|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Mar 4, 2019 9:32:44 GMT -5
It's impossible to safely predict given all the variables (upsets in other tournaments; other teams' results; uncertainty as to the Committee's emphasis on the NET). Anyone that thinks otherwise I believe is mistaken.
What seems abundantly clear is that the conference has an almost unprecedented number of teams fighting for the last bid or two or three. Just by way of example, Lunardi in his brand new projection overnight has St. John's and Seton Hall among the last four in and then Xavier, Georgetown, and Creighton (in that order) in the "next four out" category. Jerry Palm has St.J safely in and SH among the last four in and then Georgetown among the first four out (but neither of the BE teams in that category).
I'm not saying either is right or even close to right, but we need to remember that nothing happens in a vacuum. From this point onward, we need to out-perform all of the other bubble teams and games within the conference is the simplest way to do that.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Mar 4, 2019 9:36:13 GMT -5
9-9 with 2 wins in NYC would likely mean another quad 1 win over Marquette/Nova. I think that would do it. Personally, I think the committee will focus less on the ranking and more on that. 4 quad 1 wins seems to be the cut line for a lot of bracket guys/gals. Of course, that is a tall order as well. As I said the other day, beating Seton Hall made a huge difference for us because, yeah, it gives us possibilities and lets us be excited about March. Had we lost, we would have had to win the BET.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Mar 4, 2019 9:37:05 GMT -5
It's impossible to safely predict given all the variables (upsets in other tournaments; other teams' results; uncertainty as to the Committee's emphasis on the NET). Anyone that thinks otherwise I believe is mistaken. What seems abundantly clear is that the conference has an almost unprecedented number of teams fighting for the last bid or two or three. Just by way of example, Lunardi in his brand new projection overnight has St. John's and Seton Hall among the last four in and then Xavier, Georgetown, and Creighton (in that order) in the "next four out" category. Jerry Palm has St.J safely in and SH among the last four in and then Georgetown among the first four out (but neither of the BE teams in that category). I'm not saying either is right or even close to right, but we need to remember that nothing happens in a vacuum. From this point onward, we need to out-perform all of the other bubble teams and games within the conference is the simplest way to do that. Agree. Didnt see your post before mine. The rankings themselves are awful. Quad wins are always what the committee has talked about and probably will this year. |
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Mar 4, 2019 9:52:59 GMT -5
Agree that the Q1 wins will be a huge factor for selection. The NET team sheets that the committee will be supplied with have two different categories for Q1 victories (example shown here)While both a win at Marquette and a neutral win vs either Nova/Marquette in the BET semis would count as a Q1 win, the at Marquette game may be valued more, as it will definitely fall under the top Q1 section [(H 1-15)(N 1-25)(A 1-40)] vs. all other Q1 games (H 16-30)(N 26-50)(A 41-75). As of today, we don't have a win that falls under that top Q1 section. I won't pretend to know if the committee will value these Q1 games differently, but that it is even separated in distinct categories on the sheet means it will probably be considered. It's definitely possible that the neutral semifinal game could make the top Q1 section too (currently Marquette is 26 and Nova is 25), but I would highly doubt Marquette falls below 40, so this Saturday's game definitely will count as the marquee win on the resume. |
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,817
|
Post by njhoya78 on Mar 4, 2019 9:59:03 GMT -5
Yeah I agree....we need Coach Cooley and Provy to show out for us. We definitely need to stay ahead of Creighton..... I wouldn’t count on that. Cooley has underachieved more than any other coach in the conference this season. Chris Mullin says "hold my...diet coke." |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Mar 4, 2019 10:07:59 GMT -5
One thing that I think will be interesting in this process is whether the tournament committee actually makes choices differently this year, or if they just use NET and the quadrant system as one among many tools. For example, the committee has historically tended to punish bad scheduling and favor good scheduling. While scheduling is part of NET, will they look at scheduling separately too? It's really tough to know.
Out of curiousity, I looked at what our RPI would be, and we'd actually be worse off than under NET. Our RPI is 87, versus NET of 72.
|
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Mar 4, 2019 10:32:14 GMT -5
If you think back to past years, I think the one lesson is that it's impossible to make huge jumps (or suffer huge drops) at this point in the season.
The only way I feel completely safe is winning out until the BET final.
Even 9-9 and then getting to the BET final feels like we may be a "last team with a bye" type of team going into that game and then maybe dropping a bit down the curve with a BET final loss and sweating things out on Sunday.
I'm a proponent of better scheduling, but before we all gripe about "if we improved the schedule a bit we'd be in much better shape now," let's all remember how close many of those OOC games were against middling and poor teams. It's just as likely that if we had played marginally better teams early in the season, we'd be sitting on another "bad" loss or two and in even worse relative shape.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2019 10:34:35 GMT -5
Yeah I agree....we need Coach Cooley and Provy to show out for us. We definitely need to stay ahead of Creighton..... I wouldn’t count on that. Cooley has underachieved more than any other coach in the conference this season. I don't think he has, but Chris Mullin says thx.... |
|
bostonfan
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,532 
|
Post by bostonfan on Mar 4, 2019 10:36:12 GMT -5
I wouldn’t count on that. Cooley has underachieved more than any other coach in the conference this season. Chris Mullin says "hold my...diet coke." I would not be surprised to see Providence beat Creighton. The Friars have definitely under achieved this year, but they are a talented team and if they find a way to put together a full 40 minute effort they are capable. I also think St John's probably finds a way to beat Xavier in the last game of the season. St Johns is going to come out desperate in that game because they know if they lose that game, and their first round BET game, they may end up missing the tournament. They have been a brutal team to predict how they will play this year, but have to believe they will be fired up and ready top play in that last game. Hoyas just need to find way to take care of business against DePaul and then see if they can steal one from Marquette |
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Mar 4, 2019 10:43:21 GMT -5
I wouldn’t count on that. Cooley has underachieved more than any other coach in the conference this season. Chris Mullin says "hold my...diet coke." x1000 Mullin and SJU are BY FAR the biggest disappointments in the BE this season. Cooley has not had his best season, but he has built up so much goodwill over the last 5 seasons, I am fine calling it a mulligan. And before we bury PC, let's realize they can still tie us in the standings if they win the next 2. |
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Mar 4, 2019 10:44:06 GMT -5
The most interesting thing to me is what the committee will do with the usual 1 bid conferences that have 2 or 3 worthy teams this year. For instance assuming Belmont beats Murray State will Murray State and Ja get in. If Wofford beats the UNCG-Furman winner will that loser get in? Their NETs show they are more worthy than say we are right now but mid majors just keep getting killed every week that results are calculated so will it be enough to hand on. Will the committee treat them differently than they have in the past? I don't want to it to come at our expense but I would much rather watch a tourney with those tiny schools getting the chance to pull an upset over a mediocre major conference team. Who here would really rather watch TCU vs Alabama than one of those other teams i mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Mar 4, 2019 10:56:57 GMT -5
The most interesting thing to me is what the committee will do with the usual 1 bid conferences that have 2 or 3 worthy teams this year. For instance assuming Belmont beats Murray State will Murray State and Ja get in. If Wofford beats the UNCG-Furman winner will that loser get in? Their NETs show they are more worthy than say we are right now but mid majors just keep getting killed every week that results are calculated so will it be enough to hand on. Will the committee treat them differently than they have in the past? I don't want to it to come at our expense but I would much rather watch a tourney with those tiny schools getting the chance to pull an upset over a mediocre major conference team. Who here would really rather watch TCU vs Alabama than one of those other teams i mentioned. Great point. Several posters here have alluded to some "Mac Effect" and that it will enhance our chances with the committee simply because they want to see him in the tourney. The average college basketball fan is much more excited to see what Ja can do on the big stage; kid is a top 5 pick in June. I don't think the committee will be selecting teams just to try to get a big name into the tourney, but if they were, Murray St. would be the team to include over us. I've seen Lipscomb on a bunch of lists too; I would not rule them out of the at-large discussion either in addition to the teams you've mentioned. Speaking of TCU, a loss tonight puts them at 6-11 in the B12, and they have already slid into a bunch of last four ins on several brackets. That is a big game for us tonight. |
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Mar 4, 2019 10:56:59 GMT -5
The most interesting thing to me is what the committee will do with the usual 1 bid conferences that have 2 or 3 worthy teams this year. For instance assuming Belmont beats Murray State will Murray State and Ja get in. If Wofford beats the UNCG-Furman winner will that loser get in? Their NETs show they are more worthy than say we are right now but mid majors just keep getting killed every week that results are calculated so will it be enough to hand on. Will the committee treat them differently than they have in the past? I don't want to it to come at our expense but I would much rather watch a tourney with those tiny schools getting the chance to pull an upset over a mediocre major conference team. Who here would really rather watch TCU vs Alabama than one of those other teams i mentioned. Yep. Not going to lie, of course, Id be ecstatic if we got in, but I can also see us or a BE team being a huge pariah if we get in over some of those teams. |
|
SaxaCD
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,404
|
Post by SaxaCD on Mar 4, 2019 11:07:30 GMT -5
The most interesting thing to me is what the committee will do with the usual 1 bid conferences that have 2 or 3 worthy teams this year. For instance assuming Belmont beats Murray State will Murray State and Ja get in. If Wofford beats the UNCG-Furman winner will that loser get in? Their NETs show they are more worthy than say we are right now but mid majors just keep getting killed every week that results are calculated so will it be enough to hand on. Will the committee treat them differently than they have in the past? I don't want to it to come at our expense but I would much rather watch a tourney with those tiny schools getting the chance to pull an upset over a mediocre major conference team. Who here would really rather watch TCU vs Alabama than one of those other teams i mentioned. Yep. Not going to lie, of course, Id be ecstatic if we got in, but I can also see us or a BE team being a huge pariah if we get in over some of those teams. Eh, I couldn't care less about watching Furman play anybody. There are lots of small conferences out there and they all get their champs in the tourney. Plenty of Cinderellas already. |
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Mar 4, 2019 11:08:30 GMT -5
Yep. Not going to lie, of course, Id be ecstatic if we got in, but I can also see us or a BE team being a huge pariah if we get in over some of those teams. Eh, I couldn't care less about watching Furman play anybody. There are lots of small conferences out there and they all get their champs in the tourney. Plenty of Cinderellas already. I think those teams are better than meh B6 teams. And, like others, I dont think you should even sniff the tournament if you arent even .500 in conference. Those teams are on the bubble because they get 10 chances to beat a legit team and they maybe win 2 of them and lose to the meh teams, too. I think even Vanderbilt is the top 150 and they are 0-16 in the SEC. Penn St is like 50. |
|
SaxaCD
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,404
|
Post by SaxaCD on Mar 4, 2019 11:13:25 GMT -5
Eh, I couldn't care less about watching Furman play anybody. There are lots of small conferences out there and they all get their champs in the tourney. Plenty of Cinderellas already. I think those teams are better than meh B6 teams. Maybe, maybe not. Certainly some years a few smaller teams get shafted. But other years I've seen touted darlings get in and get stomped, so, depends. I'd rather have the mix weighted to B6, and give those smaller conference champs their chance (along with other that proved themselves in the non conference slate). I understand how you feel. Just see it a different way. |
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Mar 4, 2019 11:16:10 GMT -5
I think those teams are better than meh B6 teams. Maybe, maybe not. Certainly some years a few smaller teams get shafted. But other years I've seen touted darlings get in and get stomped, so, depends. I'd rather have the mix weighted to B6, and give those smaller conference champs their chance (along with other that proved themselves in the non conference slate). I understand how you feel. Just see it a different way. To me, it's not as much about who gets in and who doesnt. It's more that the system is ridiculously unfair. I dont know what the answer is aside from mandating scheduling. There is no way Penn St is the 50th best team in America. |
|
bostonfan
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,532
|
Post by bostonfan on Mar 4, 2019 11:22:09 GMT -5
The most interesting thing to me is what the committee will do with the usual 1 bid conferences that have 2 or 3 worthy teams this year. For instance assuming Belmont beats Murray State will Murray State and Ja get in. If Wofford beats the UNCG-Furman winner will that loser get in? Their NETs show they are more worthy than say we are right now but mid majors just keep getting killed every week that results are calculated so will it be enough to hand on. Will the committee treat them differently than they have in the past? I don't want to it to come at our expense but I would much rather watch a tourney with those tiny schools getting the chance to pull an upset over a mediocre major conference team. Who here would really rather watch TCU vs Alabama than one of those other teams i mentioned. Great point. Several posters here have alluded to some "Mac Effect" and that it will enhance our chances with the committee simply because they want to see him in the tourney. The average college basketball fan is much more excited to see what Ja can do on the big stage; kid is a top 5 pick in June. I don't think the committee will be selecting teams just to try to get a big name into the tourney, but if they were, Murray St. would be the team to include over us. I've seen Lipscomb on a bunch of lists too; I would not rule them out of the at-large discussion either in addition to the teams you've mentioned. Speaking of TCU, a loss tonight puts them at 6-11 in the B12, and they have already slid into a bunch of last four ins on several brackets. That is a big game for us tonight. I realize the selection process changes pretty much every year with what the most important criteria is for the committee, but how are some of these teams that will absolutely have losing records in their conference still getting so much consideration? I am baffled as to why TCU and Indiana are still considered "on the bubble". I get they had some good Quad 1 wins but they are both going to be in the bottom half of their conferences. It will be a really interesting selection process this year and there may be some really annoyed teams that get bumped for teams that have mediocre records. |
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Mar 4, 2019 11:22:56 GMT -5
Great point. Several posters here have alluded to some "Mac Effect" and that it will enhance our chances with the committee simply because they want to see him in the tourney. The average college basketball fan is much more excited to see what Ja can do on the big stage; kid is a top 5 pick in June. I don't think the committee will be selecting teams just to try to get a big name into the tourney, but if they were, Murray St. would be the team to include over us. I've seen Lipscomb on a bunch of lists too; I would not rule them out of the at-large discussion either in addition to the teams you've mentioned. Speaking of TCU, a loss tonight puts them at 6-11 in the B12, and they have already slid into a bunch of last four ins on several brackets. That is a big game for us tonight. I realize the selection process changes pretty much every year with what the most important criteria is for the committee, but how are some of these teams that will absolutely have losing records in their conference still getting so much consideration? I am baffled as to why TCU and Indiana are still considered "on the bubble". I get they had some good Quad 1 wins but they are both going to be in the bottom half of their conferences. It will be a really interesting selection process this year and there may be some really annoyed teams that get bumped for teams that have mediocre records. Exactly. It's getting more and more absurd. I hope this is the year it changes and Belmont, Lipscomb and UNCG get in over those teams. |
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Mar 4, 2019 11:32:32 GMT -5
Great point. Several posters here have alluded to some "Mac Effect" and that it will enhance our chances with the committee simply because they want to see him in the tourney. The average college basketball fan is much more excited to see what Ja can do on the big stage; kid is a top 5 pick in June. I don't think the committee will be selecting teams just to try to get a big name into the tourney, but if they were, Murray St. would be the team to include over us. I've seen Lipscomb on a bunch of lists too; I would not rule them out of the at-large discussion either in addition to the teams you've mentioned. Speaking of TCU, a loss tonight puts them at 6-11 in the B12, and they have already slid into a bunch of last four ins on several brackets. That is a big game for us tonight. I realize the selection process changes pretty much every year with what the most important criteria is for the committee, but how are some of these teams that will absolutely have losing records in their conference still getting so much consideration? I am baffled as to why TCU and Indiana are still considered "on the bubble". I get they had some good Quad 1 wins but they are both going to be in the bottom half of their conferences. It will be a really interesting selection process this year and there may be some really annoyed teams that get bumped for teams that have mediocre records. I don't think Indiana gets in without sweeping their final 2 (Illinois and Rutgers) and winning at least 1 in the B10 tourney. They do that (they should) and at least they've finished 9th in a 14 team conference. Would not be dissimilar to the BE receiving 11 bids out of 16 teams in 2011 as far as ratios are concerned. Oddly enough I think TCU's resume is even dicier than Indiana's. Only 2-7 vs the Q1 (worse than us) and in a highly plausible scenario they lose vs. K St. and at Texas, that puts them at 6-12 in conference. Even with no bad losses, I just can't see that being good enough to make it. At least Texas has the 5 Q1 wins. If the B12 gets 8 out of 10 teams in with that kind of mediocrity, the committee will get far more questions about that on Selection Sunday vs. taking a high performing mid major. |
|
