|
Post by RockawayHoya on Feb 9, 2020 11:45:47 GMT -5
Today's bubble, BE and OOC action:
9 seed: Wichita St. loss at Houston First team out: Cincinnati loss at UConn Sixth team out: Tulsa loss at UCF
BE: Marquette win vs. Butler
OOC: UNCG win vs. Samford
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Feb 9, 2020 17:00:06 GMT -5
Got a lot of help from the AAC today.
|
|
jester
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,004
|
Post by jester on Feb 10, 2020 12:48:48 GMT -5
A bunch of writers still have Cincy in their Top 25.
Comparison:
Cincy: Q1: 2-5 Q2: 5-0 Q3/Q4 losses: 3 (Colgate, Bowling Green, Tulane) SOS: 17
Georgetown: Q1: 3-9 Q2: 4-1 Q3/Q4 losses:0 SOS: 11
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,297
|
Post by daveg023 on Feb 10, 2020 13:01:07 GMT -5
A bunch of writers still have Cincy in their Top 25. Comparison: Cincy: Q1: 2-5 Q2: 5-0 Q3/Q4 losses: 3 (Colgate, Bowling Green, Tulane) SOS: 17 Georgetown: Q1: 3-9 Q2: 4-1 Q3/Q4 losses:0 SOS: 11 I think you have to factor in the total losses and extra opportunities we have gotten. But yes Cincinnati’s resume is far from impressive.
|
|
|
Post by Ranch Dressing on Feb 10, 2020 13:03:09 GMT -5
As much as I was proud of our boys on Saturday with a fantastic, gutsy, under-manned victory, I still think we have a lot to prove. 3 of our 4 conference wins are against SJU and DePaul. Going 2-0 against @depaul and Providence is basically a must. Then going 3-2 against butler/@marquette/@creighton/Xavier/Nova is required for a safe NCAA invite with no hand-wringing. 2-3 against those 5 will involve some hand-wringing, depending on how things shake out. But with all of the injuries we are facing now, it's awfully hard to see us go 2-0 and 3-2 within those 2 cohorts. Certainly, if we can't go 2-1 in our next 3 ( butler, Providence, @depaul), the chances become incredibly slim.
|
|
jester
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,004
|
Post by jester on Feb 10, 2020 14:31:44 GMT -5
Likely for Ewing thread, but how much is the relevancy for this year's tournament bubble important to poster's leash on Ewing? Especially given what he inherited, lost, then injuries? its definitely been hard to judge, but has he shown more than expected given those absences, injury (Mac missing three games) and departures(four key members). But I could see the bubble standing effecting opinions here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 10, 2020 15:18:33 GMT -5
Likely for Ewing thread, but how much is the relevancy for this year's tournament bubble important to poster's leash on Ewing? Especially given what he inherited, lost, then injuries? its definitely been hard to judge, but has he shown more than expected given those absences, injury (Mac missing three games) and departures(four key members). But I could see the bubble standing effecting opinions here. Zero. If you want to knock Pat for the defections, that's fine. I think it's a very gray area that we'll likely never know the whole of, but ultimately the buck stops with him. He has to field a team that can be competitive, which includes both recruiting the right kids and keeping them. But now he's got just 7 playables. If we knew before the year he'd be playing with this rotation, we would've been a unanimous selection for 10th place in conference. Everything from here out is gravy. There's a not-so-far-fetched shot we don't win another game all year, maybe closer to "as likely as a tournament shot" than we'd want to admit. Whatever happens, hopefully Pat can use it as a learning experience for himself and the guys who return. As a fan, it's tough to see it that way. I'll still be watching every game and hoping we can make a run at the tourney, but you can't keep moving the goalposts with every win and loss. Realistically, this lineup shouldn't be a tourney team.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Feb 10, 2020 15:49:47 GMT -5
A bunch of writers still have Cincy in their Top 25. Comparison: Cincy: Q1: 2-5 Q2: 5-0 Q3/Q4 losses: 3 (Colgate, Bowling Green, Tulane) SOS: 17 Georgetown: Q1: 3-9 Q2: 4-1 Q3/Q4 losses:0 SOS: 11 I think you have to factor in the total losses and extra opportunities we have gotten. But yes Cincinnati’s resume is far from impressive. Fair comparison above, but I think you also have to take into account several other metrics that aren't as favorable to GU: Cincy: Overall: 15-8 NET: 46 SOS: 32 NCSOS: 22 Wins over projected NCAA teams: Vermont, Houston, Wichita St. Georgetown: Overall: 14-10 (don't think conference record is a big deal to the committee, the conference strength is already reflected in the Q1/Q2, NET and SOS) NET: 53 SOS: 7 NCSOS: 43 Wins over projected NCAA teams: Creighton It's pretty close across the board, which is why one team is last four in and the other is first five out. I would think though that a win at Butler would put our resume slightly above theirs for the time being.
|
|
jester
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,004
|
Post by jester on Feb 10, 2020 15:50:31 GMT -5
My sentiment too...very unfortunate its become a 'wash' year for team progress. But I think when you look at 4 lost personnel and Mac/Omer/Pickett below pre-season expectations, and have a bubble thread still in Feb, reflects some positives.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Feb 10, 2020 15:55:06 GMT -5
In the latest update to the Matrix, GU remains 5th out but now in 12/92 brackets (13%), up from 10/89 (11%) in Saturday's Matrix.
Tonight's bubble/OOC action:
Bubble: 9th team out: Texas loss vs. Baylor (as much as we could use the NET/SOS bump, we do not want Texas jumping us in the bubble pecking order)
OOC: Duke win vs. Florida St.
|
|
jester
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,004
|
Post by jester on Feb 10, 2020 15:58:57 GMT -5
I think you have to factor in the total losses and extra opportunities we have gotten. But yes Cincinnati’s resume is far from impressive. Fair comparison above, but I think you also have to take into account several other metrics that aren't as favorable to GU: Cincy: Overall: 15-8 NET: 46 SOS: 32 NCSOS: 22 Wins over projected NCAA teams: Vermont, Houston, Wichita St. Georgetown: Overall: 14-10 (don't think conference record is a big deal to the committee, the conference strength is already reflected in the Q1/Q2, NET and SOS) NET: 53 SOS: 7 NCSOS: 43 Wins over projected NCAA teams: Creighton It's pretty close across the board, which is why one team is last four in and the other is first five out. I would think though that a win at Butler would put our resume slightly above theirs for the time being. "It's pretty close across the board". -its only close bc they have an easier schedule, in my opinion. what about those 3 crappy losses? I agree good wins count more than bad losses, but Vermont is 0-3 against Q1 and lower NET than us. Houston has 1 Q1 win. Wichita State best two wins are UConn and Oklahoma State. Agree however 2 good wins against tourny teams might be all we need. It could happen in BE tournament too. I think bubble will remain very wide if we beat NET teams below us.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Feb 10, 2020 16:08:53 GMT -5
Fair comparison above, but I think you also have to take into account several other metrics that aren't as favorable to GU: Cincy: Overall: 15-8 NET: 46 SOS: 32 NCSOS: 22 Wins over projected NCAA teams: Vermont, Houston, Wichita St. Georgetown: Overall: 14-10 (don't think conference record is a big deal to the committee, the conference strength is already reflected in the Q1/Q2, NET and SOS) NET: 53 SOS: 7 NCSOS: 43 Wins over projected NCAA teams: Creighton It's pretty close across the board, which is why one team is last four in and the other is first five out. I would think though that a win at Butler would put our resume slightly above theirs for the time being. "It's pretty close across the board". -its only close bc they have an easier schedule, in my opinion. what about those 3 crappy losses? I agree good wins count more than bad losses, but Vermont is 0-3 against Q1 and lower NET than us. Houston has 1 Q1 win. Wichita State best two wins are UConn and Oklahoma State. Agree however 2 good wins against tourny teams might be all we need. It could happen in BE tournament too. I think bubble will remain very wide if we beat NET teams below us. Easier schedule by a small bit, but with a SOS/NCSOS of 32/22, it's not like they haven't played anybody or challenged themselves. This isn't 2019 NC State we're talking about. The 3 crappy losses... Bowling Green and Colgate are actually also projected tourney teams. So yes, teams they should have beat, but not a bunch of nobodies. They don't compare to say, Providence's OOC losses. Wichita St. is edging towards the cut line after getting bombed by Houston yesterday and dropping 2 games last week, so yes I agree they're in jeopardy. Houston (7 seed) looks to be pretty safe at the moment though with a NET of 29 and 8-5 vs Q1+Q2. We are in agreement that a win over Butler on the road easily trumps all of the above. I would imagine our NET would have a chance to jump Cinci's with a win.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Feb 10, 2020 16:51:51 GMT -5
My sentiment too...very unfortunate its become a 'wash' year for team progress. But I think when you look at 4 lost personnel and Mac/Omer/Pickett below pre-season expectations, and have a bubble thread still in Feb, reflects some positives. The biggest reason we are still in the discussion and biggest positive as far as Ewing is that he went from an F to an A in OOC scheduling. Remember how even at the end of JT3's era it seemed like we were in the discussion and close to making it with very subpar BE results? I have said it before but I will say it again. If Ewing just would've fixed his scheduling philosophy 1 year earlier we wouldn't be having the hot seat conversation because we would've made the tournament last year.
|
|
madgesiq92
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,329
|
Post by madgesiq92 on Feb 10, 2020 17:13:36 GMT -5
Agree, the fact that we are in first/second four out, last four in type discussions when 3 of our 4 conference wins are DePaul and St. Johns (3-19 in BE) has everything to do with the strong pre-conference schedule that Ewing put together. This may not be our year to make the tournament bc of injuries and defections, but if he keeps scheduling like that in the future, we can make the tourney with an 8-10 BE record (like last year).
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,198
|
Post by hoya9797 on Feb 10, 2020 17:22:13 GMT -5
My sentiment too...very unfortunate its become a 'wash' year for team progress. But I think when you look at 4 lost personnel and Mac/Omer/Pickett below pre-season expectations, and have a bubble thread still in Feb, reflects some positives. It's more a reflection of how terrible college basketball is down around the bubble. But, the players do deserve a ton of credit for not giving up and somehow hanging around the bubble.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Feb 10, 2020 17:23:31 GMT -5
My sentiment too...very unfortunate its become a 'wash' year for team progress. But I think when you look at 4 lost personnel and Mac/Omer/Pickett below pre-season expectations, and have a bubble thread still in Feb, reflects some positives. The biggest reason we are still in the discussion and biggest positive as far as Ewing is that he went from an F to an A in OOC scheduling. Remember how even at the end of JT3's era it seemed like we were in the discussion and close to making it with very subpar BE results? I have said it before but I will say it again. If Ewing just would've fixed his scheduling philosophy 1 year earlier we wouldn't be having the hot seat conversation because we would've made the tournament last year. Agree with you that he probably could've afforded to schedule a few less sub-300 NET teams (3 last year vs. 2 this year), but the 2019 team also makes the tourney if they take care of business against LMU and SMU. Dropping both of those games and getting taken to the woodshed late in the season against Depaul was what cost us a NCAA berth. Other biggest factor? BE was 4th in conference NET last year and 1st this year. Strength of the conference has boosted everyone's computer numbers; hard to have bad losses when you barely have any opportunities to lose to bad teams. SJU at 76th in NET is the only team at the moment that even provides the entire league with the possibility of playing a Q3 game in conference.
|
|
|
Post by Ranch Dressing on Feb 10, 2020 17:30:45 GMT -5
The biggest reason we are still in the discussion and biggest positive as far as Ewing is that he went from an F to an A in OOC scheduling. Remember how even at the end of JT3's era it seemed like we were in the discussion and close to making it with very subpar BE results? I have said it before but I will say it again. If Ewing just would've fixed his scheduling philosophy 1 year earlier we wouldn't be having the hot seat conversation because we would've made the tournament last year. Agree with you that he probably could've afforded to schedule a few less sub-300 NET teams (3 last year vs. 2 this year), but the 2019 team also makes the tourney if they take care of business against LMU and SMU. Dropping both of those games and getting taken to the woodshed late in the season against Depaul was what cost us a NCAA berth. Other biggest factor? BE was 4th in conference NET last year and 1st this year. Strength of the conference has boosted everyone's computer numbers; hard to have bad losses when you barely have any opportunities to lose to bad teams. SJU at 76th in NET is the only team at the moment that even provides the entire league with the possibility of playing a Q3 game in conference. This is a great argument for keeping the Big East concentrated in high quality programs, and not expanding for the sake of expansion. The ACC schedule, for example, is real tough for those bubble teams who are in need of a SOS boost.
|
|
mdtd
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,567
|
Post by mdtd on Feb 10, 2020 17:32:01 GMT -5
My sentiment too...very unfortunate its become a 'wash' year for team progress. But I think when you look at 4 lost personnel and Mac/Omer/Pickett below pre-season expectations, and have a bubble thread still in Feb, reflects some positives. The biggest reason we are still in the discussion and biggest positive as far as Ewing is that he went from an F to an A in OOC scheduling. Remember how even at the end of JT3's era it seemed like we were in the discussion and close to making it with very subpar BE results? I have said it before but I will say it again. If Ewing just would've fixed his scheduling philosophy 1 year earlier we wouldn't be having the hot seat conversation because we would've made the tournament last year.I agree with the first part, but not the second. That team in the OOC was not good. They lost at home to SMU, on a neutral floor to LMU and should've lost to USF. They barely beat CCSU, UMES, Little Rock in OT (Nowell is balling now), Richmond, and Appalachian State. That team with this years schedule would've lost more games. Teams like Penn St, Oklahoma State, UNCG, SMU, Texas, Duke (Would've played Cal though), and maybe even Georgia State would've beaten that team. The Illinois win was great and all, but that was a team at the exact same point as us, maybe even a little further behind. But, they hit their stride late season and had a whole bunch go right that we didn't. The way that Illinois team ended was incredible. But, they weren't even close to that team at that point last year. Last year the team developed in front of all of us. But, they would've lost too many games to overcome the OOC like this year. Not saying last year was the perfect schedule, or this years for that matter, but I don't buy this part. But I 100% agree with the first part. In order to make the tournament you have to beat tournament teams. JT3's scheduling allowed for us to do that. JT3's teams at the end were also veteran led and had enough talent throughout the season to take those teams down, especially since those teams never really improved and peaked in November. Ewing has to continue too schedule well. That's the way the teams will succeed from now on. He's had enough time to get things set up and while the defections set us back, the OOC his first year's goal was to get wins on the schedule to help recruiting and what not. At this point, his brand of basketball has set in and he has guys who he brought in to run that system. He has to schedule well next year. First year is a bye, second year it makes sense to me. Next year needs to be a good schedule, more like this one.
|
|
LCPolo18
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,406
|
Post by LCPolo18 on Feb 10, 2020 23:00:46 GMT -5
GEORGETOWN (NET: 53, NBC: Next four out): Georgetown is now 14-10 on the season after beating DePaul (64) at home on Saturday. I’m not quite ready to give up on this team yet. They do have three Quad 1 wins now that SMU (73) and Oklahoma State (75) have jumped into the top 75, and their “worst” loss came at home to UNCG (63). Plus, Mac McClung has missed some of Georgetown’s losses and there’s the complicating factor of Georgetown’s ugliest losses coming while they were dealing with personnel issues in the first month of the season. There are plenty of elite wins left on their schedule as well. collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2020/02/10/ncaa-tournament-bubble-watch-2/
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Feb 11, 2020 13:20:15 GMT -5
The biggest reason we are still in the discussion and biggest positive as far as Ewing is that he went from an F to an A in OOC scheduling. Remember how even at the end of JT3's era it seemed like we were in the discussion and close to making it with very subpar BE results? I have said it before but I will say it again. If Ewing just would've fixed his scheduling philosophy 1 year earlier we wouldn't be having the hot seat conversation because we would've made the tournament last year.I agree with the first part, but not the second. That team in the OOC was not good. They lost at home to SMU, on a neutral floor to LMU and should've lost to USF. They barely beat CCSU, UMES, Little Rock in OT (Nowell is balling now), Richmond, and Appalachian State. That team with this years schedule would've lost more games. Teams like Penn St, Oklahoma State, UNCG, SMU, Texas, Duke (Would've played Cal though), and maybe even Georgia State would've beaten that team. The Illinois win was great and all, but that was a team at the exact same point as us, maybe even a little further behind. But, they hit their stride late season and had a whole bunch go right that we didn't. The way that Illinois team ended was incredible. But, they weren't even close to that team at that point last year. Last year the team developed in front of all of us. But, they would've lost too many games to overcome the OOC like this year. Not saying last year was the perfect schedule, or this years for that matter, but I don't buy this part. But I 100% agree with the first part. In order to make the tournament you have to beat tournament teams. JT3's scheduling allowed for us to do that. JT3's teams at the end were also veteran led and had enough talent throughout the season to take those teams down, especially since those teams never really improved and peaked in November. Ewing has to continue too schedule well. That's the way the teams will succeed from now on. He's had enough time to get things set up and while the defections set us back, the OOC his first year's goal was to get wins on the schedule to help recruiting and what not. At this point, his brand of basketball has set in and he has guys who he brought in to run that system. He has to schedule well next year. First year is a bye, second year it makes sense to me. Next year needs to be a good schedule, more like this one. These are the results in order of the Top 150 ranked teams we played in OOC last year Ill A W - 109 LMU N L - 142 USF N W - 99 Liberty H W - 58 Cuse A L - 42 SMU H L - 98 You seem to be implying that we were better come conference time than at the beginning of the season and the results dont align with that. AS for last year's team vs a schedule comparable to this year. The highest rank win last year in OOC (58) was higher than any of the wins this OOC season (65). We also lost by 1 at 42 last year which is a pretty good result. Who knows how it wouldve all played out. I think last year's team was better than this year's so I guess that plays into my thinking. Regardless there is no reason our OOC should ever be horrendous like it was in Pat's first 2 years ever again. I think we can all agree on that.
|
|