Today's Bracketology.
- Thread starter VegasDawg13
- Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Arizona State replaced Ohio State, you know, since neither of them played yesterday.
that would further the argument that Lunardi talks closely with selection committee members.
7 out of the 10 teams from the Pac-10 in the NCAAT? I just don't get it. Especially when you have a team like Oregon State who was 0-18. And Cal who was 4-12 against teams not named Oregon State. Much like the committee giving a bid to Stanford over Syracuse last year. And Stanford promptly got routed in the first game.
This is the kind of crap yesterday's buy/sell was about. With a rule that no team with a losing conference record can go to the tournament, the PAC 10 would be limited to 6 teams (fewer if Arizona St. or Oregon lose their first game in the PAC 10 tournament).
Although Cal doesn't even deserve to be on the bubble based on their overall record as much as their conference record. They're 16-14. I don't care who you've played, 16-14 shouldn't get you any consideration at all from the committee.
Although Cal doesn't even deserve to be on the bubble based on their overall record as much as their conference record. They're 16-14. I don't care who you've played, 16-14 shouldn't get you any consideration at all from the committee.
Cal's not on the bubble. They, Oregon State, and Washington are the 3 teams not in the discussion.</p>
their RPIs are virtually the same, Arizona's SOS is no. 2 vs. Ole miss in the 50s, they have the same number of top 50 RPI wins--Arizona has 3 on the road to Ole Miss's zero, and Arizona only has 2 losses to teams outside the top 100 to ole miss's 5. Arizona is also perceived to play in a tougher conference.
I don't think Villanova has any business being in the tourney either. I think Arizona is being rewarded ONLY because they have a tough schedule. They will be 18-14 after their loss today. They lost to two bubble teams (Oregon and Arizona State) at home. Sure, they have a better upside than many of the other bubble teams but they aren't consistent enough to be tourney worthy in my opinion.
And 3 of those 18 wins were against Oregon State, possibly the worst major conference team in the country.rugbdawg said:They will be 18-14 after their loss today.
andArizona's SOS is no. 2
These two items are directly related. If the national media didn't 'perceive' the Pac-10 as the best conference in the land (as quoted dozens of times on the Worldwide Leader, for example), I'm thinking 'Zona's SOS would be lower. It's a circular argument that starts and ends with the media/polls.Arizona is also perceived to play in a tougher conference
SOS is determined by RPI. It's a mathematical formula and doesn't leave room for biases.
But while we're on the subject, I don't know if the Pac 10 is the best conference in the country. Unfortunately, I don't get to watch every game every night. However, there are people who get paid to watch basketball, so they get to watch every important game. All of these people agree that the Pac 10 is the best conference this year. I think I should take their word for it over people who probably haven't watched more than five Pac 10 games all year (ie, nearly everyone on this board).</p>
But while we're on the subject, I don't know if the Pac 10 is the best conference in the country. Unfortunately, I don't get to watch every game every night. However, there are people who get paid to watch basketball, so they get to watch every important game. All of these people agree that the Pac 10 is the best conference this year. I think I should take their word for it over people who probably haven't watched more than five Pac 10 games all year (ie, nearly everyone on this board).</p>
SOS is determined by RPI.
This raises a point I've never understood. Your RPI is supposed to include a SOS component (opponents winning % and Opp Opp winning %). So why is SOS a separate variable that is considered by the committee?
I have no idea. I think that's stupid too. I also hate how people talk about a team's record by breaking it down into quality wins (<100 RPI) and bad losses (>100 RPI).
Example would be if two teams had the same record and were both on the bubble. Well, Team 1 has the edge in quality wins but they have more bad losses. Well, no ****!
Example would be if two teams had the same record and were both on the bubble. Well, Team 1 has the edge in quality wins but they have more bad losses. Well, no ****!
Well, people still commonly break out records by vs. top 50, vs. top 100, and vs. >100. They then say who has the edge in each category, ignoring the fact that the second ties into the first and they all tie into the overall record. Some people treat them all like they are independent of each other. I'm not talking about any media. I'm just referring to people who discuss such things on message boards, etc.
8Dog said:that would further the argument that Lunardi talks closely with selection committee members.Arizona State replaced Ohio State, you know, since neither of them played yesterday.
He claimed in a chat today that it was because Syracuse lost, which took away a win over a potential tournament team. I find your reasoning to be more probable.</p>
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.