The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(03-16-2019 08:41 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-16-2019 08:35 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  buffalo pulling away, they are really good. still can’t give them better than an 8 seed. Played only 5 top 100 teams all year. Went 1-1 against tournament teams. You can’t give a mid-major a better seed than an 8 if you play 25 games against quad 3, quad 4, and non division one opponents. best win is syracuse and then toledo twice.

If Wofford, Nevada, or Buffalo are seeded higher than Cincinnati then who you play doesn’t matter. Tomorrow will be UC’s 23 game agiant top 100 competition. That is the difference between playing a mid major and a high major schedule.

Buffalo is 31-3. They'd be a 3-4 point favorite against UC on a neutral court. They are better than UC. I'd have no issue if the committee rewarded them.

I would. Then let a computer seed teams. 5 too 100 games all year. UC list one sub 200 clunker, Buffalo list two sub 100 clunkers. UC margin of victory in against sub 100 teams was over 20 points. It was about 15 points a game in teams 101 to 160. Playing bad equals blowouts win which increases efficiency.

Rewarding teams for beating bad teams goes agiant everything the committee has always done.

(03-16-2019 08:50 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(03-16-2019 08:41 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-16-2019 08:35 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  buffalo pulling away, they are really good. still can’t give them better than an 8 seed. Played only 5 top 100 teams all year. Went 1-1 against tournament teams. You can’t give a mid-major a better seed than an 8 if you play 25 games against quad 3, quad 4, and non division one opponents. best win is syracuse and then toledo twice.

If Wofford, Nevada, or Buffalo are seeded higher than Cincinnati then who you play doesn’t matter. Tomorrow will be UC’s 23 game agiant top 100 competition. That is the difference between playing a mid major and a high major schedule.

Buffalo is 31-3. They'd be a 3-4 point favorite against UC on a neutral court. They are better than UC. I'd have no issue if the committee rewarded them.

I would. Then let a computer seed teams. 5 too 100 games all year. UC list one sub 200 clunker, Buffalo list two sub 100 clunkers. UC margin of victory in against sub 100 teams was over 20 points. It was about 15 points a game in teams 101 to 160. Playing bad equals blowouts win which increases efficiency.

Rewarding teams for beating bad teams goes agiant everything the committee has always done.

There are good strength of record statistics that account for that. Buffalo is 18 in BPI Strength of Record for example. Small conference teams don't play the same schedules as teams from better conferences, but that doesn't mean what they accomplsih against their particular schedule can't be compared to what other teams aaccomplish against theirs. Strength of Record metrics do a a good job of this. Buffalo is a strong team. Underseeding them would penalize whatever team draws them. It would be absurd for a 1 seed to have to deal with Buffalo in the second round.

(03-16-2019 08:56 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-16-2019 08:50 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(03-16-2019 08:41 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-16-2019 08:35 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  buffalo pulling away, they are really good. still can’t give them better than an 8 seed. Played only 5 top 100 teams all year. Went 1-1 against tournament teams. You can’t give a mid-major a better seed than an 8 if you play 25 games against quad 3, quad 4, and non division one opponents. best win is syracuse and then toledo twice.

If Wofford, Nevada, or Buffalo are seeded higher than Cincinnati then who you play doesn’t matter. Tomorrow will be UC’s 23 game agiant top 100 competition. That is the difference between playing a mid major and a high major schedule.

Buffalo is 31-3. They'd be a 3-4 point favorite against UC on a neutral court. They are better than UC. I'd have no issue if the committee rewarded them.

I would. Then let a computer seed teams. 5 too 100 games all year. UC list one sub 200 clunker, Buffalo list two sub 100 clunkers. UC margin of victory in against sub 100 teams was over 20 points. It was about 15 points a game in teams 101 to 160. Playing bad equals blowouts win which increases efficiency.

Rewarding teams for beating bad teams goes agiant everything the committee has always done.

There are good strength of record statistics that account for that. Buffalo is 18 in BPI Strength of Record for example. Small conference teams don't play the same schedules as teams from better conferences, but that doesn't mean what they accomplsih against their particular schedule can't be compared to what other teams aaccomplish against theirs. Strength of Record metrics do a a good job of this. Buffalo is a strong team. Underseeding them would penalize whatever team draws them. It would be absurd for a 1 seed to have to deal with Buffalo in the second round.

I would give them a 7 seed. Only five top 100 games. That’s a junk schedule. 31 wins and only 4 came against top 100 teams. I have never seen the committee seed a team with such a low number of quality games anything better than an 8 seed. If they want to go with NET or Kenpom, great. Then apply it consistently and seed teams based on computers.

In my view Utah State has a better resume than Buffalo. Only one sub 100 loss. Their three quad are over two tournament teams and maybe a third if UCSB wins late tonight. Played 11 top games. Once again Buffalo player only five in quad 1 and upper quad 2. Utah State played 8. Cincinnati played 14.

I hope UC wins tomorrow so we are stuck on the 7 line but somebody on that committee needs to look at that actual resumes for these teams. I keep thinkinf they benifitd by beating over rated name teams name early in the year because their overall profile is full junk wins.

Mid-majors with great computer metrics have under seeded in the last six or seven years. I would shocked if this trend changes this year. It’s why I can’t see Buffalo, Wofford, Nevada, or any other non-Gonzaga mid-major higher than a seven. The American occupies that middle ground but I think Houston will get the two seed and Cincinnati a six. If UC loses and is on the 7 line, it’s going to be because power conferences schools with elite wins like Louisville, Nova, Maryland, and company are ahead of UC and not the mid-majors.

Houston gets "mid-majored" down to a 3 seed. No way Houston gets seeded above any of these:
Duke
Virginia
North Carolina
Tennessee
Michigan
Michigan State
Gonzaga

Houston's only hope is to be put ahead of Kentucky.

A conference tournament and a 6 seed would be a good St. Patrick's Day

(03-17-2019 08:29 AM)Bruce Monnin Wrote:  Houston gets "mid-majored" down to a 3 seed. No way Houston gets seeded above any of these:
Duke
Virginia
North Carolina
Tennessee
Michigan
Michigan State
Gonzaga

Houston's only hope is to be put ahead of Kentucky.

I dont think that's mid-majoring them...they just downright shouldn't be ranked above any of those teams based on their resume.

I think it would be one thing if they lost to St. Marys on a buzzer beater type game, but they simply got whooped by a team that looked better. I am not sold on Gonzagas overall resume at this point, really nice win against Duke, but outside of that their resume isn't far off from being ours.

(03-17-2019 08:31 AM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  A conference tournament and a 6 seed would be a good St. Patrick's Day

(03-17-2019 09:16 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-17-2019 08:29 AM)Bruce Monnin Wrote:  Houston gets "mid-majored" down to a 3 seed. No way Houston gets seeded above any of these:
Duke
Virginia
North Carolina
Tennessee
Michigan
Michigan State
Gonzaga

Houston's only hope is to be put ahead of Kentucky.

I dont think that's mid-majoring them...they just downright shouldn't be ranked above any of those teams based on their resume.

Eh. Their resume is closer to a 1 seed than a 3. Their q1/q2 record is great

(03-17-2019 09:30 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-17-2019 09:16 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-17-2019 08:29 AM)Bruce Monnin Wrote:  Houston gets "mid-majored" down to a 3 seed. No way Houston gets seeded above any of these:
Duke
Virginia
North Carolina
Tennessee
Michigan
Michigan State
Gonzaga

Houston's only hope is to be put ahead of Kentucky.

I dont think that's mid-majoring them...they just downright shouldn't be ranked above any of those teams based on their resume.

Eh. Their resume is closer to a 1 seed than a 3. Their q1/q2 record is great

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I dont value beating the 75th ranked team in the nation away as much as the NET does...especially when that gym is 1/4 full.

Their record in all categories is going to be great by virtue of them only having 2 losses...just like all the other teams listed with 4-5 losses. To me, all of those teams have better wins AND better teams against typically much better schedules, thus, they're not being mid majored.

Ivy league championship has been great

(03-17-2019 12:25 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Ivy league championship has been great

Harvard not having Seth Towns (their best player, Ivy League POY last year as a sophomore, and a 4* SF from Columbus, OH) really hurt them this season. I love Ivy League...I feel like the games are all super entertaining.

This Tennessee Auburn game has turned into a 3pt clinic

(03-17-2019 01:36 PM)Billy_Bearcat Wrote:  This Tennessee Auburn game has turned into a 3pt clinic

I think Auburn was picked to win the league preseason. They are going to be a scary draw for someone.

(03-17-2019 02:11 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-17-2019 01:36 PM)Billy_Bearcat Wrote:  This Tennessee Auburn game has turned into a 3pt clinic

I think Auburn was picked to win the league preseason. They are going to be a scary draw for someone.

I think Bruce Pearl wanted that one bad. Glad he got it.

So with the injury to a Michigan State player, what does that do to their seed in the NCAA?