguing academics though? ha

The Michigan fued has gone to a whole nother level.

Anonymous said...

Not a UM guy, but it's just as good as, if not better than Duke, especially in engineering and law.

Stanford is a cut above both those schools.

Dustin said...

I have a question for B101 that they might know. I was trying to find out if the Great West has applied for an auto-bid, or what they would need to do to get 1, but I couldnt find anyything solid. Any knowledge of that?

Anonymous said...

you stay classy 7:57

DavidATL said...

DUDES!!!! This is (or at least was) a basketball forum. Go find another sandbox to play in. You are dropping way too much ____ in this one.

Anonymous said...

YAWN.

Tom and Trent ~ go have gay children and enroll them in the Law program at Michigan.

Can we talk about BASKETBALL? Save your stupid posts for the who gives a shit blog.

Trent said...

Anonymous, I guess those ratings that have Michigan in the same tier as those schools are all lies to irritate you then? You've lost it sir.

Trent said...

Gay comments now huh? What's next, some racial slurs? We tried talking about basketball and you threw a temper tantrum. Now you are throwing another one. I say follow up with an n-bomb and a mother joke - why stop when you are ahead?

Dustin said...

Yea, well Florida is the #2 academic school in the SEC, so there!

I showed you guys.

Tom said...

CSU losing removes any glimmer of hope they had.

Colorado took itself off of the bubble.

MSU probably took itself off of the bubble.

Memphis strengthened its position.

USC needs another win to get itself near the top of the bubble.

Boston College won big but still needs to take care of Clemson.

Georgia almost has a lock.

Trent said...

High five to Dustin.

DavidATL said...

Re: Question on Great West Conference -- the answer is just look at who is in it and on average how long they stay there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_West_Conference

Basically, the Great West Conference is to conferences what University of Phoenix is to real colleges.

Dustin said...

Re: Great West

I know, I know, they would be a permanent 16 seed. Their conference champion doesnt even get a NIT bid.

I was just wondering if they were trying to change that or not, and if they were, what would the requirements be, and what would they have to do to actually get the bid. Frankly, I'd like to see an at-large removed.

Chase said...

Marquette over Louisville tonight.

Dustin said...

Chase, stop copying my thoughts.

DavidATL said...

Good call B101 on UTEP. Not that putting the serious beat-down on Marshall is that wonderous an accomplishment, but it gives a good indication of what they can do with home court advantage throughout the C-USA tourney.

Time for somebody to make a change. Mr. Lunardi? Mr. Lunardi? Mr. Lunardi?

Trent said...

Why does this win get MSU off the bubble exactly? If the bubble keeps cannibalizing itself Sparty should get in, but how does a win over a sub-150 RPI Iowa team do anything but keep Michigan State afloat? It didn't get any better of a win today than Georgia or Boston College did. I just don't understand this sentiment.

Anonymous said...

I want to see a 68 school bracket and s-curve on here tommorow morning completly based on academics.

Would UM be last four in?
First four out?

They swept MSU but couldnt get the signature win against Stanford

AG said...

People hate on Michigan because we have lots of old fans who don't like standing and cheering, because our basketball arena is named after a football coach and its half full most of the time, because 30% of our student body are east coast kids who couldn't get into a private school and they only care about baseball and pro football.

Basketball recruits from Flint and Saginaw think MSU is the only school in the state. The MSU homer on Detroit sports talk radio thinks Oakland U has a better program. I on the other hand remember a time when Michigan was just as committed to two-sport excellence as Ohio State, Texas, and Florida are today.

Other reasons people hate on Michigan:

1. They are fans of a bubble team they want to see get in ahead of Michigan.

2. They are ACC homers who think real basketball means running a lot and not playing defense.

3. Subscribe to Will's "elite wins uber alles" philosophy."

BTW, if Will is the "OSU of commentators" does that mean he's going to lose to Northwestern tomorrow, too?

Anonymous said...

As far as MSU improving there standing against Iowa, I think its more that they didn't lose to them and hurt themselves. I don't think they are yet a lock, but for them to miss it would take a couple of bid thieves and the other bubble teams performing well.

Trent said...

@anonymous with the Michigan complex,

Odds are you would rage at that bracket too.

Dustin said...

Re: Michigan State

The reason beating Iowa makes them a lock is, they just needed to avoid a bad loss, they dont need another good win on their resume. It plays to whats already on their resume.

There might be people on the committee that think like Will, and thats why Michigan is still in some trouble, regardless of the fact that more bracketologists have Michigan rated higher.

Trent said...

@the more reasonable anonymous,

I agree that the bubble as it current is would work in MSU's favor. But that would be more of MSU making it because no one else could steal the bid from them than MSU earning it with a win over an 11-20 Iowa team if Sparty does as expected and loses to Purdue tomorrow.

Obviously if MSU beats Purdue all of this is moot. But yeah, MSU basically didn't kill itself today - it didn't really "earn" a bid.

DavidATL said...

OK, that's it. Somebody get a d@mn big backhoe and let's just lop off the entire state and cede it to Canada. Michigan, Michigan State, Oakland, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, South-Central-Little-To-The-Left-And-Slightly-Behind-The-Second-Shrub Michigan . . .

All of 'em. Gone. Banished.

Upper Peninsula can stay since it is (1)really just an Extension of Wisconsin anyway and (2) because Lake Superior State can play hockey and they are not a BUNCH OF SELF-IMPORTANT WHINERS.

D@mn.

Trent said...

Michigan State's good wins aren't that plentiful. They have Wisconsin and that's about it (Washington has played itself out of truly "good win" contention). And does the committee consider the loss of Korie Lucious from the Sparty team that beat Wisky? Not sure they do, but I know a lot of my Spartan friends are worried about that, because he was an important piece to their backcourt.

MSU has the great SOS. That's the main advantage it has in the bubble conversation.

Dustin said...

MSUs win over Washington came on a neutral court, and lets not forget about the win over Illinois, because thats still a good win.

They might still get credit for beating the good Minnesota.

Trent said...

DavidATL,

You are cracking. Pump the brakes.

Dustin said...

I like Notre Dame, but I'm kind of mad at them for blowing out Cincinnati. Not much else to keep me occupied for the next hour.

Good thing PSU kept it close to Indiana, just up by 1 at the half.

Trent said...

They aren't getting credit for Minnesota. And Illinois and Washington are both OK wins, but not "great" wins by any means, especially since Illinois was at home.

I think you are overstating that aspect of their resume.

Dustin said...

That aspect of their resume is still better than most of the bubble teams though.

AG said...

Also, ppl who keep self-righteously hoping for Michigan to get crushed by a mid-major in a First Four game need to remember that no body out-performs their seed in the tournament like John Beilein. Then again, nobody has taken more teams to the tournament after they were picked to finish last in their conference than John Beilein, either.

Trent said...

Dustin, not sure I agree with you there. USC has better wins. Colorado has better wins. Virginia Tech has one better win, though the rest of their resume sucks. Alabama's top wins are similar. I'm going to have to disagree with you there.

Anonymous said...

Why have Michigan fans hijacked this thread? B101 please do sOmething Ab this...it's real annoying they kill all discussiOn

Trent said...

Just to clarify, I think MSU would be in the field today. I just don't think today's win over Iowa should make much of a difference like people seem to think it does. If MSU loses tomorrow, I don't think it can rest completely easy.

Anonymous said...

We beat Illinois and we're a 6 seed, period.

Trent said...

You do realize that if you just discussed college basketball with the Michigan fans instead of crying about them like 5-year olds it wouldn't be as big of an issue don't you? Some real whiners on this page.

Anonymous said...

@ 8:47

If people stopped asking/talking about them, we wouldn't have to respond.

I've yet to see anyone provide a rational argument as to why they should not be in the tournament, or which teams should reasonably be ahead of them.

Maybe you should target the bashers as opposed to the UM fans.

Trent said...

Michigan is not a six seed if it beats Illinois. It's a 10.

Dustin said...

I'll give you USC and Colorado, but at the same time I said MOST and not ALL.

I wont give you VT though. Id rather have MSUs wins and overall resume.

And im not taking that 6 seed comment seriously. I dont even think you believe that.

Michael said...

Ok the 6 seed is ridiculous, they will be a lock at a 10 seed with a win

Trent said...

I don't Dustin. Only way Michigan emerges above a double-digit seed is by beating Ohio State in the semis. And I agree VT's resume is shittier than MSU's. I'm just saying that if I'm talking up MSU's resume, quality wins isn't where I'm going right away.

Dustin said...

MSUs strength is really a two-parter. They get to say "Look, we have a really strong OOC, and we even beat some of them!"

The reason the Washington win is big is because it was neutral court. People forget that beating someone neutral court is worth a ton more than beating someone at home. Without that win, they'd be out.

Stuart said...

With all the blowouts right now, I've switched to Lakers-Heat.

Michael said...

Not going to argue about michigan not having a top 25 win(wisky stole it) but they have 3 top 50 and if you extend that to top 59 they have 7. They went .500 in the second best conference and have a top 20 SOS, 5 road wins, not many bubble teams can beat that. Why the hate

Anonymous said...

Does UC fall to a 7, 8, or 9. I don't think so?

Notre Dame is getting closer to the 1 line.

Bracketology 101 said...

Just a quick recap of our 300 comments today:

Michigan is great. Michigan State sucks. Michigan State is great. Michigan sucks. Will is great. Will sucks. Kemba! Buffs! Cuse! UAB? Michigan sucks.

Now we can move on.

Tom said...

Dustin has it covered on why MSU.

Boston College's win was necessary but won't put them in. USC needed the win but their bad losses are horrendous and I think need at least one more to be considered.

Colorado is IN after today.

Tom said...

Nittany Lions are looking like a solid 2 seed.

Michael said...

Bracketology101 dont forget kobe

Dustin said...

To close out the random NC State comments from yesterday, their loss today means they can't be considered for the NIT. Now they can fire Sidney Lowe in peace.

Bracketology 101 said...

Cincinnati will be a low 6/high 7 tomorrow.

Anonymous said...

LOL b101 that was hilarious

Dustin said...

Lunardi moved UAB completely out.

Anonymous said...

I think Lunardi had UAB as the automatic though, not an at large.

Tom said...

Lunardi also has Michigan and Clemson in the R64. That's surprising to me (not to incite more Michigan ranting). I'd have Michigan in the last four in and Clemson in the last four out. No way does Clemson have a better profile than Boston College (who Lunardi has in the last four in, behind Clemson).

Tom said...

Specifically, I'd put MSU in the R64 and Michigan in the Last Four In, swapping them. I realize that Michigan won the H2H matches but MSU's overall profile is slightly stronger, I think.

Dustin said...

Lunardi had them as the auto, but ranked higher than the at-larges. He now moved them to first team out.

Won't said...

"Just a quick recap of our 300 comments today:

Michigan is great. Michigan State sucks. Michigan State is great. Michigan sucks. Will is great. Will sucks. Kemba! Buffs! Cuse! UAB? Michigan sucks.

Now we can move on.

9:09 PM"

Hell, I'll just show up around 9pm to read this from now on, instead of sifting through 300 messages.

Dustin said...

I'm actually in agreement with Lunardi re: Michigan and Clemson, although I know most people aren't.

I have Clemson as a 10, but they'll be out if they lose to BC.

Anonymous said...

Whats everyones thoughts on Wash St? How many do they need to win?

Tom said...

Dustin, what's your reasoning behind Clemson > BC? Just out of curiosity.

Dustin said...

Tennessee was up by 18 over Arkansas, and Bruce Pearl tried resting guys, only to see Arkansas put on a huge run in a hurry to cut it to 4 with 3 minutes left.

Dustin said...

My reasoning for Clemson is weak, which I admit up front. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt for having beaten both VT and BC, although both of those games were at home.

Mike said...

Wash st has to beat wash and ucla at min. If oregon beats ucla then wash st has to win the auto bid.

Tom said...

Wash St needs to win at least over Washington. That'd be 3 wins over a tournament team (two away/neutral), a win over Gonzaga (strong bubble team), a win over USC (bubble team).

Two wins will get them into the Last 4 in, pending at least one of the teams currently there falters. Losing in the second round of the P10T means they will probably be NIT bound. Their profile isn't much outside of the Washington wins.

Dustin said...

If Washington State beats Washington though, I think that moves Washington out....at the least they'd be one of the last four-in.

Tom said...

Clemson's inability to win away from home is the reason I have them out unless they beat BC in the ACCT.

Dustin said...

@Tom

We're basically in agreement then, Im just giving Clemson the spot right now.

Dustin said...

Arkansas tied it up, but Tennessee ends up pulling it out to lock up their bid, and meet Florida in the next round.

Chase said...

There's not a worse atmosphere than the Staples Center. There couldn't have been more than 500 there last night.. and today, with UCLA it's almost as dead. Pitiful.

Dustin said...

This Texas A&M/Mizzou game is uglier than your average SWAC game. Mizzou with 4 points in the first 9 minutes.

Bracketology 101 said...

Someone needs to tell UCLA their game started 45 minutes ago.

AG said...

UCLA was the only top 3 pac10 team to sweep the Oregon schools, and now they're getting annihilated.

You know what? No. No the Pac10 doesn't get 4 bids. I don't care. If Oregon, Wazzu, or USC win the conference tournament, Washington is out. Period.

Nick said...

Tom my boy, I have a question for you:

Yesterday if I remember correctly you put BC ahead of everyone except Michigan of all the bubble teams. BC beat Wake today, and MSU beat Indiana. Today, you have MSU solidly in, and BC needing to beat Clemson to get in. This confuses me - is it that Indiana is a bit better than Wake? Just curious, no snark (feel like I have to clarify that on this board.)

Anonymous said...

Worse Big Six conference top to bottom: Pac-10 or SEC?

UCLA making a great case for the Pac-10 right now.

Dustin said...

The SEC is heads and shoulders stronger than the PAC-10 in my opinion, and that will be evidenced by the amount of teams that make the tournament, as well of the seeds of those teams. Kentucky and Florida are clearly better than anyone in the PAC, and Id make a strong case that Vanderbilt is as well.

Dan said...

@AG - I'm with you. Hell, let's limit the SEC too. if a bid stealer takes the bid, Alabama goes bye bye.

Both of those conferences suck.

On another note, wow Notre Dame. I think that counts as a statement.

edgeinducedcohesion said...

Looking at the games so far today--Colorado looks like it punched its ticket with its third win of the season over Kansas State.

UAB looks like it's going to be a very iffy bubble team, though the way other Bubble teams (like Colorado State) are so obligingly losing that they might have a chance at a first four game.

Tomorrow is shaping up to be a huge Bubble day, with the ACC, SEC, Big 10, and Pac-10 potentially throwing some interesting curveballs (I'm rooting for USC over Arizona myself). I'm of the opinion that everyone still in the Big East tournament and Big 12 tournament is probably safe, though.

Dustin said...

The SEC isn't THAT bad.

Anonymous said...

Pac 10 is better then the SEC

Chase said...

Pac-10 is a joke. I'd love to see Wazzu get in.. unlikely.

Also, DJ Kennedy tore his ACL. St John's, had them at a 5 after tonight.. bumping them to a 6 now.

Tom said...

"Yesterday if I remember correctly you put BC ahead of everyone except Michigan of all the bubble teams. BC beat Wake today, and MSU beat Indiana. Today, you have MSU solidly in, and BC needing to beat Clemson to get in. This confuses me - is it that Indiana is a bit better than Wake? Just curious, no snark (feel like I have to clarify that on this board.)"

MSU's win puts them ahead of Michigan/BC due to Indiana being far, far better than Wake. BC's win puts them ahead of Michigan (still in the last four in category, though) only because Michigan hasn't played and it's another win in BC's belt. Colorado winning also stole a bid.

I had MSU right behind BC but I think the committee will reward MSU for its overall profile, moreso than BC or Michigan. Personally, I think BC and Michigan are better teams, but it's all about predicting what will actually happen.

Does that make sense?

Bill said...

PAC 10 < SEC

Dan said...

Bonus points for big wins? Thinking of Texas, BC, ND (the only against a tourney team) and what VT/TAMU are doing right now?

I suppose you can't REALLY give bonus points for it since it is only 1 win, but I'd certainly rather be VT/BC with a big win instead of MSU, Penn St or Tennessee with close wins.

Anonymous said...

MSU played Iowa. And a win over Iowa should not count for anything. People that are saying MSU locked up a bid with a win over a team that is 11-20 are insane.

Dustin said...

I dont agree with moving anyone based on beating crappy teams.

And MSU beat Iowa, not Indiana.

Anonymous said...

Just saying you guys msu played Iowa not indianna

Apissedant said...

Tom's idea is insane.... I'm glad everyone is hitting him for it... but I want to hit him for one more thing:

Michigan gets punished because they haven't played yet??!!?

Do you realize that Michigan hasn't played yet because they finished 4th in their conference and got a by? That's a REWARD for doing well, and you want to turn it into a PUNISHMENT?

Anonymous said...

Much more realistic scenarios for Michigan:

Blowout Loss to Illinois: Out
Close Loss to Illinois: Coin Flip
Beat Illinois, lose to OSU: 11 Seed
Beat Illinois, OSU, lose in Championship: 9 Seed
Win Big Ten Championship: 7 Seed

Is that more reasonable?

Tom said...

Err, yeah my bad. Iowa is about the same as Indiana and my point still holds.

You're looking at an RPI team about 100 points higher in Iowa than Wake.

Normally, I'd agree, but I think MSU gets moved into the field of 64, at least for right now, since beating Iowa is probably better than Wake and most pundits feel MSU's profile is better than BC/Clemson/VT. I can see the reasoning for it.

Another win in MSU's belt pushes it above Michigan, I think. MSU loses I still think they are in over BC with a loss against Clemson.

Tom said...

@Apissedant: Do you believe this is not a dynamic process? You think getting more wins or losses doesn't move you up and down the in/out rank?

Michigan isn't punished for not playing. If they win tomorrow they move back up. Again, dynamic.

Dustin said...

Tom, it seems like you're using the slotting method that voters use to rank teams in college football. That has no place here. This is a body of work ranking, and beating Iowa, or Wake isn't going to be the difference ever.

Dustin said...

Tom, the problem is, you don't move by an idle team by beating a team like Iowa......

There's enough material already out there to determine which team should be above the other, and beating Iowa is so insignificant a plus that its not going to be the difference.

Now losing to Iowa is another story....

Tom said...

Dustin, more wins matter, you know that, just like losses do. Regardless of the opponent's rank, wins mean something to the committee.

If we are just ignoring the current state of the bubble/game, why even do this? Why not just wait til the morning of selection Sunday and then guess?

Tom said...

See, I disagree about not moving an idle team by having a new team win. In the end, it's a moot point, though, as Michigan will play at least one more game.

I think Michigan will lose to Illinois. Does that make it better? That puts MSU above Michigan.

Dustin said...

Sure total wins matter, but barely. Its much more important who you beat, and who you lose to. If total wins was that important, Missouri State would be a lock.

A berth in the tournament is based on body of work. The Iowa win doesn't increase MSUs standing. The reason they were a lock with the Iowa win was because they needed to avoid a bad loss, which they did.

Tom said...

Obviously. But saying the slotting method makes no sense is silly. We are speculating based on a dynamic system, not off of the final product. If we are waiting for a total body of work, we should just sit tight until Sunday.

But, then, what's the point of this site? Or these speculative conversations?

Apissedant said...

Actually, wins against poorly ranked teams can actually hit you by lowering your SOS and therefore kicking you down the curve.

As for your next post... yes, if MSU wins another game they wouldn't definitely climb above Michigan, and if Michigan got blown out by Illinois, they would probably drop off the list.

Dustin said...

Tom

Your last comment proves your doing this based on the slotting method, which is not how this is done at all. Think of every game as having a certain amount of "credibility points." Each game you play can be worth more or less depending on the opponent and where the game is played. Beating Iowa isn't going to gain you very many credibility points, and when you add those points to how much you've gained over the season, its highly unlikely that youll jump someone else.

Dustin said...

@Tom

We're doing this to predict what the committee will do. The committee DOES what until the end to do this.

Tom said...

Sure they can, but, again, this is all speculative fun. In my mind, MSU moves above Michigan today. I could say:

"Nothing changes until Michigan plays tomorrow."

If Michigan wins tomorrow, I think they are in and, again, sit in front of MSU in the pecking order and we wait to see what MSU does.

Dustin said...

@Apissedant

Thats why I think the RPI is almost useless.

Tom said...

Dustin, again, so then you feel that winning over Iowa means so little that it doesn't close the previous gap between MSU and Michigan. I disagree.

Call it slotting, ranking, or whatever. It's not as if there's some nebulous pool that they will just pull from.

But you seem to know more about this than me. Great.

Dustin said...

@Tom

Exactly. Beating Iowa doesn't close the gap, because beating them means almost nothing. Losing to them, however, means a lot more. This is one of the reasons the committee gives a bonus to teams that play more difficult schedules, and why teams with high RPIs with tons of wins, little losses, and no quality wins have missed in the past.

AG said...

Once again I'd like to remind everybody not to put too much stock in conference tournament games. Last year, people said Florida/Mississippi State was a bubble elimination game. Mississippi State won and then almost beat Kentucky in the final but when the bracket was revealed Mississippi State wasn't even first four out while Florida was a 10 seed. I wouldn't be surprised to see a similar situation arise if Georgia loses to Alabama.

I am actually starting to feel like the bubble is tightening. UAB could have made the case for an at large if they at least got to the semifinals but losing to ECU is a bad loss and now if Memphis and UTEP are in the final than they both get in. Colorado's win finalizes the Big 12 bubble at 6 bids. I had VT on upset alert but I failed to account for the fact that Georgia Tech has pretty much quit on the season. If they beat a Singleton-less FSU (which they will) they're in. I kinda feel like Clemson needs that game tomorrow more than BC because BC has the higher RPI.

If people believed MSU's resume was better than Michigan's before the Iowa win then they definitely think it is now. If you want to get off the bubble you have to leave no doubt and the only way Michigan can do that is beat Illinois. Otherwise, they're just sitting back while USC, Wazzu, Oregon(!), or whoever take their bid.

And there's always room for the unexpected, like VCU or Missouri State getting in or Nova being left out.

Tom said...

One final thing: the comment about wins being useless because, otherwise, Missouri State would be in:

Iowa is better than 90% of the teams Missouri State beat. Based on RPI, KenPom, or Sagarin. So I don't think that's fair.

If wins over below average teams don't mean much, why are ODU and GMU guaranteed spots in the tournament? They have a lot of less-than-impressive wins and that seems to be why they are being guaranteed spots.

Dustin said...

Because ODU and George Mason have good wins against good teams too. If they only beat bottom feeders they wouldn't be in (well ODU would be because they won their tournament, but you know what I mean.)

Tom said...

And I realize that ODU won their tournament, but it was a commonly held belief that if VCU had beaten ODU that ODU would have still made it.

Tom said...

@Dustin, do they?

GMU's best win is ODU. ODU's best win is GMU. It's not as if they each have a lot of quality wins.

ODU you can make a bit of a case for since they have wins over Xavier and Clemson (if that's quality), but GMU has a lot of nothing wins over teams worse than Iowa and are a lock?

Dustin said...

Coastal Carolina has 28 wins, and wouldnt be in this tournament if there were 20 more at large berths.

Apissedant said...

Dustin,

Agreed.

I hate the RPI, but it is what seems to be most used.

Tom said...

I'm not saying wins mean everything, I'm saying they clearly mean something.

GMU and ODU are examples of teams the committee will be guaranteed to include and it's largely based on the fact they beat the majority of the teams put in front of them, even if the teams are far worse than most of the bigger conferences.

When a team like MSU has its worse loss to Iowa, and GMU has losses to NC State and Wofford (arguably just as bad, if not worse than Iowa and these were in neutral sites), but MSU beats far better teams (yet has less wins overall), how do you reconcile that?

Dustin said...

ODU has quality wins over Xavier, Richmond, George Mason, Clemson, and 2 wins over VCU. They made a case that they were a good team.

George Mason finished above them in conference and had wins over VCU, ODU and Harvard. ODU proved that they should be a tournament team, and George Mason is better, thats why they are both in.

Not to mention George Mason didnt take anything off the table with terrible losses, they're worst being a neutral site loss to NC State.

Dustin said...

Iowa is incredibly worse than NC State and Wofford.

Tom said...

Unless you consider the Big 10 and the CAA to be fairly equal in strength, or at least close to it, and the wins GMU has against ODU/VCU/Drexel/etc. are similar to Wisconsin/Washington/Illinois/PSU?

SamENole said...

Is there anything FSU can do to get out of the 8-9 game other than beating VT AND Duke? Would a loss to VT drop the 'Noles to a 10 seed?

Apissedant said...

Xavier is the 18th ranked team in the nation. I call that quality. They also beat Richmond, which is another tournament team.

Dustin said...

@Tom

If I thought that the CAA was like the Big Ten, Id have George Mason as a 2 seed, so no, I dont.

Tom said...

Wait, wait: Iowa is incredibly worse than NC State and Wofford?

I mean, I know you hate RPI, so fine.

KenPom has Iowa rated higher than both teams. Sagarin has Iowa ranked within 15 of both teams. I don't see how that's incredibly worse. Iowa has wins over Bama, MSU, and Purdue!

Apissedant said...

By the way, that makes ODU 3-3 against tournament teams. Anyone that argues a team doesn't deserve a bid because they're ONLY 50% against tournament teams is absolutely nuts. What's MSU's record against tournament teams again?

Ricky F said...

DJ Kennedy torn ACL...does this drop St. Johns to the 8-9 game?

Tom said...

Like I said, I can see the case for ODU, although it's not a great one. For GMU, I don't see it, outside of saying wins over mediocre teams, and no real quality wins, means a lot to the committee.

Regardless, I obviously won't convince you guys so we'll just see what happens.

Dustin said...

1. You're trying to make Iowa look like a good team (to give points to MSU) partly because they already beat MSU?

2. Iowa lost to the worst team in the ACC and the worst team in the Big 12. Do I really need to go further?

Apissedant said...

Yeah, how is 15-16 NC State far worse than 11-20 Iowa? They're both from BCS conferences.

Tom said...

MSU is 4-9 against tournament bound teams. So about 30% winning percentage, although they played more than twice as many tournament bound teams.

Tom said...

Who said I was making them look like a good team? You're the one who said they are far worse than Iowa or NC State.

I never said they were good, just MSU's lowest ranking loss. GMU has at least one, Wofford, that is as bad, according to most rating sources, and NC State, who is also considered as bad by those same sources.

Anonymous said...

Well what major conference teams did George mason beat they lost to acc laughingstock nc state it's going to be funny when them and odu lose in the first round the mid majors just beat up on each other

Anonymous said...

How is USC profile not better than

BC/msu/mich/vt/uab

I don't see how it is even close

Tom said...

Haha, nice Ap. You totally turned what I said around (and I'm not the one who introduced the "incredibly worse" comment). Sweet.

Apissedant said...

I would like to point out I'm from Michigan and my sister graduated from MSU undergrad and grad school. I just can't agree with your arguments here.

Despite the fact that I attended ODU from undergrad and Temple for grad (mid-majors), I still agree that mid-majors are often given too much credit for mediocre wins... just not in this case.

I think better examples would be some of the western conferences, although GMU isn't a bad example. They only played two tournament teams all year, and both of them are auto-bids.

Dustin said...

And according to the committee, the Iowa loss is going to look a lot worse than NC State or Wofford (a tournament team, even), regardless of what you think, or what sources you pull up.

Iowa lost to WAKE FOREST. And IOWA STATE. And SOUTH DAKOTA ST.

I feel like Im taking crazy pills.

Tom said...

USC has more quality wins but also more bad losses than any of those teams.

BC has one bad loss. VT has 2. MSU has one bad loss. Michigan has one bad loss.

USC has 6 bad losses. Those early season losses are killer.

Dustin said...

I have USC in front of VT, but behind the rest of the teams you mentioned, but im in the minority there.

Tom said...

Dustin, the committee uses RPI heavily - you don't like that so I was trying to get your input on why GMU would be selected. If we are going to use RPI, sure it's easy to see why ODU and GMU are tournament bound: they have top 30 RPIs.

Dustin said...

ODU is going to be in for several very good wins, and George Mason is going to be in because they finished 1st in the same conference ODU is in (who would have gotten an at-large) and they beat ODU (as well as VCU and Harvard), while at the same time, piling up no terrible losses.

Had George Mason lost to Iowa, they'd be out.

Ricky F said...

B101 can you answer a question so everyone can get more out of these comments than just hearing these clowns argue over crappy teams that are at best one-and-dones. How far does St. Johns fall with DJ Kennedy torn ACL and loss today. Is 8-9 seed realistic?

Anonymous said...

I've said this before and i'll say it again. Reason why Michigan St. looked up bid today is because they didnt lose to Iowa. A loss to Purdue on a neutral court wont look bad at all, but another loss to Iowa would have looked very bad. Less about winning the game (even though getting to 20 wins is usually a good thing for a team to get an at-large) and more about not losing the game

Anonymous said...

Translation of Ricky's comment:

"But I wanna talk about my team! WAAAAAHHHHHHH"

Relax. It won't be a huge drop, if there's one at all. The real question for you is, Michigan or MSU?

Bracketology 101 said...

St. John's won't fall much. We'll have them a 5 seed tomorrow.

Dustin said...

@ 12:10

I agree 100% and thats what Ive been saying all day/week re: MSU.

Anonymous said...

st johns 6 at worst prob 5

Dustin said...

B101

Isn't there presedence for teams dropping about 1 seed line for losing key players due to injury?

If so, wouldn't that make St. John's a 6, or are you not penalizing them at all for the injury?

Anonymous said...

b101 you guys have done this for awhile..

In your experience would u say committee values having good wins more than not having bad losses..

IE USC 5 good wins/ 5 bad losses

Mich 0 good wins/ 1 bad loss

wileydan said...

Does a 5 seed playing the team that wins the play-in game have an advantage or does it hurt their chances to play a team that just won and now has momentum? That's what St. john's could be facing.

Anonymous said...

b101

What is UCLA seed now...

Anonymous said...

Georgetown rises back to a 6 by osmosis

Blind Resume said...

It's time for my favorite game... blind resume! (Both teams are major conference bubbly)

Team A:
vs 300-345 (7-0)
vs 200-299 (1-0)
vs 100-199 (2-2)
vs 50-99 (5-4)
vs 1-49 (6-6)
Overall SOS: (63) Non-conf: (324)

Team B:
vs 300-345 (0-0)
vs 200-299 (2-0)
vs 100-199 (7-4)
vs 50-99 (5-3)
vs 1-49 (5-6)
Overall SOS: (24) Non-Conf: (54)

Who would you chose?

Chase said...

Team A:
vs 300-345 (7-0)
vs 200-299 (1-0)
vs 100-199 (2-2)
vs 50-99 (5-4)
vs 1-49 (6-6)
Overall SOS: (63) Non-conf: (324)

Team B:
vs 300-345 (0-0)
vs 200-299 (2-0)
vs 100-199 (7-4)
vs 50-99 (5-3)
vs 1-49 (5-6)
Overall SOS: (24) Non-Conf: (54)

They both have 12 and 13 losses. I think these two teams are Michigan and USC. Team B has a better resume.

Blind Resume said...

*Choose (DERP!)

Dustin said...

Dumbest.Game.Ever.

Did I mention how silly RPI is?

Blind Resume said...

Who said the numbers were RPI?

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 400 of 438   Newer› Newest»