Pike on with Mad Dog at 4

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
238,179
167,911
113
The committee has now indicated that OOC SOS is a material consideration. We would be committing malpractice if we ignored them and continued to schedule SEVEN sub-300 teams.

I don’t mind 4 or 5 such cupcakes. I mean, everybody has them. But please not 7. We cannot afford to have our Team Sheet say 309 in the OOC SOS box. We’re just inviting more scrutiny at that point, and, if we have a debatable resume with little margin for error, giving a subjective committee ammunition to hose us.

As dumb as OOC SOS is as a datapoint, WE HAVE TO PLAY THE GAME AND SCHEDULE STRONGER.


exactly, i dont know why posters insist we need to schedule 300 plus every year, rather odd
 

Greene Rice FIG

Heisman
Dec 30, 2005
40,437
23,613
0
it doesnt end the ooc sos discussion, its actually just beginning. its piss poor and need to get better
You do realize you replace 2 early cupcakes with good teams we aren’t even watching selection show at 17-16.

Beating Q4 team is better than losing to a Q1.

Now I know you can’t predict injuries when you make schedule, but you know Pike will be tinkering with rotation.
 

Greene Rice FIG

Heisman
Dec 30, 2005
40,437
23,613
0
exactly, i dont know why posters insist we need to schedule 300 plus every year, rather odd
If we ever schedule like you want and we lose and dig a hole we don’t get in every game thread I am going to hijack and reference in Alt music from 2010-23
 

fluoxetine

Heisman
Nov 11, 2012
23,529
16,897
0
For the people who keep saying "don't lose to middleing teams", that's just not realistic. There will always be teams that unexpectedly jump up and bite better teams. Temple beat us, but they also beat Houston. NC State only had one Q1 win, but they simply smoked Duke in that win.

It is rare for a team to have a truly unblemished record, even those at the top of the bracket. The trick is to mitigate those blemishes.... lose to team 62 not 93, get a 4-point win against team 230 on an off night instead of losing a tight match to team 125, get shellacked by a top 25 team when you have players out injured instead of losing a close one to team 100, etc

That starts with purging the OOC slate of teams in that 70-150 danger range.
You don’t have to literally never lose, but we consistently underperform against our OOC. You can lose to someone out of Temple and SHU but you aren’t supposed to lose both (or if you do, beat Miami). Last year we were terrible in the beginning of the season, in 2019-20 we lost to St. Bonnie’s and at Pitt neither of which were good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUsojo and kcg88

runrutgersrun

All-Conference
Jun 23, 2020
1,512
2,764
113
Mad Dog to sum up call " RU got royally screwed." Pike " thanks for this , you could have been talking Rodgers"....Mad Dog " Enough of Rodgers!!"...
Best thing in this thread, best line, goes to Coach:

Pike " thanks for this , you could have been talking Rodgers".

LOL...that's a really good line! Otherwise, I still can't get over we got screwed like this. GO RU!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MiloTalon13

Scarlet83

Heisman
Feb 4, 2004
9,539
10,699
103
The committee has now indicated that OOC SOS is a material consideration. We would be committing malpractice if we ignored them and continued to schedule SEVEN sub-300 teams.

I don’t mind 4 or 5 such cupcakes. I mean, everybody has them. But please not 7. We cannot afford to have our Team Sheet say 309 in the OOC SOS box. We’re just inviting more scrutiny at that point, and, if we have a debatable resume with little margin for error, giving a subjective committee ammunition to hose us.

As dumb as OOC SOS is as a datapoint, WE HAVE TO PLAY THE GAME AND SCHEDULE STRONGER.
How many top conferences play 20 conference games each year? I know the SEC and B12 play 18. So our 2 extra conference games can easily be viewed as replacing two strong OOC games compared to the SEC and B12, right?

But the effin simpleton NCAA committee can’t think in those terms, can they?
 
Last edited:

denmig

Senior
Dec 19, 2015
141
448
43
Illini fan here. I lurk on your board from time to time because I respect the Rutgers program and I find you guys knowledgeable. Anyways, just wanted to post that yesterday when Underwood gave his press conference regarding the Illini's tournament seeding, etc. , he finished up his press conference saying Rutgers should be in, that he was shocked they were left out. (wasn't prompted) Just wanted to share, haven't seen that mentioned.
 

runrutgersrun

All-Conference
Jun 23, 2020
1,512
2,764
113
Illini fan here. I lurk on your board from time to time because I respect the Rutgers program and I find you guys knowledgeble. Anyways, just wanted to post that yesterday when Underwood gave his press conference regarding the Illini's tournament seeding, etc. , he finished up his press conference saying Rutgers should be in, that he was shocked they were left out. (wasn't prompted) Just wanted to share, haven't seen that mentioned.
Thanks, denmig...much appreciated. It seems that many RU fans (like me!) have an inferiority complex and, additionally, feel that many in our own league have little or no respect for our school or programs. Kind words like yours and Coach Underwood's help on days like yesterday. Good luck to the Illini... hope to see you playing in week 2...see you next year! GO RU! Go Illinois!
 

bigbirdru

Junior
Mar 6, 2010
2,256
332
83
Its not hard to understand.

You can't do both:
  1. Schedule crap OOC SOS
  2. Lose to that crap OOC SOS

If we actually win OOC (haven't done it the last 2 years), then we easily make the tournament.

The schedule isn't a problem. It's losing to it. Let's have a clean OOC before worrying about upgrading.
This year is certainly different though. We destroyed the low tier teams. Lost to temple on neutral court and SHU at home. Minn on road. They weren’t Lafayette debacles and the NET reflected it
 

Scarlet Shack

Heisman
Feb 3, 2004
26,090
15,571
73
We don’t need to schedule up …we need to go 10-1 against this type of schedue instead of 8-3

2019-2020….went 9-2
Should have gone 9-2/10-1

2020-2021….went 4-0
Should have gone 4-0

2021-2022….went 7-4
Should have gone 10-1
Cost us ..6 seed instead of 11 as last four in

2022-2023….went 8-3
Should have gone 10-1
Cost us …8 seed instead of 2nd team out

The schedule is fine …just win the damn games
 

fatsam98

Heisman
Mar 23, 2005
42,333
34,953
113
Illini fan here. I lurk on your board from time to time because I respect the Rutgers program and I find you guys knowledgeable. Anyways, just wanted to post that yesterday when Underwood gave his press conference regarding the Illini's tournament seeding, etc. , he finished up his press conference saying Rutgers should be in, that he was shocked they were left out. (wasn't prompted) Just wanted to share, haven't seen that mentioned.
Good luck in the tourney, Underwood is one of my favorite coaches in the league. Met a lot of Illini fans at the tourney in Indy a couple years ago, good people (even if you do all hate our Paul).
 

SJScarlet

All-Conference
Jan 30, 2006
1,988
2,401
83
The committee has now indicated that OOC SOS is a material consideration. We would be committing malpractice if we ignored them and continued to schedule SEVEN sub-300 teams.

I don’t mind 4 or 5 such cupcakes. I mean, everybody has them. But please not 7. We cannot afford to have our Team Sheet say 309 in the OOC SOS box. We’re just inviting more scrutiny at that point, and, if we have a debatable resume with little margin for error, giving a subjective committee ammunition to hose us.

As dumb as OOC SOS is as a datapoint, WE HAVE TO PLAY THE GAME AND SCHEDULE STRONGER.
It’s total horseshit. Swap in two top 20 teams, lose to them close enough that our Net ranking remains 40 like it ended up this year, and see if they put us in with 17 wins.
You do realize you replace 2 early cupcakes with good teams we aren’t even watching selection show at 17-16.

Beating Q4 team is better than losing to a Q1.

Now I know you can’t predict injuries when you make schedule, but you know Pike will be tinkering with rotation.
According to the committee’s logic, swap a couple of our cupcake wins for losing to a couple top 20 teams on the road, such that our NET ranking remained at 40 or so, and finishing at 17-16, would’ve gotten us in the tournament.
(Yeah, right.)
 

RUPartisan

All-American
Dec 31, 2007
9,402
5,580
113
The committee has now indicated that OOC SOS is a material consideration. We would be committing malpractice if we ignored them and continued to schedule SEVEN sub-300 teams.

I don’t mind 4 or 5 such cupcakes. I mean, everybody has them. But please not 7. We cannot afford to have our Team Sheet say 309 in the OOC SOS box. We’re just inviting more scrutiny at that point, and, if we have a debatable resume with little margin for error, giving a subjective committee ammunition to hose us.

As dumb as OOC SOS is as a datapoint, WE HAVE TO PLAY THE GAME AND SCHEDULE STRONGER.
You might have to repeat this for those in the back of the class sleeping. The teacher is telling us how to pass the exam and we still have stubborn posters saying that's stupid or unfair so they are going to continue to study the wrong material.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Degaz-RU

RUBlackout7

All-Conference
Apr 10, 2021
1,535
2,097
0
We can improve our OOC schedule by a little so we’re in the 200’s, but nothing more than that. More important that we win those games. Win those games and nobody is even talking about SOS.
 

Shell21

Heisman
Mar 23, 2004
31,838
21,944
113
Listened to Russo at the beginning of his show. Unloaded on the committee for not putting us in. Said he's usually the guy that is against having all of these power conference teams in but ridiculous that Mountain West had 4 teams and rattled off all of the wins we had against tournament teams.
do you have the audio to this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MiloTalon13

Plum Street

Heisman
Jun 21, 2009
27,306
23,009
0
It’s total horseshit. Swap in two top 20 teams, lose to them close enough that our Net ranking remains 40 like it ended up this year, and see if they put us in with 17 wins.

According to the committee’s logic, swap a couple of our cupcake wins for losing to a couple top 20 teams on the road, such that our NET ranking remained at 40 or so, and finishing at 17-16, would’ve gotten us in the tournament.
(Yeah, right.)
Don’t believe it . They just will change the narrative to fit their selections at the time
 

ScarletR30

Senior
Aug 19, 2008
474
812
0
If they'd beaten the likes of Seton Hall, Minnesota, and Temple, and hadn't been robbed against Ohio State, they're in easily.
If that happens they are probably on the 5 line. Also never gets brought up that SHU was immediately after OSU debacle. Team was obviously affected
 
  • Like
Reactions: G- RUnit

Jackson206:)

All-Conference
Sep 29, 2006
3,594
3,304
0
Just listened to the segment. Say what you want about Pike, the man is a total class act. Russo said everything I’m sure Pike wanted to say lol. I hope they run the table in the NIT and they get to Vegas and make the most of the sh*t sandwhich they were handed. One other thing, eff the selection committee.
 

Skull83

All-Conference
Jul 31, 2001
2,411
3,224
98
They won’t admit it, but I believe the committee decided the B1G was getting 8 teams and then twisted themselves into a pretzel looking for a way to keep RU out to make that happen. To paraphrase the words of Clint Eastwood to Gene Hackman at the end of Unforgiven: “deserves got nothing to do with it.”
 

RUChoppin

Heisman
Dec 1, 2006
19,270
13,695
0
You don’t have to literally never lose, but we consistently underperform against our OOC. You can lose to someone out of Temple and SHU but you aren’t supposed to lose both (or if you do, beat Miami). Last year we were terrible in the beginning of the season, in 2019-20 we lost to St. Bonnie’s and at Pitt neither of which were good.

In 2019-20, both St. Bonaventure and Pittsburgh were both in that 100-150 danger range.... no upside to beating them, huge downside to losing to them. In 2021-22, DePaul was 103 and UMass was 178, also in that danger range.... but we still lost to Lafayette at 300+.
 

PiscatawayMike

Heisman
Jul 27, 2001
16,917
14,330
113
They won’t admit it, but I believe the committee decided the B1G was getting 8 teams and then twisted themselves into a pretzel looking for a way to keep RU out to make that happen. To paraphrase the words of Clint Eastwood to Gene Hackman at the end of Unforgiven: “deserves got nothing to do with it.”
A part of me believes this, too. Figuring out how to squeeze a third B1G team into one of the regions would have taken a lot of additional work on their part, so they simply decided eight B1G teams is enough.
 

RUsojo

Heisman
Dec 17, 2010
28,307
26,921
113
You do realize you replace 2 early cupcakes with good teams we aren’t even watching selection show at 17-16.

Beating Q4 team is better than losing to a Q1.

Now I know you can’t predict injuries when you make schedule, but you know Pike will be tinkering with rotation.
I don’t believe beating a Q4 team isn’t better than losing to a Q1 team.
How many top conferences play 20 conference games each year? I know the SEC and B12 play 18. So our 2 extra conference games should be viewed as strong OOC games compared to the SEC and B12, right?
Playing 20 conference games is not viewed as a positive by the committee and NCAA as it shuts out other conferences non-conference opportunities.

The committee makes it clear you cannot leverage your conference schedule and lock out other teams from tournament access/opportunity.

There rest of the power 5 teams now support the mid major teams against the big ten with that unfair advantage in mind.
 

Anon1751594821

All-Conference
Jul 28, 2001
2,555
2,358
0
You do realize you replace 2 early cupcakes with good teams we aren’t even watching selection show at 17-16.

Beating Q4 team is better than losing to a Q1.

Now I know you can’t predict injuries when you make schedule, but you know Pike will be tinkering with rotation.
Why do you always assume that we will always lose those games all the time?

Best of Luck,
Groz
 

Skull83

All-Conference
Jul 31, 2001
2,411
3,224
98
A part of me believes this, too. Figuring out how to squeeze a third B1G team into one of the regions would have taken a lot of additional work on their part, so they simply decided eight B1G teams is enough.
Mike, I don’t think they had any interest in figuring out how to squeeze us in, I think their additional work was focused on finding a rationale for squeezing us out. Which pisses me off, but is what it is.
 

bac2therac

Hall of Famer
Jul 30, 2001
238,179
167,911
113
You do realize you replace 2 early cupcakes with good teams we aren’t even watching selection show at 17-16.

Beating Q4 team is better than losing to a Q1.

Now I know you can’t predict injuries when you make schedule, but you know Pike will be tinkering with rotation.

You dont know that...also Temple so 18-15
 

Scarlet Bri

All-Conference
Sep 6, 2001
568
1,118
93
They won’t admit it, but I believe the committee decided the B1G was getting 8 teams and then twisted themselves into a pretzel looking for a way to keep RU out to make that happen. To paraphrase the words of Clint Eastwood to Gene Hackman at the end of Unforgiven: “deserves got nothing to do with it.”
This x100 is my firm belief. Once PSU beat NW and MD and passed us in the metrics we were cooked. All those commissioners from smaller conferences were not letting in 9 B1G teams. They just constructed a narrative to fit that outcome. That’s why Nevada is in and 90% of bracketologists had the wrong call on RU. The objective criteria had us in.
 

fluoxetine

Heisman
Nov 11, 2012
23,529
16,897
0
This x100 is my firm belief. Once PSU beat NW and MD and passed us in the metrics we were cooked. All those commissioners from smaller conferences were not letting in 9 B1G teams. They just constructed a narrative to fit that outcome. That’s why Nevada is in and 90% of bracketologists had the wrong call on RU. The objective criteria had us in.
Why would the commissioner of some 1 bid league care whether they let a mountain west team in vs a big ten one?
 

Scarlet Bri

All-Conference
Sep 6, 2001
568
1,118
93
Why would the commissioner of some 1 bid league care whether they let a mountain west team in vs a big ten one?
They have to protect each other from the big bad conferences hogging all the bids and all the money. They have no power other than this process.

I hope it’s not laziness in fitting in 3 B1G teams in one region, but wouldn’t be surprised
 

koleszar

Heisman
Jan 1, 2010
35,486
55,161
113
How many top conferences play 20 conference games each year? I know the SEC and B12 play 18. So our 2 extra conference games should be viewed as strong OOC games compared to the SEC and B12, right?
 

Plum Street

Heisman
Jun 21, 2009
27,306
23,009
0
They have to protect each other from the big bad conferences hogging all the bids and all the money. They have no power other than this process.

I hope it’s not laziness in fitting in 3 B1G teams in one region, but wouldn’t be surprised

It’s one year and one snub, but if this is a sign of things to come the landscape could change . When the big boys say F this and go off on their own