Wednesday, March 09, 2011

Bracketology 101's Field of 68 - March 9

Tuesday Recap
The Big East Tournament kicked off with a big upset as South Florida took down Villanova. The Wildcats finished the season in absolute free-fall mode, losing five straight, which has dropped them from a 4 seed just over two weeks ago all the way down to a 9 now. It will be interesting to see what the committee does with the Wildcats, but we can see anything from an 8-11 seed come Sunday. Elsewhere in Big East action, Marquette took care of business against Providence and are now just playing for tournament seeding the rest of the way.

Three more automatic bids were handed out on Tuesday, the most important of which was Butler winning the Horizon by (finally) beating Milwaukee. We thought the Bulldogs were safe regardless, but now there's no need to debate their at-large credentials. Butler's win really had no effect on our bracket, since we already anticipated the Bulldogs winning the Horizon title. The most thrilling finish of the night happened in the Sun Belt with lowly Arkansas-Little Rock taking down North Texas in the closing seconds to earn a bid (and an almost certain appearance in one of the First Four games.) In the Summit final, Oakland stamped their ticket with a convincing win over Oral Roberts.

The final notable result of the night was Princeton's win over Penn, which sets up a de facto conference title game against Harvard on Saturday.

Wednesday Preview
The Big XII, Pac-10, C-USA, MWC, and WAC all begin their conference tournaments today. The most important game in any of those tournaments is in the Big XII, as Colorado looks to keep its at-large hopes alive with a win over Iowa State. Missouri will be looking to avoid a Villanova-esque ending to its season as they take on Texas Tech. Baylor and Nebraska will also try to get off to strong starts and climb back into the bubble discussion with deep Big XII tourney runs.

In the Big East tournament, every game is crucial in regards to tournament seeding. A high noon showdown between Georgetown and UConn will decide which of these teams will be on the 5 line tomorrow, as both teams try to right the ship after late season slides. In other second round action, hometown favorite St. John's will continue its quest for a top 4 seed as they take on Rutgers. Cincinnati will try to solidify their spot on the 6 line with a win over USF, while the defending Big East tourney champ, West Virignia, will try to defend its title in the late game against Marquette.

Two more automatic bids will also be handed out tonight. Montana plays at Northern Colorado in the Big Sky final, and Robert Morris takes on Long Island in the Northeast final.

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, West Virginia, Connecticut, Cincinnati, Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette

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
West Virginia, Xavier, Arizona, Connecticut

The 6s
Kansas State, Cincinnati, Temple, Georgetown

The 7s
Texas A&M, UCLA, Vanderbilt, Old Dominion

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

The 9s
Villanova, Illinois, Florida State, Tennessee

The 10s
Gonzaga,
Butler, Richmond, Washington

The 11s
Michigan, Marquette, 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.

283 comments:

1 – 200 of 283   Newer›   Newest»
Will said...

@ Howard Salsasser. Cinderella's name is... You know... Cinderella.

Anonymous said...

What is WVU's ceiling as far as seeding goes if they win the Big East tourney? Also, what is their floor if they lose tonight against Marquette? Thanks!

Evan said...

Any shot Nova doesn't make the tournament? I thought they were overrated all year...

Bracketology 101 said...

Another Big East title for WVU would mean a 3 seed, while a loss tonight would probably mean a 6 seed.

Nova is in.

Anonymous said...

Where can i get team resumes/numbers?

I would like to see DUKE's/byu/zona/wvu/

Bracketology 101 said...

The best free site to get a wealth of team info is on warrennolan.com

Marty said...

How do you put a team that loses its last 5 games into the tournament? 5-10 in the last 15 games! Is this a joke? I dont care who they beat earlier in the year, they just lost to South Florida in a tournament setting. If you want to dance then dont lose your last 5 games. Plain and simple.

AG said...

I have to agree with Marty, no team has ever received an at-large after ending the season on a 5 game losing streak. And Nova didn't just lose, that was the biggest blown halftime lead in the history of the Big East Tournament, against what is arguably one of the worst offenses in the history of the Big East Tournament.

March_24_7 said...

To leave Villanova out would be to ignore the first 3 months of the year. Seed them 8. Seed them 12. Just make sure they are in. They have earned it.

Marty said...

Michigan
* 7 wins over rpi top 60
* 5 true road wins (3 over top 60)
* Top 20 SOS
* 7 of 12 losses against RPI top 12
* Only 1 loss to rpi 100+
* Steadily improving team

Looking at the whole resume, the OT loss to Kansas and fluke bank shot at the buzzer against Wisconsin were very impressive losses. This is a NCAA tournament team.

Evan said...

If one more Michigan supporter brings up their "close" losses...

...You're not the only school who almost had some great wins. Let's not forget when a bad call, not just a good shot prevented a PSU upset of Purdue.

Also Mr. Michigan fan, why did you use the RPI top 60 instead of 50? That seems strange...also I guess you didn't feel like mentioning their ZERO wins vs top 25 teams eh?

Leave the fan-dom for other blogs, this is one based on unbiased facts. That's why this is such a popular bracketologist site.

Michael said...

@Evan

There are posters saying Michigan doesn't belong, Marty is pointing out that in fact they do. Argue another bubble team over them thats fine, no one is debating if Michigan deserves a 5 seed, only that they belong in the field. If you don't like it, go fly a kite bruh!!!

Anonymous said...

"Villanova-esque...as they take on Texas Tech". Nice.

Anonymous said...

I'm really wondering why Florida isn't considered a 2 Seed by this point. I'm loving their season & resume

15 wins v RPI Top 100
10 Wins v RPI Top 50
5 Wins On ROAD v RPI Top 50 (My Favorite)
10 RPI & 6 SOS
13-3 In Conference Outright Regular Season Champ

They definitely got a 2 seed resume. Their overload of quality wins makes up for the 3 bad losses that they have

They Also Led Ohio St with 12:30 Left in their game

I don't see how BYU, Purdue or Texas can be looked at as a better resume then Florida

Rick O'Shea said...

*Please read the following in a sarcastic tone*

Might as well bring up the actual "UM" (Miami FL) if we're talking close losses too. Like the four in a row they dropped by a total of nine points. Then they'd be 10-6 in conference instead of 6-10 and they'd be a lock!

Won't said...

"They Also Led Ohio St with 12:30 Left in their game"

LOL, I think you should have stopped before throwing in this ridiculous fact.

Evan said...

Yeah its a little cold to "fly a kite" but I'm glad we're keeping this about basketball...

I believe Michigan is being overvalued because they are hot now. They have two wins over rpi-200 teams...so I believe their overall record is inflated. Same as MSU, who has a win against a D-2 team!! I hope the NCAA looks at where these extra wins come from, not just overall record.

Will said...

I hear U of M homers using the "lower bar" analogy here, but it doesn't hold up. What people are saying, in an argument against U of M, is that good wins are MUCH MORE VALUABLE than a dearth of terrible losses. I think VT, with wins over FSU, a projected 9 seed, and Duke, a projected 2 seed, are more worthy of a bid. They also have 2 less losses. Vt>Michigan.

Michael said...

@ Will

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but the majority in this country prevail and the majority say you are wrong.

Will said...

You've talked to all 320 million? I'm defending my point, and pointing out that the argument people are using against my point is point-less. I think it'll be interesting to see whether or not an 11-loss VT gets left out for a 13-loss michigan. Or a 14-loss Marquette, if they lose today.

Derek said...

I'm in agreement with Michael here. VT should be nowhere near the bubble as far as I'm concerned. Ugly resume. But it is also an extremely mediocre bubble so I guess they could be last four in. We'll see.

Michael said...

VT is fine, I am not saying no teams deserve to be in over michigan, I have a problem with people saying all bubble teams should be in over michigan. Silly

Will said...

Ok, Michael, my postulate is that all bubble teams currently projected "in" are deserving, AND VT, and that Michigan would be my last team out. Which teams that I would have in do you feel are less deserving than michigan, who has 2 wins over teams in the tourney, both of which came against a team in the last 4 out?

Anonymous said...

If Scotty Hopson doesn't go crazy for Tennessee, if Gilbert Brown didn't turn the ball over in OT at Louisville, if Ben Hansbrough missed a running jumper in the lane in the last 2 minutes, and if Dwight Hardy's last second shot bounces off the rim or the ref actually calls him out of bounds Pittsburgh would be undefeated.

ENOUGH about Michigan already. A loss is a loss. Take your 7-10 seed an be happy. Geezus

Won't said...

Sheesh, I'm glad that Butler won last night, so I don't have to try and formulate an argument for them.

Will said...

Who thinks U of M is getting a 7-10 seed? I think they need 2 wins to stay out of the first four games...

Anonymous said...

Sorry, take your possible 12 seed and be happy.

John said...

Do you see a set of circumstances that could bump Texas up to a 2?

Derek said...

@John Yes. Win the Big 12 Tourney.

Marty said...

@Evan

I used top 60 because Michigan has 7 wins against the top 60. I realize that people get carried away with the top 50 references but in reality there is very little difference in quality of a 50 and 60 rated team. This should have been very clear to you.

stuart said...

I think we should celebrate the 20th anniversary of the Fab Five by letting in Michigan and setting up a possible second round match against Steve Fisher and San Diego State.

mistersuits said...

I come for the pageantry, I stay for the daily Will-Hating-Michigan meltdown.

A couple of weeks ago it was Minnesota that was the tournament team according to Will.

Last week it was UM's inevitable loss to MSU. I think Will gave it only a 6% chance Michigan could win vs MSU and the 4/5 game vs Illinois!!! I know a few people around here took those odds.

Today's team-de-jour that's better is Virginia Tech. My thought is VaTech is indeed a very comparable bubble team but you could make a strong case that Michigan's resume is stronger. Here's how:

VT Overall Record 19-10
UM 18-12

Average RPI Win
UM 139.0
VT 165.5

Average RPI Loss
UM 42.1
VT 64

Strength of Schedule
UM 18
VTech 88

VaTech has a better overall record, but it comes up short of Michigan upon closer inspection in both average quality of wins, average quality of losses and strength of schedule all of which are an order of magnitude better in favor of the Wolverines.

VT Road Record (6-6)
UM Road Record (4-5)

Now comparing their road records it appears again the edge goes to VT, until you look at where those road wins came from:

VT
99 maryland
110 st bonaventure
118 nc state
252 northridge
256 wake forest
298 greensboro
(Average Road Win RPI 188.8)

UM
48 msu
55 penn st
59 clemson
168 iowa
(Average Road Win RPI 82.5)

A full one hundred points better on average for calibre of road wins in favor of Michigan.

Lastly, if two teams are comparable enough, the committee will go down to things like head-to-head and common opponents. VT and Michigan had four:

Common Opponents
RPI 314 vs SCarUpstate (UM 66-35, VT 64-53)
RPI 8 vs Purdue (UM 57-80, VT 55-58)
RPI 55 vs Penn St (UM 76-69, VT 79-69)
RPI 59 @Clemson (UM 69-61, VT 60-69)

They played almost an identical game at home vs Penn St. VaTech nearly pulled off the upset against Purdue while Michigan got blown out. UM blew out the terrible team by 31 and VaTech only won by 11, not a big deal. But, UM won @Clemson in the BT-ACC challenge and VaTech just lost there last week with their bubble hopes on the line. I would argue against common opponents, Michigan objectively fared better.

So to recap, things Michigan has the edge on:
Strength of Schedule
Average Quality of Win
Average Quality of Loss
Performance Against Common Opponents
Better Road Wins

Things VaTech has the edge on:
One statement win vs a top 10 team.

Conference tournaments change things, as it stands today, this is why I have UM on the 11 line and VaTech on the 12.

Cheers!

Derek said...

@Marty It's just not a realisitic stat. No matter how close you think the RPI 50 and 60 are it's not really used in blind resume situations. Top 50 is top 50 and that's what matters.

AG said...

Will, the only people making the "elite wins uber alles" argument are you and a bunch of fans of other bubble teams who want to see their teams get in ahead of Michigan. The consensus actual bracket projections show Michigan not just in but 2-3 spots above the First Four.

Personally I think the bubble will continue to weaken today because either Colorado will lose to Iowa State again or Baylor will lose to Oklahoma again.

Michael said...

@Will

Mistersuits just pretty much owned you. You lose again.

Anonymous said...

Its convenient you used "Average" quality wins vs. "quality" wins, because UofM has 0.

Will said...

Like I said, I think quality wins against tournament teams is the most important statistic. You won't convince me using "average RPI of teams beaten"

Michael said...

apparently 3-4 games should define your season not the entire 30.

Marty said...

Nice post mistersuits!
@Derek
You are mistaken. Fortunately human beings are on the selection commitee and they weigh it all out, and they have the ability to realize a 49 ranked team and a 51 ranked team are basically identical. These top 25, 50, 100, 200 designations are used as general categories to quickly evauluate teams against one another. This in no way, prevents the commitee from looking closer, in fact I know for sure that they do. Let me ask you a question, do you think a win against the 99th team should be equally valued as a win against the 51st team? Well under your rationale that would be the case, fortunately the commitee will break it down further.

Won't said...

"Top 50 is top 50 and that's what matters."

There's no way to know if that matters to individual members of the committee, especially on a case by case basis.

Michael said...

not fully understanding RPI and that it is a rating based on averages and such

Will said...

I'm not saying "elite" wins. Michigan has ZERO wins over teams safely in the tournament. They have proven INCAPABLE TIME AND TIME AND TIME of beating teams with of substance.

Michael said...

Oakland is in the tournament with an rpi of 52 next?

Anonymous said...

Michigan should barely be in with a win over Illinois but until then they are out. There "improved" play as some call it, has been against bad teams. All their recent wins are against teams in the bottom of the league (except MSU) which just isnt impressive.

Will said...

Mistersuits used a comprehensive argument that left out the one statistic I said was most important, quality wins. He didn't own anything, since he circumvented the issue.

Will said...

Oakland is only in the tournament because of their auto-bid. They aren't a good enough team to make the tournament on their merits, obviously.

Anonymous said...

@Michael
I think your helping Wills argument once you point out that Oakland is Michigans best win

Will said...

Not truly... Their argument is that 18 wins over mediocre teams is better than 1 win over an elite team, 1 win over a good team, and 17 wins over more mediocre teams. No matter what the top end of those mediocre teams is, they're still mediocre.

Derek said...

@Marty 'Let me ask you a question, do you think a win against the 99th team should be equally valued as a win against the 51st team?'

Simply put, yes. Both are quality wins. There is a reason for RPI and if you are in the top 50 they are elite wins. If they are 51-100 they are quality wins. RPI 48 should be valued more than RPI 53. You have to draw the line somewhere. RPI 55 should be given a quality win the same as RPI 93 should.

Will said...

Top 50 is an elite win? UAB, Georgia, Missouri State, VCU, Marshall, Cleveland State, and Colorado State are elite wins?

Anonymous said...

Whats funny is that people give credit to UM for beating bad teams but knock Alabama for it. Only Alabama has beat Tenn and Kentucky which is better than any wins Michigan has.

Derek said...

As far as I'm concerned Michigan has a much better resume than Virginia Tech. Better RPI, SOS, conference, 1 bad loss. VT has a worse RPI, SOS, conference, and 3 bad losses. Not much to compare here.

Anonymous said...

Something I never fully understood... What would a team's RPI look like if they had losses to say... the top 6 teams in the RPI, and wins over like 15 teams in the 100-150 range? Fantastic, right? They'd probably be in the 25 range, i'd think, even though they were terrible?

Won't said...

Derek, that's just a ridiculous argument. You don't have to draw an arbitrary line at all. Isn't anyone good enough at mathto do anything other than create these little pigeonholes?

Will said...

And... VT has 2 less losses, and two more quality wins... Not much to compare here.

Derek said...

@Will Yes. They are top 50 wins.

dalianch said...

maybe VT should control their own fate and not get blown out by BC at home. Maybe they shouldn't lose at clemson. Mich has the bid over VT all day. Michigan has suffered some terrible loses (or wins in VT's case) and still been competitive in every of their last 11 games. so VT should do themselves a favor and play better basketball, like U of M has done in the second part of the season. No one wants a team in the NCAA if they are inconsistent. a duke win at home and a blow out by bc at the same place raises red flags.

Will said...

Elite is much more exclusive than that, Derek.

Derek said...

@Will Michigan has more wins vs. the top 100. I don't what stat you are looking at.

Scott M said...

B101, I don't have Colorado rated as highly as you do, but do you agree that a loss today and they have no chance of making the field?

Will said...

BC is a tourney team. Not a bad loss. Michigan got lucky with their scheduling, in that their easiest stretch came late. That doesn't mean they're playing their best basketball. If your best isn't good enough to beat a single team that is safely in the tourney, then you aren't good enough.

Will said...

I'm looking at the stat that doesn't qualify 13-17 seton hall as a qualiy win.

Justin said...

Average RPI of wins/losses might be the worst stat I've ever seen. It takes some of the biases already inherent in the terribleness that is the RPI - overemphasis on the bottom of the schedule over the top - and multiplies them. There's a reason that at least the committee has the sense to mostly use T50 W/L, T100 W/L and the like. At least those provide useful information.

The RPI already makes it so a team that beats a few ~300 RPI teams is far far worse off than a team that beats a few ~200 RPI teams. Even though almost all of us would agree those games are near meaningless for evaluating at team. Average RPI takes a formula that already exaggerates the outliers and re-adds them to the point where they can overwhelm what we should be talking about - how you fare against good teams.

Anonymous said...

Didn't Virginia Tech go 23-8 last year, 10-6 in conference, a 59 RPI, with a nice signature win vs a ranked team but get left out of the tournament because of a weak strength of schedule?

Maybe more things matter than just one statement win or two?

Brian Reinthaler said...

Isn't everyone getting a little too bent out of shape given that they're generally agreeing about where Michigan falls on the S-curve?

It seems pretty plain that, as of now, they're somewhere between a low 10-seed and a "first four" 12-seed. A neutral court win over Illinois, a projected 9-seed, should solidify them as an 11-seed (eliminating 12-seed consideration) and depending on other results, put them squarely in the running for a 10-seed.

However, a loss to Illinois, particularly if they look bad doing it, will not bode well. Sure, they may still hang on to a bid, but they will sweat as much as anyone on Sunday.

No matter how much better they've "looked" lately, it will be relevant that they failed every single time they faced an obviously at-large worthy opponent (yes, Clemson should prove to be one, and the fact that they beat the Tigers on the road will probably be their saving grace).

Will said...

I agree with Justin's point.

Won't said...

"Average RPI takes a formula that already exaggerates the outliers and re-adds them to the point where they can overwhelm what we should be talking about - how you fare against good teams."

Not to mention it doesn't factor in how many wins and losses you have. A team could have one loss but if it's to a bad team, their average RPI loss is going to look terrible.

dalianch said...

michigan is the youngest team in the nation, of course they weren't playing good basketball early on. the selection committee looks at consistency and overall body of work. I personally don't care if VT is in the tourney or not, but to say they are in before Mich is absurd. i hope the hokies pull it together and make a run, but if anything, they should get a bid before MSU or bama.

Will said...

@ 11:26 Anonymous... That sounds a lot like Michigan this year, except with 5 more losses and no good wins over quality teams...

Will said...

Actually, Brian, my postulate is that Michigan should be out, and they should only be in if they beat illinois, and only escape the first-four games if they win 2 games.

Derek said...

@dalianch Completely disagree with VT getting in over Alabama. Bama deserves it over them, especially going by your train of thought. Injured and young early on and then became an elite team in the SEC during conference play. More consistent than VT and beat better teams.

Anonymous said...

Mistersuit would you mind doing one of this resume comparisons for Penn state and Michigan?

Anonymous said...

If the Irish win the Big East Tournament are they a lock for a one seed?

P.S. What teams do you root for Will?

Will said...

It's not the 37 best teams as of March 13th, 2011, though. That's not the way it works. You don't get extra credit for "pulling it all together" or "steadily improving". You can't use 100 stats, then try and pad your inferior stats using platitudes.

Derek said...

That sounds a lot like Michigan this year, except with 5 more losses and no good wins over quality teams...

@Will It sounds like your making up your own rules for this Michigan v. VT debate. Michigan has more quality wins than VT, better RPI, better SOS, and only 1 bad loss compared to VT's 3. Those are facts.

dalianch said...

i haven't looked to much at bama's case...i just read in earlier comments that they lost to bad teams and were being "rewarded" for it. given what you said, looks like I'm going against my own argument. Appreciate the info. should learn to rely a little less on existing comments...

Justin said...

And also, why are people here arguing about Michigan every single day as if they're a final four team. They're a marginal bubble team. They've beaten no at large tournament teams, and only a few teams on the bubble. Their T50 wins are either questionable (Harvard) or teams that barely are in the T50, let alone the tournament (Mich St x 2). At the end of the season, they might have one T50 victory which most wouldn't consider a great win.

Win some games in the Big Ten tournament or go home.

Won't said...

I think the committee has a newly added platitudes category on their stat sheets, this year.

Bracketology 101 said...

@ Scott,

Yes, Colorado needs to win today. We can't see them making it if they lose to Iowa State again.

Anonymous said...

Hey b101 how far do Colorado Nebraska and Baylor have to go in the big 12 tourney

Thanks I love the blog

Bracketology 101 said...

Colorado might just need one win, and two would secure them a bid. Nebraska and Baylor will have to win their first round games and then beat Kansas and Texas, respectively, in the quarters.

Will said...

I root for FSU. I closet-root for Duke, because I was a humongous fan of J.J. Redick. I'm rooting for BYU right now, because I enjoy the statement they made in kicking Brandon Davies off the team. I root for Louisville, because I enjoy watching to see if Pitino's face will think it's alone and move, though it always remains still. I root for Rick Barnes at UT, because I read John Feinstein's book about the season which he spent following the ACC, when Barnes was making the tournament at Clemson. I root for Wisconsin for a reason I can't even figure out, except that I always adavance them two spots too far in my bracket. I root for Vandy, because they are a smart school. I root for Tennessee, because I loved Chris Lofton. I root for Illinois, because I still think they were the best team in the country the year they had Deron Williams, Luther Head, and Dee Brown. I root for Belmont, because they win the conference that includes the two major colleges of my hometown, Jacksonville University and UNF. I root for UCF because they beat Florida. I root for Marquette, because they seem like they don't belong, but somehow they stand in there. I root for Bucknell, because they win the Patriot league, another subject of a Feinstein novel, though when I was reading it, I hated them, because I like Lafayette more. I root for Vermont, because I can still remember how the electricity I felt watching Germain Mopa Njila and T.J. Sorrentine hit those 3's to knock off Syracuse, which I called in my bracket. I root for UNI, because... Come on. We ALL root for Ali Faroukmanesh's alma mater. I also root for all the lower seeds in the NCAA tournament, even if it's a 9 over an 8. It's more interesting if there are upsets.

Anonymous said...

If Penn state wins their first round game which is essentially a road game against indianna and then beats wisconsion to go to 18-13 with a top SOS are they in?

Will said...

Derek, I would classify a win as "quality", only if it comes against a team solidly in the field. Seton Hall, Robert Morris, and East Tennessee State don't count for me.

mistersuits said...

I'd be happy to oblige anon @11:31,

Overall Record
UM 18-12
PSU 16-13

Strength of Schedule
UM 18
PSU 7

Average RPI Win
UM 139.0
PSU 117.0

Average RPI Loss
UM 42.1
PSU 53.1

UM 5-5 80.8 (Forgot @Minn last time!)
PSU 2-8 128.0 (@Minn 74 ,@Indiana 182)

Common Opponents
No common opponents out-of-conference. Both hold 9-9 conference records.

Heads Up
Michigan swept series (76-69 home, 65-62 away)

Signature Win
PSU vs Wisconsin 13
UM vs Harvard 35

Worst Loss
PSU vs Maine 215
UM @Indiana 182

Advantage Michigan:
-overall record
-average RPI loss
-far superior road record
-average quality road win
-didn't lose to Maine at home
-swept heads up series

Advantage PSU:
-strength of schedule
-average RPI win
-signature win

The sad thing for PSU (and Michigan St too) is that if both of these teams had taken care of business vs the team projected to finish 10th out of 11... both MSU and PSU would be hard locks in the tournament.

Will said...

I favor PSU in that matchup, because PSU has two wins over teams solidly in the field.

Anonymous said...

Thanks very much mistersuit just 2 things Penn state also beat northwestern on the road another top 100 team and also at the end when you said that thing about Penn state and msu Penn state didn't lose to a bottom feeder they just only got to play indianna and Iowa once

Chris in NC said...

@Brian at 11:26. Dead on. UM is probably in but a loss to Illinois would damage that greatly.

Agreeing with Will, eventually you do have to beat a big dog to claim you can run with them. UM will get their chance if they beat Illinois.

Dalianch: That is probably the scariest thing about Michigan. They didn't have a Senior Day because they don't have any. Haradaway Jr is a freshman. This team is way young and people are so hell bent on screaming about whether or not they belong that no one has stepped back to say "wow, for one of the youngest teams that was pretty darned good". Not that that should factor in the selection, but dang, the fact that they are even being discussed is amazing. And scary for opponents in a couple years...

If UM gets left out, it's not going to be a crime against humanity and if they get let in they'll be amongst a number of teams that could have been NIT bound if not for a smile from fate.

Sadly for all their close losses where they missed ft's and such, that fluke shot against Wisconsin may be the last nail.

Anonymous said...

Not all that wondrous, since UK made the elite 8 with practically all freshman last year...

Chris in NC said...

"The sad thing for PSU (and Michigan St too) is that if both of these teams had taken care of business vs the team projected to finish 10th out of 11... both MSU and PSU would be hard locks in the tournament."

Yep. Dead on. 11th in most but even 12th in some. UM was supposed to be at home after this weekend watching. No NCAA, No NIT not even that tournament for those not good enough for the NIT.

Not a bad year for them. NCAA worthy? We'll see. They too hold their own fate Friday and Saturday. Let's see if they can do something. Sunday is going to be fun.

Will said...

Interestingly, 1 team in the pre-season first four in/first four out will make it, and yet all 4 of the next four out will make it... Interesting.

dalianch said...

well said Chris in NC. and UK had the top recruiting class in the country, its no suprise they made the elite eight. UM's team is made of mostly unknown (in terms of skill) players. Yes I know there are familiar names like dumars, horford, and hardaway, but these names did not make a top notch recruiting class. dumars is a walk on and horford has seen minimal playing time. these kids were overlooked by many programs, which makes this opportunity for a young Michigan special. WONDROUS.

Will said...

Certainly. Just don't think it adds to the case.

Anonymous said...

Michigan has 0 quality wins!

Has a 13 loss team ever got a selection without beating a single rated team?

I would guess no...which is as it should be..

The committee wants teams in that can beat tourney teams

(IE tenn/colo/marq/msu/usc/vt)

All better options

Michael said...

Michigan Sweept MSU - you can't say they are a better team then Michigan. PERIOD.

Will said...

It's not about being the best team, it's about the best resume. Or at least it is as long as Richmond and UAB stay in the field.

Anonymous said...

Michigan has 0 quality wins!

Has a 13 loss team ever got a selection without beating a single rated team?

Tom said...

Geez, so much back and forth over Michigan.

The point of arguing over using RPI as a quality metric is silly: put forth your own metric if you disagree.

Using Pomeroy UM beat an average ranked opponent of 121.6 and lost to an opponent averaging 26.9. Even better positioned, by numbers, than RPI.

Using the eye test comparison versus VT: Michigan beat Clemson away, something VT didn't do.

VT has one signature win and a Pom average win of 154.1. Of their 19 wins, 8 came from Pomeroy teams ranked 225+.

VT feasted on bad teams, much more so than Michigan.

Signature wins are nice but comparable away games against potential tourney teams, like Clemson, are probably more useful. I'd love to hear some discussion how the Duke win overshadows the Clemson comparable.

Anonymous said...

@Will said...

It's not about being the best team, it's about the best resume. Or at least it is as long as Richmond and UAB stay in the field

A couple years ago Creighton had a far better resume than arizona..

Arizona got in...why? because they beat somebody

dalianch said...

the committee wants consistent teams... vt and msu are liabilities. They will either show up and play well or leave their talent on the bus. cbs doesnt want people changing the channel due to a terrible basketball game.

Will said...

Yeah, Daliance. Only VT is normally mediocre, and sometimes brilliant, whereas michigan is always mediocre...

Tom said...

@Will

VT was one-time a winner, at home, over Duke: certainly an awesome accomplishment. They were also losers of their last two, one a DRUBBING by BC at home and one a loss to Clemson on the road (a team UM took care of on the road) when their tourney life depended on it, they pooped the bed.

UM, on the other hand, took care of business in their final two games, and winning 3 of 4. They certainly didn't skid into the end of their season like VT did.

I think VT can make the tourney with 2 ACCT wins, but I think they are not as well positioned as UM is.

mag900 said...

"dalianch said...
michigan is the youngest team in the nation, of course they weren't playing good basketball early on."

how are they the youngest team in the nation when they start 2 juniors and a soph? that's not even close to the youngest team in the nation.

Will said...

On the other hand, VT has won 15 of 21, and Michigan has won just 9 out of their last 19... Vt also beat FSU.

dalianch said...

That's true. They do start to juniors and a soph. Those juniors are the only two on the entire team, and one of them wasn't starting early until recently. 2 juniors, two sophomores, and the rest freshman are only who receive any significant playing time. i dont know what your definition of young is, but that sounds young to me. I'm not really sure why you care, I was just thinking of the early season expectations this team had compared to where they are now. For a young team, they are in good shape...but young or old, it is an irrelevant thing to look at when talking about the tourney.

Anonymous said...

And all bubble teams put on there okie state garb, and tune into espn 3.

Tom said...

Will, in effect you're saying that a win over Duke is more important than the direct comparison of the Clemson game. Also that the average team beaten doesn't matter.

VT has two wins over locks in the NCAA tourney: Duke and FSU, both at home. Definitely good. Counting PSU as a strong bubble team, they have 3 wins over potential tourney squads. UM has 7 such wins, although none carry the lock designation, all are in strong bubble status.

In essence, you're putting 2 lock wins above 7 bubble wins and over the comparable game. I get it, I just don't agree.

Justin said...

@Tom

My point was more that using "average" numbers aren't instructive considering most people would consider teams below 200 to be fairly equal and show us nothing about at team (unless you lose) yet have wild affects on your "average" win.

And also considering that averages themselves can be misleading. A team can beat the number 5 team, the number 40 team and the number 100 team and have the same average as a team that beat 3 ~50 ranked teams. Which one of those teams makes the tournament?

Averages are basically another way of saying SOS without providing any other context for who you beat. And I think everyone agrees that Michigan had a pretty good SOS. It's just that they lost to every team that has the potential to get better than a 12 seed in the tournament (i.e., who they'd be playing in the NCAAs).

Will said...

Yes, the average win means nothing. It's one of the dumbest stats out there. VT has 1 win over an elite team, U of M has 0. VT has one additional win over a team currently looking at a single-digit seed. U of M has 0. U of M is very good at beating mediocre teams, yes. Congrats.

Will said...

LOL... Seth Davis says USC with 2 tourney wins and Colorado with 1 tourney win would get in over 'Nova.

Anonymous said...

If MSU loses to Iowa are they nit bound?

Tom said...

UM took care of a team VT couldn't, on the road and OOC, no less. VT beat no one on the road, period. All tournament games occur on the road/at neutral sites. Tech's best win on the road was Maryland. UM took down PSU, MSU, and Clemson on the road (all bubble teams).

Again, wins, at home (where it is easier to win) over two good teams beat out wins over three decent teams on the road (where it is much harder to win and where play is more indicative of what your tournament ability might be like)?

Will said...

The bigger problem for U of M, in this argument, is that they had opportunities to get the wins equal to what VT did, but were unable to.

dalianch said...

michigan is good at beating mediocre teams. i think your Vatech team would fall under the mediocre column. would love to see a head-to-head against these two.

Will said...

Maybe we'll get to.

dalianch said...

Will, you do bring up a good point about Michigan's inability to get a good win given all the opportunities. If they don't make it, that will surely haunt this team, especially since they were close many time (I know close doesn't count and a loss is a loss). We can talk all we want, but nothing will be certain until the conference tournaments are over and Sunday has arrived. best wishes to all who are rooting for their bubble teams.

Marty said...

Will obviously has a personal issue here.

Bracketology 101 said...

@ Anonymous 12:57 -

Michigan State's not going to make it if they lose to Iowa.

AG said...

Two Words: Warren Nolan

Records vs. RPI Top 50:

MSU: 3-9
Michigan 3-8
Washington 3-4
Arizona 2-4
Boston College 1-6
Illinois 3-8
UCLA 3-6
Georgia 3-9

The point is, not only is *someone* getting in with few quality wins A LOT OF SOMEBODIES are getting in with few quality wins. If those quality wins don't meet the great and powerful Will's definition of quality wins, then he's either an ACC homer at best, or a Michigan hater at worst.

Perhaps if he'd like to explain his double standard of why VT's embarrassing home loss to BC is OK but Michigan's win @ Clemson is irrelevant despite both being in equal standing on the bubble.

Bracketology101, I know Villanova is probably going to become the first team to ever get an at-large after ending the season on a 5 game losing streak, but at the very least the selection committee could ship 'em out to Tuscon or something can't they?

Will said...

Because, as I've said 100,000 times, the most important statistic is quality wins. To me, a quality win is a win over a team solidly in the tournament. Vt has 2, U of M has 0. Prove to me, U of M, that you are able to beat tourney teams, and maybe I'll accept that you can be a tourney team. Until then, you're just very mediocre...

Marty said...

@Derek
So the rpi 50 is a good win but the rpi 51st is not, in fact the 51st rpi is the same as the rpi 99. Is this what you are saying?

Marty said...

@ will
Almost every major Bracketologist has Michigan in as a 11 seed, not even a 12 seed! Why do you suppose that is?

Michael said...

"Prove to me, U of M, that you are able to beat tourney teams, and maybe I'll accept that you can be a tourney team."

Roght now just Oakland in the tournament:

Oakland

But what I see happening:
Clemson getting in
Harvard will beat Princton
MSU x2 will beat Iowa
Illinois

That will be 6 wins if things fall right. Next?

March_24_7 said...

@Will,

Team A is 1-6 vs the top 25 and 1-10 vs the top 100. Their one win appears to be a fluke based on the fact that they didn't beat anyone else in the top 100 all year.

Team B is 0-7 vs the top 25, hasn't played anyone 26-50, but has gone undefeated vs 51-300 including a handful of top 100 wins.

Who do you think is most likely to win a game as a 12 seed?

Who do you think is more deserving of a 12 seed?

Bracketology 101 said...

Cleaning up some of the other questions....

Two wins for Penn State will put them right in the mix and it will depend on how other bubble teams fare, particularly Michigan and Michigan State. The Nittany Lions really need to avoid being viewed as #7 in the Big Ten pecking order since whichever team is #7 will likely be left out.

If Texas makes it to the Big 12 final they would have a chance at a 2 seed.

If ND wins the Big East tourney they are a lock for a 1 seed.

zlionsfan said...

Iowa has a quality win. I guess they've got a better resume than Michigan does.

If, you know, all you care about is quality wins.

Anonymous said...

March are these 2 real teams?

AG said...

Will, I'll agree there's some merit to your belief, but you have to consider 2 things:

1. With the expanded field, *somebody* with a weak resume is getting in, and it might as well be the team that's playing the best. You can knock Michigan's schedule and say they got lucky to play Ohio State and Purdue earlier and Northwestern and Indiana later, but they actually won. If VT didn't lose their last two after beating Duke they wouldn't be a bubble team (they'd also probably be a first round bye.) If Colorado hadn't lost to Iowa State, ESPN would be talking themselves blue in the face right now about how excited pro scouts would be to see Alec Burks and Cory Higgins in the tournament instead of asking if they'll lose to Iowa State again or can they beat K-State for the 3rd time.

2. As a Florida State fan, Will, you of all people should know that even the elite teams can have a bad shooting night in college basketball. I don't know about you, but I watched FSU, a team with a McDonalds All American PG and PF lose to Auburn on a night where Chris Singleton went like 4-12 from the ft line. Jay Bilas once said College Basketball is the only sport where offense wins championships, because the average player can't hit a wide open jump shot more than 40% of the time. If you're going to do silly things like make the case that Oklahoma State and Penn State belong in the tournament ahead of Michigan because they fell victim to a sub-30% 3pt shooter hitting a buzzer beater for the 2nd straight year, while that same Wisconsin team has been notoriously awful from 3 in almost every other road game this season, then you're not being objective about who should be in the field.

Chase said...

Marty, you're creeping me out bro.

Michigan hasn't beaten any quality teams. Your best win is Clemson or Penn State on the road - because they just got on a little streak and are now a fringe bubble team.

0-7 vs the RPI 25.
3-8 vs the RPI 26-50.

And in those 3 wins, both are Michigan State, the other is Harvard.

Close loses mean nothing - if they did Penn State would be a 9 seed (lost by a total of 4 points at Ohio State and Purdue). If we look at close losses, why not close wins then? Terrible logic.

I hate stupid people.

Facts are facts: Michigan has beaten not one tournament quality team. They're 0-6 against the top 4 Big 10 teams. Better beat Illinois or the Wolverines are out.

Marty said...

@ Chase
Stay classy

Anonymous said...

B101,

How far does Georgetown fall after getting handled by UCONN given the uncertainty of the status and/or effectiveness of Chris Wright for the Big Dance?

Interesting seeding dilemma for the committee.

Last season ND lost Harangody for some games late in the season, the committee gave ND a 6 seed (probably overseeded) then ND promptly got beat by ODU in the 1st round w/ Harangody as basically a no-show.

Marty said...

Michigan

*Bracketology101 -11seed
*Lunardi -11seed
*Jerry Palm -11seed
*Bracket Matrix -11seed

Chase, are these all "Stupid People"?

Won't said...

Is that a rhetorical question?

AG said...

One more bubble team down.

Anonymous said...

If you really want to compare two bubble teams' resumes, line up all their results, side by side. Put their most impressive game (obviously a win) side by side, and give a +1 to whichever one is better. Do that for every game, and see if one side comes out on top. Maybe one team's close loss to a good team is more impressive than the counterpart.

Tom said...

Will,

I guess I'll leave you to the "the only thing that matters is an elite win" logic you cling to. It's specious, at best.

Blind:

Team has a win over a top 10 team, 3 more wins over tourney locks, and another win over a likely bubble team. 5 total wins over likely tourney teams, including that lock.

Does this team, in a vacuum, deserve to be in?

Anonymous said...

As a Kansas and Big 12 Fan, I just want to congratulate the Nebraska Cornhuskers on not making the tournament, and here's hoping they enjoy many more years of sub mediocrity in the Big 10. We already don't miss you! Enjoy the NIT!

Anonymous said...

Nebraska down... are there any bubble teams out there that want to actually play their way into the tournament?

Dan said...

Any comparisons of GTown this year and ND last year are way off base. Last year, without 'Gody, the Irish won, and won, and won. In fact, with Gody they were probably NIT bound, but when he went out, the Tory Jackson show started and they earned a (still probably overseeded) 6 seed. GTown has nothing to do with ND last year.

Anonymous said...

Why all the talk about Michigan? Could it be the recent and frequent ESPN reminders that after Sunday night’s Selection Show, they’ll be showing their documentary about Michigan’s Fab Five freshmen group that went to the NCAA championship games in 1992 and 1993. That’s a reminder of when Michigan basketball last was considered relevant on the national scene. Even on campus in Ann Arbor, the student section at Michigan hockey’s Yost Arena seems more enthusiastic than the Maize Rage students at UM basketball’s outdated and dingy Crisler Arena. (Michigan hockey soon will be playing in its 21st straight NCAA tournament.)

Two weeks ago, after Michigan lost by one at home to Wisconsin on a fluky buzzer beater, how many so-called “experts” had Michigan in the NCAA field? They weren’t even projected as high as a two seed in the NIT. They’ve won only two games since then, at Minnesota and at home against Michigan State by identical 70-63 scores.

Michigan’s 18-12 record* and collection of close losses against good teams (Syracuse by 3 in Atlantic City, Kansas by 7 in OT at home, Ohio State by 4 at home, Illinois by 2 on the road and that Wisconsin loss at home) may not be enough to get them in the NCAA field if they lose again to Illinois in the Big Ten Tournament. Still, that should not diminish their accomplishments, considering that in the preseason they were expected to finish no better than 8th in the conference. *Concordia win doesn’t count for NCAA tournament consideration.

For most of the season, they started two true freshmen, a redshirt freshman, a sophomore (3rd team all conference) and a junior who might be a role player on most other Big Ten teams (though always hustling Zack Novak might be a fan favorite at those schools and at places like Duke’s Cameron Indoor Stadium.) They may have less height in their regular rotation than some AAU U-19 teams. They don’t have any great outside shooters. Their bench isn’t very strong. Having the sons of Tim Hardaway, Joe Dumars and Tito Horford (brother of Al Horford) on their roster shouldn’t give UM a bid to the Big Dance. Like several of this year’s bubble teams, they have a nice NIT resumé, but still could be dancing on Selection Sunday.

Mike said...

Alright, one big 12 team down, time to put on my ISU hat! lets make it two for two

Dustin said...

Re: Michigan.

Michigan loses to who they are supposed to lose to, and beats all of the bubble teams around them.

They have a win @Clemson, which is something VT and BC don't have.

They have wins against Harvard and Oakland, teams very comparable to bubble teams.

They swept Penn St, another bubble team.

They swept Michigan St, another bubble team.

Looking at the pecking order, if you are going to consider Michigan St, and Penn St, you have to consider Michigan first. They have comparable resumes, and Michigan swept both teams. Its one thing if they only played once, and Michigan won at home, and its another to take 2 from someone.

The metric you're using, Will, to keep out Michigan isnt a metric that the committee is going to use. They don't need to see Michigan beat a 4 seed to be more worthy than all of the teams they are beating on their level.


Also, FSU sucks.

GO GATORS!

Anonymous said...

I guess I should have clarified... the point of my comparison between ND and Georgetown was overseeding by the committee. Will the committee assume Georgetown will be much better w/ Wright and overseed, even though we have no idea how effective Wright will be after the lay off.

Tico said...

Georgetown's floor is a 7 (maybe even 6) with their resume and fact that Chris Wright is already practicing with team and will be back.

Anonymous said...

switch st peters and morehead st...look at their body of works not just their confernece.. dont be lazy

Bracketology 101 said...

Tico -

We agree. Georgetown's floor is a low 6/high 7.

Anonymous said...

Okay... 6/7 it is for G-Town. Wright may be back practicing, but no one has any idea how effective he'll be in a game after the lay off. Depending on who they draw in the first round, I see upset potential (at least based on the seeds).

Bracketology 101 said...

St. Peter's has one more Top 100 win than Morehead State and they beat Alabama. Conference strength is also a pretty big factor in seeding the 13-16 lines, and the MAAC is rated 16th and the Ohio Valley is 27th. Both might end up as 14 seeds in the end, but right now St. Peter's has a slightly better resume.

Tom said...

UCF looked like a bracket buster back in December. Now the Jordan boys drop their opening round by 15. Yikes.

Anonymous said...

B101,

Is Oklahoma St in with a win over Kansas?

Is Colorado in with a win over Iowa St. but loss to Kansas St.?

Is Baylor in with a win over Texas?

Anonymous said...

B101

Why do you consider Marquette to be safe now and just playing for seeding. If they lose to WVU, they would have 14 losses with more than likely a SOS around 30, not to mention an RPI that would probably be around 60. IMO, the only teams that should be allowed 14 losses and make the tourney would have to be a team with a SOS in the top 10, with a few rpi top 50 wins (I.e. Tennessee, and I guess Mich. St. & PSU, even though they don't have as many top 50 RPI wins).

I understand that they have a few very good conference wins (Uconn, Cuse, ND, & WVU) and no bad losses, but they had a pretty weak non conference showing (all the good teams they played, they lost to). I do think Marquette would sneak in as 1 of the last 4 in, barring alot of bid stealers, but I just do not see how they are only playing for seeding now.

Dustin said...

Marquette is closer to a 10 than they are to being out.

Dustin said...

@anon 3:33

Oklahoma St probably needs to win the Big 12T.

Colorado is probably in with a win over ISU, but it'll be close.

Baylor becomes a serious contender with a win over Texas, but they might need 1 more win that that.

Won't said...

I don't get why Baylor is even considered a bubble team at this point. Their profile is fairly comparable to Northwestern. They do have the two wins over A&M (NW's best win is Illinois) but the Wildcats don't have a sub RPI top 100 loss all season, while Baylor has three.

Curtwill1975 said...

I am a Nova fan, if you remember, a month ago, I asked you what it would take for them to be a 1 seed. Man, was that dumb. So I ask you this: Why are they in the Tourney in your view? Losing 10 out of 15 including to Providence, Rutgers and South Florida(on a neutral site and tourney setting)?

That's 3 TERRIBLE losses so I can understand why ANYONE would object to them being in the dance so why do you think they should be there? And yes, I know that how a team the last 10(+) games aren't factored as much as they used to be

Chase said...

Michigan

*Bracketology101 -11seed
*Lunardi -11seed
*Jerry Palm -11seed
*Bracket Matrix -11seed

Chase, are these all "Stupid People"?

Well, Lunardi is.

They're in the tournament RIGHT NOW. If they LOSE for the 7th time to a Big 10-worthy tournament team.. they WON'T get in. Easy?

And even if they do get in, what? A run to the Final 4? One and done team. Jump off.

mike said...

bah. marty is so damn annoying. really, 70 posts about michigan, a team who has beaten nobody? ugh.

Bracketology 101 said...

Oklahoma State needs to win the Big XII tournament to get a bid.

If Colorado beats Iowa State and loses to Kansas State, they'll have a 50-50 shot at an at-large. It would all depend on how the rest of the bubble fared between now and Sunday.

If Baylor beats Texas, they'd be very alive for an at-large, but they would probably still need one more win to get in.

Kyle said...

can we please move on from the michigan argument until they play another game? i think both sides of the argument have made their points now and it's getting a little old.

how about we talk about st johns seed if they lose to rutgers? or maybe colorado getting closer to playing their way out...

Chase said...

Buffs down 43-41 with 12 minutes left.

Won't said...

I still say Baylor = Northwestern, more or less. Northwestern actually has a better Sagarin rating than Baylor and a considerably better ELO Chess rating. Their Pomeroy ratings are almost identical.

Anonymous said...

so...the big east tournament might want to look into getting new officials. the rutgers/st johns game's ending was unbelievably bad

Chase said...

Worst officiating i've ever seen.

Bracketology 101 said...

Wow...the last 30 seconds of that game were a disgrace.

Howard Salwasser said...

If I'm Rutgers coach Mike Rice, i'd not only be having a cow over the non-traveling-step-out-of-bounds-throw-ball-into-the-stands call for the last play of the game with St. John's, I'd be having a turkey, chicken, pot roast, goose, and the occasional pheasant over it. That was horrible officiating.

Dustin said...

Big win for St. John's, they lock up a 4/5 seed, and there isnt a lot of difference for them since they arent likely to get a preferential pod anyways.

Anonymous said...

Yep, Rutgers got screwed. If I pretend to ignore the 2 fouls that should have been called on St. Johns, St Johns stepped out of bounds with 1.7 secs left, followed by him tossing the ball into the stands. Should have been an auto tech, plus the ball back. Not to mention, the refs immediately leave the court, with not so much as taking a glance at the monitor. Isn't this why replays were brought into basketball, to avoid horrible calls by refs in the last seconds of a game. These officials better be banned from officiating the rest of their lives...

Anonymous said...

Worst home court whistle I have EVER seen.. Rutgers got straight hosed... 1) Coburn got fouled on his drive 2)Someone def went over the book on Mitchell 3)Evans goes out of bounce with 2 seconds left 4)throwing the ball into the crowd with time left is an automatic Technical Foul. Rutgers should have had two free throws and the ball down 1 with 2 seconds left.

Anonymous said...

AND HOW DO YOU NOT EVEN CHECK THE MONITOR? they just stormed off the court to avoid the controversy!

Anonymous said...

So what teams get in instead of Nebraska/Colorado/Baylor? Who was out that is now in?

Dan said...

How come everyone in the world knows Higgins and Burr are awful officials, yet they keep getting hired. Doesn't someone have to realize the two of them and TV Ted are this bad and STOP PAYING THEM TO WEAR THE STRIPES! It's a travesty that Higgins keeps getting games, especially in the big conferences. Let them do HS Girls basketball.

Chase said...

Tim Higgins = 68 year old alcoholic referee.

You know what is the worst thing about this? He'll be in Houston in April at the Final 4.

Dustin said...

Nebraska and Baylor are already on the outside lookin in. If Colorado loses to ISU (looks like its going to happen) Im moving USC into my bracket.

Anonymous said...

USC does not have a tournament resume. Id put Clemson/VT (Whomever you didnt have in before) in along with BC.

Michigan is in. Stop talking about them

Won't said...

"If Colorado loses to ISU (looks like its going to happen) Im moving USC into my bracket."

Have things really gotten THIS desperate?

Tom said...

Don't give up on Colorado just yet.

Dustin said...

@ Anon 5:04

I have Clemson and BC in, with VT one spot behind USC. USC and VT will have a chance to distinguish themselves.

AG said...

Jim Burr, Tim Higgins, and Ed Hightower are the axis of evil when it comes to college basketball officiating. What's funny is that everybody thinks their conference has the worst refs because of these guys. They all ref the same conferences!

Tom said...

USC's profile is interesting:

Away wins over: Washington, Tennessee
Home wins over: Texas, Wash. St., UCLA, Arizona

Right there, the team has a better profile than most bubblers.

Still they have HOME losses to: Rider, Oregon

And away/neutral losses to: Oregon State, Bradley, TCU, Oregon

Those are some terrible losses and some excellent wins. They need to make a bit of a stink in to P10 tournament for them to be in, I think.

Dustin said...

Colorado pulls it out at the end. Needing 50 points in the second half against Iowa State is abysmal though.

Up 4 with 15 secs left.

Jabesblog said...

This Michigan talk is exhausting...I was curious so I just put up records vs teams in/under consideration on my blog. Michigan is 7-9, Virginia Tech (who seems to be the chosen comparison) is 3-7. One excellent win does not alone get you in the tournament (the Iowa reference worked well here). I have Michigan ahead of Virginia Tech.

Also, USC is gaining momentum, at least on my radar. I think wins against Cal and Arizona might do it if the bubble does not shrink.

AG said...

Well both teams are known for running a lot. Last time they played Iowa State won a game in the high 90s.

Running seems like a great strategy for a team that plays at elevation.

Chase said...

Colorado wins but they just look so unimpressive. Gotta beat K-State tomorrow.

Michael said...

agree colorado looks real bad, they are going to be a 50/50 shot

Tom said...

Colorado, who certainly didn't need the opening game to take itself to the wire, still has a solid profile.

Wins against Texas, KSU (2x), Mizzou, and Colorado State (fellow bubble team) look good. Losses to Oklahoma and San Francisco are bad but at least both were away.

What hurts Colorado is that it has a home court hero profile, similar to Clemson (but with better wins and worse losses). They are 4-10 away from home, not exactly amazing for a tournament that occurs away from home. KSU win was the only solid away victory.

I'm excited to see if these guys man up and win another B12 game.

Anonymous said...

Do the SWAC, Southland, and MEAC all play during the Majors championship week so nobody will notice how bad of baskebtall they play? seriously why are they even division 1? drop them!

Anonymous said...

isnt there a tournament specficially for HBCU's?

Anonymous said...

I think Colorado is in with this. Not a lock but "Bubble In". Even with a loss to K-State tomorrow.

Dustin said...

I have Colorado as a slightly better than 50/50 chance to make the tournament even with a loss to K-State. They have a solid but not great resume and you cant punish them too harshly for losing a game they are supposed to lose tomorrow.

Dustin said...

@ Anon 5:26

If you think they're bad, try watching the Great West, the only conference that doesnt get a bid to the NCAA tournament.

Anonymous said...

Is anybody in CUSA in the discussion for an atlarge after UAB? Say Memphis/Southern Miss beats the other tomorrow, then beats UAB Friday, but loses to UTEP in the finals?

Or say UTEP gets to finals but loses to UAB?

Tom said...

I agree, slightly better than 50/50 with a loss. With a win over KSU they're clearly a lock. I don't see it happening, though.

I like them more than Clemson/VT due to their higher profile wins but I'd think they're more likely to tank out round one than either of those ACC squads.

If BC beats Wake tomorrow and loses to Clemson, and Colorado loses to KSU, I would put Colorado just behind BC and ahead of most of the field. BC is a better away team and I think that will help them in the eyes of the committee.

Won't said...

I didn't know it was even possible to beat six(!!) teams with 300+ rpi's in the non-con but Colorado did exactly that, plus beat #296 Citadel for good measure. Man, that's just brutal!

Tom said...

What are everyone's feelings on BC?

Only 1 win against a tournament lock, 2 more against bubble teams (VT), loss to Yale at home (and URI away).

Rest of losses are solid but there are 11 of them in total.

Sweep of Maryland (no longer a bubble team), VT, Virginia.

Where I think they work out well is the fact they have 7 wins away from Chestnut Hill and a top 20 SOS with 19 wins.

Chances of a berth with a loss to Clemson?

Dustin said...

@Tom

BC is my last team in right now. I don't see them getting in if they lose to Clemson again. I really believe the Clemson/BC game is a play-in/play-out game.

Also, supposedly Perry Jones hired an agent. He's suspended for tonight's game against Oklahoma. I guess that removes the last bit of doubt about Baylor making it.

Tom said...

Dustin, I'm on the same page with you about BC. I think they need to beat Clemson to get in. I think they will, too, as Clemson has shown nothing away from Littlejohn and BC has shown the ability to beat teams on the road. They are also slightly schizophrenic, though, and could easily lose to Clemson by 20 if their 3s aren't falling.

AG said...

I always felt BC was the 4th team from the ACC right now because of their wins and higher RPI. We know the ACC ain't getting 3 and I don't see Clemson or VT getting in ahead of them right now.

Then again the way Reggie Jackson acts out he could get benched again and they might lose to Wake...

Tom said...

Reggie is fun to watch. He might have a future in the NBA if he finds a way to get his mid-range jumper to fall more consistently. He slashes to the basket better than most in the ACC.

I don't think they lose to Wake but it's a serious possibility Clemson beats them. Clemson has Milton Jennings down in the paint and he's closer to 6'10 than 6'8 and from the games I've seen, BC has trouble with big men (see Reggie Johnson from Miami dominate them).

Tom said...

On a different ACC note: NC State better get a shot in the NIT. They have no bad losses and wins against George Mason and Clemson. They just have too many losses with an incredibly hard SOS.

CJ Leslie is awesome.

Tom said...

Make that an incredibly hard SOS in conference. Their OOC SOS is terrible and that kills their RPI.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 283   Newer› Newest»