“Murray State” has ZERO chance of beating them!
Last edited:
We got robbed. BIG is 8-0…
- Thread starter Wiedersehen
- Start date
One game at best. Some teams peaked early. We failed to launch.
It isn't a formula. I'm not special. People are doing well in pools. To me the only ones who didn't get it are the committee who was in love with the SEC.
Statistically they are only off by maybe 3 or 4 teams right? But the seeding seems off too.
We already know the committee and Bubba were corrupt with getting Carolina in, but they were also very lazy. It was pretty much all NET analytics and OOC match ups, not even wins, that mattered way more. Carolina at 1-12 in Quad 1’s, but oh, look who all they played (and lost to everyone, but UCLA). Plus their quad 2 and 3 losses. UM finishing behind PU In seedings after winning 2 of 3. Oregon ahead of Illinois in seeding when Illinois beat them out there. OU getting in at all at 6-12 in the league and even getting a 9 see was absolute nonsense!! Also on the lazy theme, it seemed no results after Friday made any difference in seeds. Quad 1’s and head to head should be every bit as consequential as NET. Hoping this will really be looked at moving forward.
That’s my issue with the UNC bid. So what you played a lot of good teams? You only beat one of them, a 1-point win at a neutral site. The committee can’t get caught up in overthinking it. How many wins, especially against good teams, should matter more than the number of good teams you played. It should not be that difficult to assess.
Last edited:
I didn’t say McNeese State. I said “Murray State.” Someone else edited my replied post. The “joke” was on you.Are they worse than Fairleigh Dickinson?
The Ken Pom algorithms are completely separate from NET and the NCAA but showed the same relative rankings. If anyone can do better then the models then fabulous riches await.
Weekend? Had IU received a bid, they would have been out Tuesday night.
we got exactly what we deserved
Good show for big ten we have alot of good coaches maybe not a title contender team but legit final four teams.
Illinois-KY will be an interesting match up tomorrow. Underwood has a serious advantage in tournament experience.
Vitality is part of it. Knowledge was a larger part. After 4 years, I’m still not convinced he (and his staff) truly understood the college game and all it entails.
They didn’t count the big ten tournament.
It’s absurd. Somehow games in November matter more then March.
Michigan was 12-7 in Q1, Purdue 7-10.
And the end result is Purdue now gets to play home games in the Sweet 16 which would have been entirely avoided if they switched Michigan and Purdue
With “Murray State” I was engaging you in a facetious manner, knowing you not in right mind seriously thinking.
I don’t think you can look just at Q1 wins. UM got more wins v. Q3 and Q4 opponents combined. Both teams have the same number of wins against Q1 and Q2 combined. Q1 losses aren’t as much of a negative. And, SOS favored Purdue. Despite the higher seed, Purdue was a trendy pick to lose against High Point, too.
Michigan went 14-6 in the BT, Purdue went 13-7, yet Purdue was a +7.8 scoring margin and Michigan was -0.3! Big Difference!
Yep. Points mattered. RPI, Power Rating, Massey.... any of those algorithms that had "quality of outcome" included, UNC was well above us. Play stupid, get stupid results. IMO, it may be better to keep scheduling cupcakes with the intent to blow them out by 30+.
Plus to Purdue's bracket they got the perfect draw to make it to the sweet 16. I'd still have had Michigan the 4 and PU the 5. Both made it to the sweet 16 so kudos to them.
Hard to say we got robbed when we looked the way we did.
We weren't very good. Underachieved horribly.
After more than 30 games, the Hoosiers still had not figured out a starting lineup.
