(01-26-2018 10:40 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote: Not even close.
Then you can save your trolling commentary for your own.
How are we with the zero quality wins when I’ve already listed a page or 2 back that we are 7-2 versus the RPI groups 1 and 2?
4-2 vs RPI Group 1
3-0 vs RPI Group 2
Wins in G1 and G2 are quality wins by definition.
You’re trolling sucks much like your teams ability to work through screens...
Both teams have very similar resumes at this point. So either one saying the other team would be on the bubble is by default saying your own team would be on the bubble.
I mostly agree. What I personally thought was a ridiculous statement was that UC would be on the bubble with a loss or two. I think UC and WSU were in very similar situations. WSU just lost a couple and is nowhere near the bubble. Both are closer to being locks than bubble teams.
Agreed, You can't lock them in yet. Because by definition, you have to be able to get in if you lost every game left on your schedule. Both teams would be out if that happened. They would both need a catastrophic collapse to miss the tourney.
(01-26-2018 10:49 AM)ShockerFever Wrote: Then you can save your trolling commentary for your own.
How are we with the zero quality wins when I’ve already listed a page or 2 back that we are 7-2 versus the RPI groups 1 and 2?
4-2 vs RPI Group 1
3-0 vs RPI Group 2
Wins in G1 and G2 are quality wins by definition.
You’re trolling sucks much like your teams ability to work through screens...
Both teams have very similar resumes at this point. So either one saying the other team would be on the bubble is by default saying your own team would be on the bubble.
At least Cincy has a Top 30 RPI win. WSU isn’t even close.
Dude, stop bragging about the win over Buffalo. Buffalo is a pretty good team and will likely give a scare to a 5 seed in the tourney, but that win isn't impressing the committee members enough to make it a signature win.
Thank you. It's a good win, but we all know the committee uses the RPI .. until they decide to not use the RPI and use the eye test (or whatever other number/reason they want).
(01-26-2018 12:00 AM)ShockerFever Wrote: What's Cincinnati's best win?
I mean SMU is technically our highest metric win. At UCLA might be second honestly. I get your point and it's somewhat valid, but be careful with that logic. What's WSUs best win?
Depends on the metric. The Committee still uses RPI. Cincy beat RPI #27 on a neutral court.
You’re hanging your hat on a neutral court win over a MAC team? rofl
Why are you Dissing the MAC. Sure Buffalo is running thru a very weak conference, but the Committee make allowances for that. They sure did for WSU.
Alright, I admit I laughed a bit at this one.
Intentional or not, this was actual high level setup with a solid punchline.
(01-26-2018 12:32 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: For what it's worth, most Cincinnati fans find payday just as obnoxious as Wichita State posters do.
That actually is worth something. Kind of the same with WSU posters and CB. Though i think I give CB the edge because he at least tries to be creative with his trolling. Even if it does get old at times.
You work for CNN don't you? You've got that #fakenews down pat!
I'm a GD legend son and I suggest you stop biting the hand that feeds you...
(01-26-2018 12:32 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: For what it's worth, most Cincinnati fans find payday just as obnoxious as Wichita State posters do.
That actually is worth something. Kind of the same with WSU posters and CB. Though i think I give CB the edge because he at least tries to be creative with his trolling. Even if it does get old at times.
You work for CNN don't you? You've got that #fakenews down pat!
I'm a GD legend son and I suggest you stop biting the hand that feeds you...
(01-26-2018 12:35 PM)bearcatmark Wrote: Almost every resume out there has holes in it. Cincinnati's resume is really solid when you look at record vs. each "tier", overall record and advanced metrics like kenpom/sagarin (the first part likely the biggest deal for the committee). Cincinnati's resume lacks really noteworthy wins (beating a protected seed type team) and suffers from too many bad RPI teams in the nonconference. It is what it is. The ceiling for this UC team is probably a 2 seed as a result, but the strengths of the resume are enough that if they keep taking care of business (split with WSU, maybe lose one more game) they will be a protected seed and possibly as high as a 2 in the tournament.
I think this is too optimistic. I don't see any way we get a 2 seed without a protected seed win. That lack of high level punch will make a difference even if the rest of the resume is on point. UC has a ceiling of a 3 right now IMO.
Maybe if we win at WSU and they are a 4/5 seed, we get the credit for that signature W, but I personally don't see it.
(01-26-2018 09:20 AM)stxrunner Wrote: I mean SMU is technically our highest metric win. At UCLA might be second honestly. I get your point and it's somewhat valid, but be careful with that logic. What's WSUs best win?
Depends on the metric. The Committee still uses RPI. Cincy beat RPI #27 on a neutral court.
You’re hanging your hat on a neutral court win over a MAC team? rofl
Why are you Dissing the MAC. Sure Buffalo is running thru a very weak conference, but the Committee make allowances for that. They sure did for WSU.
Alright, I admit I laughed a bit at this one.
Intentional or not, this was actual high level setup with a solid punchline.
LOL. It was planned. It just took a long time for them to take the bait.
(01-26-2018 12:35 PM)bearcatmark Wrote: Almost every resume out there has holes in it. Cincinnati's resume is really solid when you look at record vs. each "tier", overall record and advanced metrics like kenpom/sagarin (the first part likely the biggest deal for the committee). Cincinnati's resume lacks really noteworthy wins (beating a protected seed type team) and suffers from too many bad RPI teams in the nonconference. It is what it is. The ceiling for this UC team is probably a 2 seed as a result, but the strengths of the resume are enough that if they keep taking care of business (split with WSU, maybe lose one more game) they will be a protected seed and possibly as high as a 2 in the tournament.
I think this is too optimistic. I don't see any way we get a 2 seed without a protected seed win. That lack of high level punch will make a difference even if the rest of the resume is on point. UC has a ceiling of a 3 right now IMO.
Maybe if we win at WSU and they are a 4/5 seed, we get the credit for that signature W, but I personally don't see it.
Though really .. 1-4 don't matter too much. You should still get geographic preference and decent match ups. Danger zone is the 5-9. 5 gets the 12 which always seems to be an underrated mid that is way better than their resume says they are. 6 might be the best overall as you get an 11 which is normally the last teams in, so they are overrated M7 teams that squeaked in off of one or two hot shooting games and you don't have the 1 or 2 until the S16.
