Bracketology

Will Nebrasketball Make the NCAA Tournament?

  • Total voters
    107
  • Poll closed .
The Murphinator said:
Virginia Tech was already in the tournament. We have to worry about teams like Syracuse, UCLA, USC, Boise State, Washington, and Mississippi State.
Click to expand...
Probably, but Virginia Tech had an RPI of 57 before tonight and Nebraska's was 58. Their resume is definitely better, but we can use all the help we can get.

Every year there is a team that plays itself out of the tournament in the last week and one that plays itself in. We need some teams to fall apart or we're going to the NIT.

Also, of the teams you mentioned, only USC is considered in the tournament by Lunardi. We are currently not projected in, so teams in front of us need to lose. Beating Michigan might help us jump a team or two, but not five or six.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
HS_Coach_C said:
Probably, but Virginia Tech had an RPI of 57 before tonight and Nebraska's was 58. Their resume is definitely better, but we can use all the help we can get.

Every year there is a team that plays itself out of the tournament in the last week and one that plays itself in. We need some teams to fall apart or we're going to the NIT.

Also, of the teams you mentioned, only USC is considered in the tournament by Lunardi. We are currently not projected in, so teams in front of us need to lose. Beating Michigan might help us jump a team or two, but not five or six.
Click to expand...


Yeah, but Boise State sure could play themselves in. As well as the rest of those teams.

 
Moiraine said:
Q1 means you beat a team in the top 75 in an away game. So there's nothing really contradictory there. There are several teams in the top 75 that aren't bubble teams.


 
Click to expand...
Take away that other crap and put it into real words.

Kansas is credited with a “big” win which helps their case to be in the tournament and be a 1 seed, by beating a team that doesn’t deserve to be in the tournament according to most.

Think about that without defining what the QUADs mean.

 
ScottyIce said:
Take away that other crap and put it into real words.

Kansas is credited with a “big” win which helps their case to be in the tournament and be a 1 seed, by beating a team that doesn’t deserve to be in the tournament according to most.

Think about that without defining what the QUADs mean.
Click to expand...






What "big" means here is beating a top 75 team on the road. That's what it means for all teams. People have assigned the word "big" to it, but maybe they shouldn't have. Not all "big" teams make it to the tournament. Before this year, it wouldn't have been considered a "big" win.

Don't get me wrong, I think how tournament teams are decided is really lame, because the RPI formula is stupid. But Q1 wins, whether they're called "big" or not, means beating a top 75 team on the road, + 2 other options. The top 75 teams, those "big" teams, don't all make it into the tournament. I'm guessing the top 50 teams don't all make it into the tournament either due to the small conferences. I don't know the numbers.

Another problem is margin of victory seems unimportant. We lost to top seed by 1 point and no one mentions it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Murphinator said:
Yeah, but Boise State sure could play themselves in. As well as the rest of those teams.
Click to expand...
Yes, the teams in the same position as us can't get ahead of us, but that won't be enough by itself. We also need teams ahead of us to drop. I see Texas and Baylor as two, we need a couple more.

 
Moiraine said:
What "big" means here is beating a top 75 team on the road. That's what it means for all teams. People have assigned the word "big" to it, but maybe they shouldn't have. Not all "big" teams make it to the tournament. Before this year, it wouldn't have been considered a "big" win.

Don't get me wrong, I think how tournament teams are decided is really lame, because the RPI formula is stupid. But Q1 wins, whether they're called "big" or not, means beating a top 75 team on the road, + 2 other options. The top 75 teams, those "big" teams, don't all make it into the tournament. I'm guessing the top 50 teams don't all make it into the tournament either due to the small conferences. I don't know the numbers.

Another problem is margin of victory seems unimportant. We lost to top seed by 1 point and no one mentions it.
Click to expand...


This is exactly correct.

You can make an argument that the break points they chose are not correct but that doesn’t make it contradictory.  Ever since I started hearing about the system earlier in the year It’s eeemed to me like there is too much separation based on the location of the game.  I understand the sentiment that inning on the road is harder but Ithink they overshot.  Only the Top 25 at home but the Top 75 on the road? That seems excessive to me.  I’m not sure what the right numbers would be.  Maybe Top 35 at home and Top 65 on the road or something like that.  Not that it would change this particular argument but it seems more accurate to me.

 
Moiraine said:
What "big" means here is beating a top 75 team on the road. That's what it means for all teams. People have assigned the word "big" to it, but maybe they shouldn't have. Not all "big" teams make it to the tournament. Before this year, it wouldn't have been considered a "big" win.

Don't get me wrong, I think how tournament teams are decided is really lame, because the RPI formula is stupid. But Q1 wins, whether they're called "big" or not, means beating a top 75 team on the road, + 2 other options. The top 75 teams, those "big" teams, don't all make it into the tournament. I'm guessing the top 50 teams don't all make it into the tournament either due to the small conferences. I don't know the numbers.

Another problem is margin of victory seems unimportant. We lost to top seed by 1 point and no one mentions it.
Click to expand...


Next question: How do they determine the top 75?

 
ScottyIce said:
Next question: How do they determine the top 75?
Click to expand...




RPI, which is a dumb metric, and the top 75 RPI teams don't all make the tournament. Nor do all of the top 60 I'm assuming. Again, I'm not arguing that they're doing this logically, but using their metric, calling Nebraska a top 75 team is not contradicting the statement that they aren't good enough to make the tournament. Nebraska has plenty of company there. Everyone from 55-75 has been a Q1 win for other teams. That doesn't mean they've done enough to get a bid.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would like to see all bubble teams chances. Heard Mizzou only has like a 43% chance if they lose one of their final two games. Not sure where to find it though. 

 
ECisGod said:
I read somewhere that they picked 75 because no team with an RPI over 75 has ever made the tournament.  Yes there have been teams with RPI's in the 70's that made it.
Click to expand...


Save for automatic qualifiers, right? Because there have been some stinkers that won their conference tourney and got an AQ bid that way that weren't even top 100 RPI, IIRC.

 
VectorVictor said:
Save for automatic qualifiers, right? Because there have been some stinkers that won their conference tourney and got an AQ bid that way that weren't even top 100 RPI, IIRC.
Click to expand...
And this is what should caution some fans following the first 4 out/next 4 out teams and their results.  All it takes is like a San Diego team making a tourney run and suddenly the WCC is a conference that gets three bids instead of two(Zaga and St Mary’s).  Other conference tourneys NEED to chalk out

 
PaulCrewe said:
And this is what should caution some fans following the first 4 out/next 4 out teams and their results.  All it takes is like a San Diego team making a tourney run and suddenly the WCC is a conference that gets three bids instead of two(Zaga and St Mary’s).  Other conference tourneys NEED to chalk out
Click to expand...


Great minds....

 
PaulCrewe said:
And this is what should caution some fans following the first 4 out/next 4 out teams and their results.  All it takes is like a San Diego team making a tourney run and suddenly the WCC is a conference that gets three bids instead of two(Zaga and St Mary’s).  Other conference tourneys NEED to chalk out
Click to expand...


It's almost as if we need to have a tournament (or playoff?) just for the P5 conferences, and then we can have some fun, meaningless games for the non-P5 schools to take on P5 schools that didn't quite make the tournament/playoff cut. And then we don't have to worry about these dirty non-P5 schools messing things up.

/s

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top