Jamar - I wasn't arguing with you and really enjoyed your post. I was voicing my fears about selection Sunday and where the quality wins argument comes into play. I agree WSU doesn't have the luxury of playing 10 or 15 Top 50 games, but that is what scares me and keeps me from relaxing and thinking 100% we are in. If we had a larger sample size I think our record against the Top 50 would compare much more favorably against other teams.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Definitive Argument Why The Shockers Deserve (And Will) Receive An At-large Bid
Collapse
X
-
Well done sir! That has to be one of the best posts I have ever read on Shockernet. :applause::good:
Edit: Oh, and by the way, I think we are in.Last edited by ShockerDropOut; March 10, 2016, 10:03 AM.Go Shocks!
Comment
-
Originally posted by FlyingWheat View PostWith so many in the media regurgitating dumb arguments, what are the odds that the committee also uses the same wrong reasoning? I mean it's not like the committee has shown us a lot of love the last couple years with Bracket of Death and the seven seed.Last edited by Heinro; March 10, 2016, 10:17 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Heinro View PostBracket Matrix has us on 76/99 brackets. Therefore, I think one could suggest our odds of making it are around 75%. If you factor in that at least some of the 23 only use RPI, like Palm, an argument could be made our odds are greater.
Comment
-
In a best case scenario, I think we know we are in today. GW, Michigan, Florida and Vandy are all in must win situations to even consider being above us on the cutline. That would leave only Tulsa and Connecticut who could perhaps position themselves above us and knock us out of the field. Butler, Pitt, South Carolina, the A10 bubble and Pac 12 bubble are bonuses I will be pulling for, but would suspect those are more seeding related.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shockfan89_ View PostIf I was putting together a tournament of teams with RPI 101-200, WSU would definitely be in. When putting together a tournament of the top 50 I would tend to look at success against the top 50 (1-4) and the top 100 (3-3) and not weight success against the 101+ teams as highly since these are teams that won't be in the tournament. This is where I get nervous. I think we get in, but that is where the "quality wins" discussion comes into play.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SHOCKvalue View PostJH4P just spent what looks like hours putting together one of the must substantive posts this forum has ever seen, strictly to explain to people with your take why they're off... and somehow you still managed to post this.
Comment
Comment