Lunardi say Mississippi 4th team, State 7th team out
- Thread starter Coach34
- Start date
I may be wrong but I think that in the end head to head would make a difference. That was difference when Arkansas knocked us out in the SEC tourney which was a virtually a play in game that year. I do not think it will matter though.
We're toast. Mississippi at least has a chance. The difference when Arkansas knocked us out of the SEC tournament was that they had a significantly better RPI than we did and had a better SEC record (counting both regular season and the tournament) than we did.
only a prejudiced MSU fan would think we have the better team looking at the resumes. Without the sweep of OM there wouldn't even be a discussion.
It doesn't matter how good your body of work is when we beat you TWICE.
"Ole Miss beat Kansas State! They have to be Good! Who has State Beaten?!"
"They beat Ole Miss twice."
"Oh."
You aren't a better team than us unless you beat us. Isn't that how the tourney works?
"Ole Miss beat Kansas State! They have to be Good! Who has State Beaten?!"
"They beat Ole Miss twice."
"Oh."
You aren't a better team than us unless you beat us. Isn't that how the tourney works?
the fact that there are other variables. I don't think Ole Miss is in without a win in the tourney, but the only thing State has over Ole Miss is the head to head record. That's it. As already mentioned in the thread, the committee considers much more than that. The head to head record would only be significant if it came down to a choice between State or Ole Miss, and at this point, that looks very unlikely. Neither of us have great resumes, but after State's last two losses, Ole Miss' is better.
So they have ahalf gamebetter of a record, the same conference record, and they areONLY 3 spots ahead of us for a tourney spot and that's supposed to make me want to schedule better? ONLY 3 spots ahead with a freaking win over KState, a top 5 team, and games against Villanova and WVU helping their SOS.
Let's say things work out like they're SUPPOSED to, and OM loses to KState and we beat Rider and WKU, then it's likely that we're ahead of them in the pecking order, even w/ a much worse SOS. As long as you actually win the games you play against terrible teams, SOS really doesn't matter. All that really helps you is pulling off a miracle like OM did against KState
Let's say things work out like they're SUPPOSED to, and OM loses to KState and we beat Rider and WKU, then it's likely that we're ahead of them in the pecking order, even w/ a much worse SOS. As long as you actually win the games you play against terrible teams, SOS really doesn't matter. All that really helps you is pulling off a miracle like OM did against KState
is if Ole Miss were to beat Tennessee and Kentucky to reach the final and we were to beat Florida and Vanderbilt and reach the final. If we then lost to Ole Miss, its an interesting situation, as we would be 5-5 against the top 50, an immensely better record than any other bubble team.
If you end up with the same exact record, and theirs is actually a half game better than ours, then I don't see why it matters that we swept them b/c they will have beat someone that we haven't, or gotten a road win that we haven't, etc...
My point is that scheduling 3 tough games really didn't help them,it only put them 3 spots ahead of us at this point EVEN w/ a win over KState. If they lose that game and we win vs Rider and WKU, then we're actually rewarded for scheduling poorly and they are punished.
Make sense?
My point is that scheduling 3 tough games really didn't help them,it only put them 3 spots ahead of us at this point EVEN w/ a win over KState. If they lose that game and we win vs Rider and WKU, then we're actually rewarded for scheduling poorly and they are punished.
Make sense?
This whole upgrading our scheduling thing is a trap, and you are all buying into it like the c34 sheep that you are. If you could open your eyes and think for yourself, you might actually make an original point that makes sense instead of repeating what someone else says.
We win the games we're supposed to, and we're ahead of Ole Miss in the pecking order EVEN with a lot lower ranked SOS, and EVEN w/ them having a win over a top 5 team. Take away their win over KState andhave us beating two more OOC teams, and we're way ahead of them.
Anyway, go do something productive w/ your day jcbully, work on the Denson's project and get back to me.
We win the games we're supposed to, and we're ahead of Ole Miss in the pecking order EVEN with a lot lower ranked SOS, and EVEN w/ them having a win over a top 5 team. Take away their win over KState andhave us beating two more OOC teams, and we're way ahead of them.
Anyway, go do something productive w/ your day jcbully, work on the Denson's project and get back to me.
to play good teams so you can beat them. But if you don't, like losing @ West Virginia, those losses don't hamper you so much and cripple your chances of making the Tourney.
BECAUSE we have scheduled poorly, and BECAUSE we slipped up and lost some games we shouldn't, we are behind a team for a Tourney berth that we SWEPT head-to-head. That's how important scheduling is- even if someone sweeps you, you can still be ranked ahead of them
BECAUSE we have scheduled poorly, and BECAUSE we slipped up and lost some games we shouldn't, we are behind a team for a Tourney berth that we SWEPT head-to-head. That's how important scheduling is- even if someone sweeps you, you can still be ranked ahead of them
Actually I was just making a justification for how scheduling better doesn'tnecessarilyenhanceANY team's chance for making it in over another, if two teams have identical conference records. OM justhappens tobe the team w/ the same conference record as ours. And although they have a better SOS, it wouldn't matter if we had won the OOC games vs teams outside of the RPI top 100 and they had lost toKState.patdog said:
Though you'd pick up on that but you are nearing your 60's
Even if we'd won 3 out of our 4 bad losses, our RPI would STILL only improve to about #53 and we'd STILL be on the bubble (right there with Mississippi). The point remains, we HAVE to schedule a little better.
Calculation (if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me):
By RPI, we're 18.2-7.4 (.7109) adjusted for home-road. If we win the 3 worst of the 4 bad losses, we're 21-6.2 (.7721). Only 1/4 of RPI is based on your record, so 1/4 of the difference is .0153. Add that to our RPI of .5658 and you get .5811, which would be #53.
Edit: Screw it. I was wrong.Looking at it again, looks like we'd move up to about #44 if we won those 3 games.
Revised calculations:
By RPI, we're 18.2-8.8 (..6741) adjusted for home-road. If we win the 3 worst of the 4 bad losses, we're 21.6-6.2 (.7770). Only 1/4 of RPI is based on your record, so 1/4 of the difference is .0257. Add that to our RPI of .5658 and you get ..5915, which would be #44.
Calculation (if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me):
By RPI, we're 18.2-7.4 (.7109) adjusted for home-road. If we win the 3 worst of the 4 bad losses, we're 21-6.2 (.7721). Only 1/4 of RPI is based on your record, so 1/4 of the difference is .0153. Add that to our RPI of .5658 and you get .5811, which would be #53.
Edit: Screw it. I was wrong.Looking at it again, looks like we'd move up to about #44 if we won those 3 games.
Revised calculations:
By RPI, we're 18.2-8.8 (..6741) adjusted for home-road. If we win the 3 worst of the 4 bad losses, we're 21.6-6.2 (.7770). Only 1/4 of RPI is based on your record, so 1/4 of the difference is .0257. Add that to our RPI of .5658 and you get ..5915, which would be #44.
So despite the fact that our schedule was "so much" worse than OM's, if we had won 3 of our 4 bad losses, we'd have an RPI of 44, but better yet would be 24-7, which would put us in for sure no matter what our SOS is. That's my whole point.
Also, we had a bit of bad luck on our schedule this year as has been pointed out on here before. UCLA has never been this bad, and if we had been matched up against almost ANY other Big East team that would've been a huge boost to us. We may not have had many big name opponents, but Richmond, St Bonnie, WKU, Old Dominion, and Wright St have fielded better teams in the past that would've outweighed us playing the terrible teams that almost every other team does as well.
Also, we had a bit of bad luck on our schedule this year as has been pointed out on here before. UCLA has never been this bad, and if we had been matched up against almost ANY other Big East team that would've been a huge boost to us. We may not have had many big name opponents, but Richmond, St Bonnie, WKU, Old Dominion, and Wright St have fielded better teams in the past that would've outweighed us playing the terrible teams that almost every other team does as well.
That's reason enough to schedule harder. Somehow they act like SOS and RPI are these 2 independent factors when SOS is like 75% of the RPI equation. Scheduling harder is more rewarding than beating crappy teams, plain and simple.
Then if Ole Miss's SOS is 50 or 70 spots (or whatever it is) better than ours, then why is our RPI so close and why are they only 2 or 3spots ahead of us in the pecking order for an NCAA bid if we have the exact same record?
Pretty much it means that SOS doesn't matter that much if you beat who you're supposed to beat (them beating KState is huge for them, but it's an abberation)
Pretty much it means that SOS doesn't matter that much if you beat who you're supposed to beat (them beating KState is huge for them, but it's an abberation)