That post is specifically replying to the one (not yours) that says it's luck while simultaneously laughing at bac for getting it wrong.
It can be one or the other but not both.
BACATOLOGY: 3/11 NCAA Tournament Analysis***Rutgers 95% in***
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
It can be one or the other but not both.
Starting to sound like Numbers defending a rainstorm thread...
Bac did not know the committee was going to judge RU on an 8 game season vs body of work and theres no way he should have known that.
95+% of bracketologists had us in
The usual suspects on this board saying they knew it would happen, or worse justifying it, are talking out of their ear holes.
Which is what they do on most other topics as well
Numbers and stats and algorithms are one thing. This is why so many brackets are 66-67/68 accurate. In this case, the rules that should be training the data model were changed at the last minute. No fault on the prognosticators.
the committee finally admitted that they use the eye test as criteria.
They also basically admitted they don’t watch the conference tournaments
Is it eye test or just "current make up of the team?"
As has been previously stated - they consider injuries. Especially current injuries that effect the makeup of the team entering the tournament.
Hypothetical question if our February and January were flip flopped, are we in?
Assuming the NCAA goes by what they said and that wasn’t some magic bs, then maybe
Rutgers is now in 181 of the 190 brackets on the Matrix
Nevada 59
Pitt 120
NC State 166
Providence 180
Nevada 59
Pitt 120
NC State 166
Providence 180
there was conspiracy theories going around here Saturday. But many said it was just they didn’t want the press coverage of it.
If it leaked , it would have been a small leak that got word to pike somehow . But I have a hard time thinking there was a leak . This process just can’t have any
me too but hopefully recover by end of day...i can tell you havent even looked at a bracket. I dont even know the matchups right now. usually i am posting all kinds of threads here...
maybe later tonight
Which is 95.3 percent. So your 95 percent was actually low. You nailed it. Congratulations!
“These are very difficult situations. It’s challenging because it’s like splitting hairs. Both teams had good years — not great years, but good years. But I will say this: when you look at Rutgers, for example, their non-conference schedule — in particular, their non-conference wins — the committee looked hard at that. They were trying to find something they could really grab to. In the non-conference as it relates to having success in that portion of the schedule, it was lacking. And they certainly had some wins over conference teams, I don’t want to take that away from them. However, when you get to February 7, the team suffered a setback with an injury to a key member of the team and they just didn’t look the same the rest of the year. We had several games we could observe them from February 7 on and they had a difficult time. So we certainly look at the full body of work, but when you look at the non-conference schedule and lack of quality wins (in it), and how they looked down the stretch, the combination of the two were the reason why they were left out by the committee.”
RU beat 3 schools on the cut line during this stretch and finished Michigan State off in that stretch. Would it have been better to lose at wisky and penn state and beat Michigan and Nebraska at home?
the only true bad loss was at Minnesota. Nebraska and Michigan yeah not so good to lose at home. but yikes Michigan beat some good teams this year. Are they worse than losing to UNLV 2x.
the only true bad loss was at Minnesota. Nebraska and Michigan yeah not so good to lose at home. but yikes Michigan beat some good teams this year. Are they worse than losing to UNLV 2x.
If I wanted to put my tinfoil hat on I would say that the leak regarding the committee considering the Ohio State game was used against us.
havent analyzed everything, but still trying to figure out why Texas AM is a 7 and Creighton is a 6..what is so great about Creightons resume, take away their net number and this is a 8/9 game resume
The concept of a WAB held strong when looking at who got in. Only Pitt was an outlier
Bac do you think many of us were guilty of confirmation bias which added to our shock during the selection show? We have a tendency to shout down contrarian beliefs on this forum.
They also seem to change what they emphasize as important metrics each year.
last year we felt RU should be in but that was backed up by less than 40% of the matrix, this year currently its 201 out of 210 so I would say we were not guilty of confirmation bias. To me there was always a concern with having 4 Q3 losses, that never goes away. Yet our wins were impressive and the Purdue win tremendous. Its another tough lesson for bracketologists and a confirmation that conference tourneys no longer matter
What we were blind sided by was the committee basically selecting the field before conference tournament play began and using the eye test to justify leaving out RU and ignoring body of work.
So basically, they made up and deleted criterion as they saw fit. Sounds fair and impartial.
As first reported by me. I thought the Michigan win pushed it over the edge but obviously not.
Last edited:
I think you accounted for a tournament game too much. I doubt the committee watched a single oneAs first reported by me. I thought the Michigan win pushed it over the edge but obviously not.
Bac was ranked 44 out of 229. Haters need to shut up lol.
I think his biggest error and every other bracketologist’s error was over valuing the BIG1G. The committee **** all over the conference
Here goes Politi again……..Rutgers has nobody to blame but itself for NCAA Tournament snub | Politi
https://www.nj.com/rutgersbasketbal...t-itself-for-ncaa-tournament-snub-politi.html
https://www.nj.com/rutgersbasketbal...t-itself-for-ncaa-tournament-snub-politi.html
I wonder if our Purdue win came at the end of February instead of January if that would have gotten us in
Face it the Ncaa tourney is probably as corrupted by politics, bias and incompetence as the college football championship. It in many ways is just a subjective beauty contest .The hurtful thing is that the players and team that worked so hard got screwed. Actually naive fans always considered the baketball championship special and purer but anything run by the Ncaa is anything but. Sadly It's just entertainment and a reason to bet/gamble and maybe we take it too seriously.