Bubble Team Comparisons - 3/9

[Shox The Revenant]

There are two good things; we have no 'bad' losses and that we control our destiny. Beat UCONN and Cincy and we're a no doubter. Keep it simple.

[MadaboutWu]

That's halfway accounted for with the Quadrants which I tried to account for here

Good that you have it - and my post wasn't meant as criticism of you but of the selection committee. Pundits make it sound like they do look at it.

Great chart btw.

[Kashman]

Can somebody please explain how the NET works? More importantly, how do the FIRST calculations start? Because almost all of these power conference conferences schedule light and heavy on the home cooking. Seems like true non-conference road games should amount to double the value of any other game.

I'm not entirely certain ANY team is worthy that can't be at a .501 In-Conference winning percentage MINIMUM.

The NET counts road games slightly higher than home games and you get better "bumps" with 10+ point wins. We made it to #9 in NET early on based on winning games big and agajnst, at the time, a good OOC schedule. Once we hit leage, we were playing teams that didn't take advantage of their OOC, with there exception of Memphis. This tanked our conference games against eachother. Cincy an Tulsa have a combined 6 Q3/Q4 losses and they are regular season co-champs. We have multiple teams with OCC over 200. Yes we should have at least 2 more wins (@TU and vs UC) and we wouldn't be talking about being on the bubble. The conference jacking up the non-con weak schedule and weak record, ruined chances of getting more than 2 in the dance. As it stands, if UH wins and we play UC in the semis, that winner and cUH are thre only 2 invites.

[Shockm]

Cincinnati has had some bad losses. Four of them. We have had zero bad losses. Even though we have lost to them, our games have been so close and frankly could have gone either way. We need to play them and beat them in the tournament and then we would have a case to bring for us before them.

[Maizerunner08]

Cincinnati has had some bad losses. Four of them. We have had zero bad losses. Even though we have lost to them, our games have been so close and frankly could have gone either way. We need to play them and beat them in the tournament and then we would have a case to bring for us before them.

Yeah Cincy is a must win. It’s a hard (if not impossible sell) to say we get in over Cincy if they beat us 3 times.

[WuDrWu]

Our best win doesn't stack up at all. Our SOS leaves a lot to be desired too.

It's gonna be Cincinnati in the semis or bust. Period.

Like BOBB said I want you to be wrong but...…..


The Q1-4 thing is already so poorly skewed it's not funny. Basically they've said anyone outside P5 doesn't count. Literally half the teams games don't count. Another quarter basically don't count. It's a way to separate top half and bottom half of P5 schools into groups that they can give credit to each other for playing. As if Tulsa at 76 is light years difference from (say) UCLA at 70.

Anyway, it's the same ****, different year. How the eff Rutgers is just "in" makes zero sense. These Q1 and Q2 things allow people to ignore 40% of the season. They have 2 road wins against the worst team in the conference and the 3rd worst team in the conference. Somehow that means they really aren't on the bubble? Providence's non con which is BRUTAL is ignored. They won some big games, so we ignore the 4 Q4 losses. GMAFB.

But again, same **** different year.

I believe we're in if we make the finals no matter what happens around the country with other teams. If we don't make the finals, I think we're NIT bound. Just my opinion. I probably will have a different idea if we SHOULD be in, but I think that's what happens. Way too much P5 bias & big win bias. You cannot have it both ways and say NET is good, but we like UCLA. Just read ESPN's bubble watch article. OU is safe with a NET in the 40s. WSU is going to sweat to the end with a NET in the 40s. Nevermind we beat OU, or that our NET is within 2 points. P5 is basically safe, we're outside looking in. Same with Texas. Texas loses a Q2 home team by 20+ and has a NET in the 50s which might get the committee asking questions if they lose early in the B12 tourney, WSU gets no credit for pounding the #76 NET team that wins the conference. If you don't get credit for home wins against Tulsa, why get credit for home wins against UCLA? Because UCLA is better than Tulsa because well, UCLA and John Wooden I guess.

Rant over. Go Shocks.

[TheShocktocles]

Like BOBB said I want you to be wrong but...…..


The Q1-4 thing is already so poorly skewed it's not funny. Basically they've said anyone outside P5 doesn't count. Literally half the teams games don't count. Another quarter basically don't count. It's a way to separate top half and bottom half of P5 schools into groups that they can give credit to each other for playing. As if Tulsa at 76 is light years difference from (say) UCLA at 70.

Anyway, it's the same ****, different year. How the eff Rutgers is just "in" makes zero sense. These Q1 and Q2 things allow people to ignore 40% of the season. They have 2 road wins against the worst team in the conference and the 3rd worst team in the conference. Somehow that means they really aren't on the bubble? Providence's non con which is BRUTAL is ignored. They won some big games, so we ignore the 4 Q4 losses. GMAFB.

But again, same **** different year.

I believe we're in if we make the finals no matter what happens around the country with other teams. If we don't make the finals, I think we're NIT bound. Just my opinion. I probably will have a different idea if we SHOULD be in, but I think that's what happens. Way too much P5 bias & big win bias. You cannot have it both ways and say NET is good, but we like UCLA. Just read ESPN's bubble watch article. OU is safe with a NET in the 40s. WSU is going to sweat to the end with a NET in the 40s. Nevermind we beat OU, or that our NET is within 2 points. P5 is basically safe, we're outside looking in. Same with Texas. Texas loses a Q2 home team by 20+ and has a NET in the 50s which might get the committee asking questions if they lose early in the B12 tourney, WSU gets no credit for pounding the #76 NET team that wins the conference. If you don't get credit for home wins against Tulsa, why get credit for home wins against UCLA? Because UCLA is better than Tulsa because well, UCLA and John Wooden I guess.

Rant over. Go Shocks.

You are absolutely right. This is just another con game for so-called power conference schools. And Joe Lunardi is in for the con.

[AZ Shocker]

I'm just gonna go ahead and assume since the America Conference is NET ranked as the #7 conference in the country...and Wichita St. is tied with the league leader in overall record in said conference with a NET ranking of #41 at 23-8...that the #7 conference in the country is a multi-bid conference and will get more teams in the tournament than conferences ranked below the American. This obviously goes against the "tool" that has 1 team from the American solidly in...and only one other team from the American as barely making it.

[ShockerFever]

Like BOBB said I want you to be wrong but...…..


The Q1-4 thing is already so poorly skewed it's not funny. Basically they've said anyone outside P5 doesn't count. Literally half the teams games don't count. Another quarter basically don't count. It's a way to separate top half and bottom half of P5 schools into groups that they can give credit to each other for playing. As if Tulsa at 76 is light years difference from (say) UCLA at 70.

Anyway, it's the same ****, different year. How the eff Rutgers is just "in" makes zero sense. These Q1 and Q2 things allow people to ignore 40% of the season. They have 2 road wins against the worst team in the conference and the 3rd worst team in the conference. Somehow that means they really aren't on the bubble? Providence's non con which is BRUTAL is ignored. They won some big games, so we ignore the 4 Q4 losses. GMAFB.

But again, same **** different year.

I believe we're in if we make the finals no matter what happens around the country with other teams. If we don't make the finals, I think we're NIT bound. Just my opinion. I probably will have a different idea if we SHOULD be in, but I think that's what happens. Way too much P5 bias & big win bias. You cannot have it both ways and say NET is good, but we like UCLA. Just read ESPN's bubble watch article. OU is safe with a NET in the 40s. WSU is going to sweat to the end with a NET in the 40s. Nevermind we beat OU, or that our NET is within 2 points. P5 is basically safe, we're outside looking in. Same with Texas. Texas loses a Q2 home team by 20+ and has a NET in the 50s which might get the committee asking questions if they lose early in the B12 tourney, WSU gets no credit for pounding the #76 NET team that wins the conference. If you don't get credit for home wins against Tulsa, why get credit for home wins against UCLA? Because UCLA is better than Tulsa because well, UCLA and John Wooden I guess.

Rant over. Go Shocks.

You are 110% on point. It’s a completely BS system.

With that said, we had our opportunities (few), even at home, to solidify our spot in the field but failed. On non con turned out to be fairly underwhelming. It also didn’t help that it seemed like we had an unusually large amount of Q4 home games this year. I get it. We were young going into the year, but a sizable chunk of those 15 non-con wins were heaps on the trash pile.

But also, we definitely fair better than some of this other P5 hypocritical garbage that’s in front of us - UCLA, Indiana, Texas, and Rutgers immediately come to mind.

[Maizerunner08]

You are 110% on point. It’s a completely BS system.

With that said, we had our opportunities (few), even at home, to solidify our spot in the field but failed. On non con turned out to be fairly underwhelming. It also didn’t help that it seemed like we had an unusually large amount of Q4 home games this year. I get it. We were young going into the year, but a sizable chunk of those 15 non-con wins were heaps on the trash pile.

But also, we definitely fair better than some of this other P5 hypocritical garbage that’s in front of us - UCLA, Indiana, Texas, and Rutgers immediately come to mind.

Spot on. I'd argue all the teams you listed are in the discussion solely because of conference affiliation...meaning the conference is "propping" them up. You could be a poor to mediocre team in the Big 10 *cough* Indiana *cough* and conference strength alone gives you leeway to lose basically all your road games and still be under consideration because NET cares about who you played.