(03-17-2022 08:45 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:09 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 11:43 PM)stever20 Wrote:  St John's got in with a NET in 2019 of 73 with 5 Q1 wins.

The NET doesn't matter in selections. The last 2-3 years is absolute proof of it. Using it to argue stuff is rather stupid.

Well, IIRC, the "quad wins" that seem to matter a lot are IIRC defined by NET, so it does seem to matter.

St Johns was bad, no doubt, a contender for worst-ever, before Rutgers came along. But Rutgers has busted the standards.

St Johns also had an RPI of 72. That's 73 NET /72 RPI compared to 77/92. That's a big difference.

And about this year, look beyond NET - look at RPI, Sagarin, KenPom and Massey composite. Compared to Wyoming, Notre Dame and Michigan, Rutgers was behind ALL of them on ALL metrics, save for ahead of Wyoming on KenPom. That's pretty emphatic.

Rutgers is the worst. Their inclusion was IMO completely ridonculous. Valuing six Q1 wins (defined as Q1 by the same NET metric that said they absolutely do not belong), led by the two best wins being by two points at home, one on a miracle shot at the buzzer.

Absolutely absurd.

And ahead of Texas AM! And IIRC, ahead of Texas AM by like SIX spots! IIRC, Rutgers wasn't even the last team in. The committee had them ahead of Notre Dame. Also, TAMU wasn't first out, they were like 3rd out.

So TAMU, who was better than Rutgers across the board, was left out, and by like five spots, compared to Ridonculous Rutgers.

VENT MODE OFF. LOL.

Like it or not teams like Rutgers are going to continue to get in. Period the end.

If anything, what we saw in Dayton is just going to make it worse. Wyoming absolutely being a no show won't help the mid majors at all whatsoever.

Oh, I haven't been talking about what will happen. Just what should/should have happened.

I don't doubt the committee's capacity to put another Rutgers team in next year, or the year after, etc.

They keep putting a hundred B1G teams in year after year, even though the B1G hasn't won a national title since we were recording "Friends" on our VCRs, cell phones had retractable antennae, and people were pulling cash out of ATMs in fear of the Y2K bug.

St John's got in with a very similar situation 3 years ago. You get 5-6 Q1 wins and you've got 18 wins overall, you're making the tourney no matter who you are.

Crap in, crap out. Why so many Q1 wins? It happens when the B1G gets over ranked annually by similar or the same pathetic computer programs, mostly with name bias. The Big 10 made its image in the 70's and 80's in hoops and the echo lives on in the programming of the 90's. Nobody who loses 45% of their games is worthy!

(03-17-2022 10:49 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:45 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:09 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Well, IIRC, the "quad wins" that seem to matter a lot are IIRC defined by NET, so it does seem to matter.

St Johns was bad, no doubt, a contender for worst-ever, before Rutgers came along. But Rutgers has busted the standards.

St Johns also had an RPI of 72. That's 73 NET /72 RPI compared to 77/92. That's a big difference.

And about this year, look beyond NET - look at RPI, Sagarin, KenPom and Massey composite. Compared to Wyoming, Notre Dame and Michigan, Rutgers was behind ALL of them on ALL metrics, save for ahead of Wyoming on KenPom. That's pretty emphatic.

Rutgers is the worst. Their inclusion was IMO completely ridonculous. Valuing six Q1 wins (defined as Q1 by the same NET metric that said they absolutely do not belong), led by the two best wins being by two points at home, one on a miracle shot at the buzzer.

Absolutely absurd.

And ahead of Texas AM! And IIRC, ahead of Texas AM by like SIX spots! IIRC, Rutgers wasn't even the last team in. The committee had them ahead of Notre Dame. Also, TAMU wasn't first out, they were like 3rd out.

So TAMU, who was better than Rutgers across the board, was left out, and by like five spots, compared to Ridonculous Rutgers.

VENT MODE OFF. LOL.

Like it or not teams like Rutgers are going to continue to get in. Period the end.

If anything, what we saw in Dayton is just going to make it worse. Wyoming absolutely being a no show won't help the mid majors at all whatsoever.

Oh, I haven't been talking about what will happen. Just what should/should have happened.

I don't doubt the committee's capacity to put another Rutgers team in next year, or the year after, etc.

They keep putting a hundred B1G teams in year after year, even though the B1G hasn't won a national title since we were recording "Friends" on our VCRs, cell phones had retractable antennae, and people were pulling cash out of ATMs in fear of the Y2K bug.

St John's got in with a very similar situation 3 years ago. You get 5-6 Q1 wins and you've got 18 wins overall, you're making the tourney no matter who you are.

Crap in, crap out. Why so many Q1 wins? It happens when the B1G gets over ranked annually by similar or the same pathetic computer programs, mostly with name bias. The Big 10 made its image in the 70's and 80's in hoops and the echo lives on in the programming of the 90's. Nobody who loses 45% of their games is worthy!

Big Ten was 2nd best conference OOC by winning percentage. The NET and RPI start off at 0 every year. There is no last year factor in it at all.

And what you're saying doesn't explain St John's a few years ago at all.

(03-17-2022 10:54 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 10:49 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:45 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:09 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Like it or not teams like Rutgers are going to continue to get in. Period the end.

If anything, what we saw in Dayton is just going to make it worse. Wyoming absolutely being a no show won't help the mid majors at all whatsoever.

Oh, I haven't been talking about what will happen. Just what should/should have happened.

I don't doubt the committee's capacity to put another Rutgers team in next year, or the year after, etc.

They keep putting a hundred B1G teams in year after year, even though the B1G hasn't won a national title since we were recording "Friends" on our VCRs, cell phones had retractable antennae, and people were pulling cash out of ATMs in fear of the Y2K bug.

St John's got in with a very similar situation 3 years ago. You get 5-6 Q1 wins and you've got 18 wins overall, you're making the tourney no matter who you are.

Crap in, crap out. Why so many Q1 wins? It happens when the B1G gets over ranked annually by similar or the same pathetic computer programs, mostly with name bias. The Big 10 made its image in the 70's and 80's in hoops and the echo lives on in the programming of the 90's. Nobody who loses 45% of their games is worthy!

Big Ten was 2nd best conference OOC by winning percentage. The NET and RPI start off at 0 every year. There is no last year factor in it at all.

And what you're saying doesn't explain St John's a few years ago at all.

2nd best out of conference winning percentage against whom? The B12 or SEC, or the MAC, PAC and ACC? And Stever staring at stats and past examples of who got in and probably shouldn't have makes you lose sight of why:

1. 64, let alone 69 teams isn't a championship, it's a mob. Losing 45% of your games and making a championship event is absurd in any sport prima facia when winning is what sports are supposed to be about.

2. Bids for crap teams which win a conference tourney which renders a regular season champion moot is also imbecility at work and why ultimately college basketball has issues.

3. I'm only thankful that the Sweet 16 usually contains 10-12 schools who should be there or the whole damn thing would be worthless.

4. Any sports fan who justifies a team with 45% losses has lost perspective and any school finishing in the bottom half (and I personally think out of the 1/4 th) of a conference is by performance no champion. Which is yet another reason college hoops is at times a farce.

(03-17-2022 08:45 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:09 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 08:05 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 11:43 PM)stever20 Wrote:  St John's got in with a NET in 2019 of 73 with 5 Q1 wins.

The NET doesn't matter in selections. The last 2-3 years is absolute proof of it. Using it to argue stuff is rather stupid.

Well, IIRC, the "quad wins" that seem to matter a lot are IIRC defined by NET, so it does seem to matter.

St Johns was bad, no doubt, a contender for worst-ever, before Rutgers came along. But Rutgers has busted the standards.

St Johns also had an RPI of 72. That's 73 NET /72 RPI compared to 77/92. That's a big difference.

And about this year, look beyond NET - look at RPI, Sagarin, KenPom and Massey composite. Compared to Wyoming, Notre Dame and Michigan, Rutgers was behind ALL of them on ALL metrics, save for ahead of Wyoming on KenPom. That's pretty emphatic.

Rutgers is the worst. Their inclusion was IMO completely ridonculous. Valuing six Q1 wins (defined as Q1 by the same NET metric that said they absolutely do not belong), led by the two best wins being by two points at home, one on a miracle shot at the buzzer.

Absolutely absurd.

And ahead of Texas AM! And IIRC, ahead of Texas AM by like SIX spots! IIRC, Rutgers wasn't even the last team in. The committee had them ahead of Notre Dame. Also, TAMU wasn't first out, they were like 3rd out.

So TAMU, who was better than Rutgers across the board, was left out, and by like five spots, compared to Ridonculous Rutgers.

VENT MODE OFF. LOL.

Like it or not teams like Rutgers are going to continue to get in. Period the end.

If anything, what we saw in Dayton is just going to make it worse. Wyoming absolutely being a no show won't help the mid majors at all whatsoever.

Oh, I haven't been talking about what will happen. Just what should/should have happened.

I don't doubt the committee's capacity to put another Rutgers team in next year, or the year after, etc.

They keep putting a hundred B1G teams in year after year, even though the B1G hasn't won a national title since we were recording "Friends" on our VCRs, cell phones had retractable antennae, and people were pulling cash out of ATMs in fear of the Y2K bug.

St John's got in with a very similar situation 3 years ago. You get 5-6 Q1 wins and you've got 18 wins overall, you're making the tourney no matter who you are.

Yes, St Johns was bad. But Rutgers was worse. As I indicated above, it's 77/92 NET/RPI for Rutgers compared to 72/73 for St Johns.

St Johns set a new mold for bad, Rutgers broke the mold.

(03-16-2022 11:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ...the much larger offense. Michigan (17-14) doesn't belong in the field of 64 or at Dayton. Teams 3 games over .500 for the season don't belong at all!

Can you imagine the outcry if an SEC football team was selected for the playoffs after going 8-4 (and that's 4 games over .500)!

BTW, Michigan currently trails Colorado State by 10 in the first half.

(03-17-2022 11:58 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 11:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ...the much larger offense. Michigan (17-14) doesn't belong in the field of 64 or at Dayton. Teams 3 games over .500 for the season don't belong at all!

Can you imagine the outcry if an SEC football team was selected for the playoffs after going 8-4 (and that's 4 games over .500)!

BTW, Michigan currently trails Colorado State by 10 in the first half.

Yes, it's ridiculous that Michigan is in this tournament and I hope Colorado State blows them out in the 2nd half.

(03-17-2022 12:12 PM)cubucks Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 11:58 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 11:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ...the much larger offense. Michigan (17-14) doesn't belong in the field of 64 or at Dayton. Teams 3 games over .500 for the season don't belong at all!

Can you imagine the outcry if an SEC football team was selected for the playoffs after going 8-4 (and that's 4 games over .500)!

BTW, Michigan currently trails Colorado State by 10 in the first half.

Yes, it's ridiculous that Michigan is in this tournament and I hope Colorado State blows them out in the 2nd half.

FWIW, even though I generally "hate" Michigan athletics, I don't mind Michigan being in the tournament. Looking at NET and RPI, they have the classic profile of a legit bubble team. They aren't outside the normal parameters. And with a legit bubble team, it's always a coin flip thing, sometimes you get in, sometimes you don't. Michigan got in.

I don't get too bent out of shape over record, because record is a function of who you play. Even as I've been raking Rutgers over the coals, I haven't focused on their 18-13 record. The metrics like RPI, NET, KenPom, etc. factor all of that in. So I look at those.

Just MO.

It could be a really rough Tournament for the MWC.

Come 10 PM ET tonight, Fresno St in TBC could be their only postseason team

Well there you go - Michigan advances.

(03-17-2022 01:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Well there you go - Michigan advances.

Yeah that tends to happen when CSU didn't shoot one free throw until the 17 minute mark in the second half in against a very physical team and one of your starters fouls out on a play where a Michigan guy shoves him to the court. CSU only shot 3 free throws at the 2 minute remaining mark. In the last 2 minutes the fouls are finally being called and the game is over! So there you go, an undeserved bid, an essential home court, home crowd advantage, and the officials. Damn sure hard to lose that way!

(03-17-2022 01:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 01:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Well there you go - Michigan advances.

Yeah that tends to happen when CSU didn't shoot one free throw until the 17 minute mark in the second half in against a very physical team and one of your starters fouls out on a play where a Michigan guy shoves him to the court. CSU only shot 3 free throws at the 2 minute remaining mark. In the last 2 minutes the fouls are finally being called and the game is over! So there you go, an undeserved bid, an essential home court, home crowd advantage, and the officials. Damn sure hard to lose that way!

CSU had 35 3 point attempts, that hurt their chances of gaining fouls. I wish they would have drove to the basket a little more to pick up some free throws. CSU is a solid team, but not a team that plays in the paint, unfortunately that allowed those di*ks up north to win the game.

(03-17-2022 01:31 PM)cubucks Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 01:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-17-2022 01:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Well there you go - Michigan advances.

Yeah that tends to happen when CSU didn't shoot one free throw until the 17 minute mark in the second half in against a very physical team and one of your starters fouls out on a play where a Michigan guy shoves him to the court. CSU only shot 3 free throws at the 2 minute remaining mark. In the last 2 minutes the fouls are finally being called and the game is over! So there you go, an undeserved bid, an essential home court, home crowd advantage, and the officials. Damn sure hard to lose that way!

CSU had 35 3 point attempts, that hurt their chances of gaining fouls. I wish they would have drove to the basket a little more to pick up some free throws. CSU is a solid team, but not a team that plays in the paint, unfortunately that allowed those di*ks up north to win the game.

See, I love your attitude. Its a mature college fan attitude. No "B1G solidarity" from you, at least not where your big rival is concerned. You want them to go down!

In immature, weak conferences, there is this wrongheaded attitude that 'conference solidarity' matters, that you pull for your conference rivals in the tourney because it helps the conference.

Nuts to that - I always want my team's rivals to LOSE.

Iowa goes down!

BTW, Iowa was one of those big "Quad 1 Wins" that got Rutgers in to the tournament. Their biggest, right there with Purdue.

LOL

(03-17-2022 04:25 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Iowa goes down!

BTW, Iowa was one of those big "Quad 1 Wins" that got Rutgers in to the tournament. Their biggest, right there with Purdue.

LOL

Spider-men > Hawkeyes

Eh... surprising that Iowa played so horribly, but UM recovering nicely mitigates the B1G perception somewhat. Key games will be MSU and OSU respectively. Illinois also can't lose, otherwise, there would be a pretty big perception problem.