The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(03-05-2019 11:44 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 11:41 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 10:42 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 09:59 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  Just for the record, I doubt we've ever had double digit top 100 wins.

Just going back to what probably our best year was (in the BT era), 2010, we had 27 wins total.

We had the following top 100 wins:

Marshall 81
Georgetown 11
Charlotte 96
VCU 56 (2)
Notre Dame 35

2011 we had 13 top 100 wins:

Saint Peter's 93
Clemson 55
Xavier 26
Richmond 33
Dayton 79
George Mason 24
Hofstra 88 (x2)
JMU 90 (x2)
VCU 31 (x2)
Cleveland State 43

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2011/s...d-Dominion

KenPom has:

Clemson 25
Xavier 38
Richmond 39
Dayton 97
George Mason 24
VCU 53 (2)
Cleveland State 68

So, 8 appears to be the high from the years I check; according to Ken Pom. St Peters was 137, Hofstra was 135, and JMU was 106 by those metrics.

The committee was using RPI, not KenPom. As far as the committee was concerned, we had 13 top 100 wins.

Im not talking about the committee, I'm talking about something that actually has merit.

(03-05-2019 11:50 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 11:44 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 11:41 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 10:42 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 09:59 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  Just for the record, I doubt we've ever had double digit top 100 wins.

Just going back to what probably our best year was (in the BT era), 2010, we had 27 wins total.

We had the following top 100 wins:

Marshall 81
Georgetown 11
Charlotte 96
VCU 56 (2)
Notre Dame 35

2011 we had 13 top 100 wins:

Saint Peter's 93
Clemson 55
Xavier 26
Richmond 33
Dayton 79
George Mason 24
Hofstra 88 (x2)
JMU 90 (x2)
VCU 31 (x2)
Cleveland State 43

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2011/s...d-Dominion

KenPom has:

Clemson 25
Xavier 38
Richmond 39
Dayton 97
George Mason 24
VCU 53 (2)
Cleveland State 68

So, 8 appears to be the high from the years I check; according to Ken Pom. St Peters was 137, Hofstra was 135, and JMU was 106 by those metrics.

The committee was using RPI, not KenPom. As far as the committee was concerned, we had 13 top 100 wins.

Im not talking about the committee, I'm talking about something that actually has merit.

You are free to flail your arms and scream at the sky, but the committee picks the teams and that was the metric they used for guidance at the time. Now they use NET and now P5 teams that are 5-10 in conference are considered a lock so I guess you got your wish if they really end up taking it seriously.

as of Tuesday March 5th.
Old Dominion 13-3 0.813 23-6 0.793
WKU 11-6 0.647 18-12 0.600
UTSA 10-6 0.625 16-13 0.552
Southern Miss 9-7 0.563 17-11 0.607
UAB 9-8 0.529 17-13 0.567
Marshall 9-7 0.563 16-13 0.552
FIU 9-7 0.563 18-11 0.621
Florida Atlantic 8-8 0.500 17-12 0.586
North Texas 8-9 0.471 20-10 0.667
Louisiana Tech 8-9 0.471 18-12 0.600
Rice 7-9 0.438 12-17 0.414
Middle Tenn. 6-10 0.375 9-20 0.310
Charlotte 4-12 0.250 7-20 0.259
UTEP 3-13 0.188 8-19 0.296

Interesting...there is only 1 other 20 win team and that is UNT @9th in conference. There is a strong possibility that only WKU has a chance to get to 20 wins. That is pretty sad as a conference. I still feel WKU and UAB are our toughest competition for the tournament title.

Why UAB?

I wouldnt count out FIU. They played us tough, and are in the midst of a good run last I looked. They probably feel like we stole one from them much like we felt about UTSA. I think FIU and WKU will be tough if we face them again.

(03-05-2019 04:54 PM)odu09 Wrote:  Why UAB?

They were hurt for most of the season and now are more healthy. They have length at every position. Also, they are athletic and have always played us tough.

(03-05-2019 11:50 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 11:44 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 11:41 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 10:42 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-05-2019 09:59 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  Just for the record, I doubt we've ever had double digit top 100 wins.

Just going back to what probably our best year was (in the BT era), 2010, we had 27 wins total.

We had the following top 100 wins:

Marshall 81
Georgetown 11
Charlotte 96
VCU 56 (2)
Notre Dame 35

2011 we had 13 top 100 wins:

Saint Peter's 93
Clemson 55
Xavier 26
Richmond 33
Dayton 79
George Mason 24
Hofstra 88 (x2)
JMU 90 (x2)
VCU 31 (x2)
Cleveland State 43

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2011/s...d-Dominion

KenPom has:

Clemson 25
Xavier 38
Richmond 39
Dayton 97
George Mason 24
VCU 53 (2)
Cleveland State 68

So, 8 appears to be the high from the years I check; according to Ken Pom. St Peters was 137, Hofstra was 135, and JMU was 106 by those metrics.

The committee was using RPI, not KenPom. As far as the committee was concerned, we had 13 top 100 wins.

Im not talking about the committee, I'm talking about something that actually has merit.

Jesus dude.

You’re wrong, give it a rest, absolutely no one was discussing ken Pom when discussing top 100 wins. We’re talking about what the committee cares about, not what YOU care about.

(03-05-2019 04:47 PM)Mr.BigBlue Wrote:  as of Tuesday March 5th.
Old Dominion 13-3 0.813 23-6 0.793
WKU 11-6 0.647 18-12 0.600
UTSA 10-6 0.625 16-13 0.552
Southern Miss 9-7 0.563 17-11 0.607
UAB 9-8 0.529 17-13 0.567
Marshall 9-7 0.563 16-13 0.552
FIU 9-7 0.563 18-11 0.621
Florida Atlantic 8-8 0.500 17-12 0.586
North Texas 8-9 0.471 20-10 0.667
Louisiana Tech 8-9 0.471 18-12 0.600
Rice 7-9 0.438 12-17 0.414
Middle Tenn. 6-10 0.375 9-20 0.310
Charlotte 4-12 0.250 7-20 0.259
UTEP 3-13 0.188 8-19 0.296

Interesting...there is only 1 other 20 win team and that is UNT @9th in conference. There is a strong possibility that only WKU has a chance to get to 20 wins. That is pretty sad as a conference. I still feel WKU and UAB are our toughest competition for the tournament title.

It’s a big part of why we are 23-6 and have absolutely no chance of earning an at large and have ZERO top 100 wins in our conference.

CUSA was pathetic this year.

It’s actually been pretty bad for a while outside of mtsu’s nice run.

A few fluke 15 seed upsets didn’t change that either. They were 15 seeds for a reason.

Went from 75 to 93 in the NET. POD system is great !

Updated Standings

A win by Southern Miss on Saturday will put WKU as the 4 seed.

(03-07-2019 11:40 AM)Mr.BigBlue Wrote:  Went from 75 to 93 in the NET. POD system is great !

It's the first year of the system. If you were expecting that it would create at-large bids out of whole cloth, then you went in with unrealistic expectations. You still need to have good teams.

Would playing FIU and FAU instead of USM and UTSA twice have been more to your liking? Because that's what this year's schedule would have looked like with no pods.

(03-07-2019 12:36 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(03-07-2019 11:40 AM)Mr.BigBlue Wrote:  Went from 75 to 93 in the NET. POD system is great !

It's the first year of the system. If you were expecting that it would create at-large bids out of whole cloth, then you went in with unrealistic expectations. You still need to have good teams.

Would playing FIU and FAU instead of USM and UTSA twice have been more to your liking? Because that's what this year's schedule would have looked like with no pods.

First year or last year, you lose you drop. And we lost to FAU and overwhelmed FIU by 1.

(03-07-2019 12:49 PM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  

(03-07-2019 12:36 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(03-07-2019 11:40 AM)Mr.BigBlue Wrote:  Went from 75 to 93 in the NET. POD system is great !

It's the first year of the system. If you were expecting that it would create at-large bids out of whole cloth, then you went in with unrealistic expectations. You still need to have good teams.

Would playing FIU and FAU instead of USM and UTSA twice have been more to your liking? Because that's what this year's schedule would have looked like with no pods.

First year or last year, you lose you drop. And we lost to FAU and overwhelmed FIU by 1.

Any year and any method of going about it; you have to win to rise. Our resume is better the year because of the pod system. That doesn't guarantee at large bids or better seeding though.

The problem with NET is you have to blow teams out. I wonder what our NET ranking would have been last year when we blew everyone in the USM and F_U caliber out and we lost close games to the better teams?

(03-07-2019 01:01 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The problem with NET is you have to blow teams out. I wonder what our NET ranking would have been last year when we blew everyone in the USM and F_U caliber out and we lost close games to the better teams?

I would hope the NEt would be higher since we showed superiority over teams by winning big. FWIW, scoring margin is only one component within the NET rankings.

(03-07-2019 01:02 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-07-2019 01:01 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The problem with NET is you have to blow teams out. I wonder what our NET ranking would have been last year when we blew everyone in the USM and F_U caliber out and we lost close games to the better teams?

I would hope the NEt would be higher since we showed superiority over teams by winning big. FWIW, scoring margin is only one component within the NET rankings.

It also shows up in net efficiency, and unlike the margin of victory metric, there's no cap. That's why N.C. State, despite an atrocious OOC schedule and so-so overall record, has such a good NET, because 30-point wins against garbage makes your net efficiency a lot better.

(03-07-2019 01:06 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(03-07-2019 01:02 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-07-2019 01:01 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  The problem with NET is you have to blow teams out. I wonder what our NET ranking would have been last year when we blew everyone in the USM and F_U caliber out and we lost close games to the better teams?

I would hope the NEt would be higher since we showed superiority over teams by winning big. FWIW, scoring margin is only one component within the NET rankings.

It also shows up in net efficiency, and unlike the margin of victory metric, there's no cap. That's why N.C. State, despite an atrocious OOC schedule and so-so overall record, has such a good NET, because 30-point wins against garbage makes your net efficiency a lot better.

FWIW, NC State is 40 in KenPom rankings and 35 in Net. Obviously, some portion of it is due to the net ratings, but they have also played a bunch of top teams as well (and competed fairly well).

Im not saying it's not a factor at all, but NC State has 6 games against garbage teams and 12 games vs. top 50 teams. Their net rankings are not all *that* great; 31st in offense and 60th in defense.

They are 8-9 in the ACC, thats going to be a top 50ish team at the very least.

Well, at least 3 out of 4 "experts" think we will win our tournament:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ournaments

(03-08-2019 04:10 PM)CalODUFan Wrote:  Well, at least 3 out of 4 "experts" think we will win our tournament:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ournaments

Lets hope so ! The way it stands now is if we don't we will likely be a 2 or 3 seed in the NIT.