Welcome to The Holy Land of Hoops

Just curious, I went back to this time last year to capture some of the predictions Stever made. There are some great ones in there. So when reading any of his prediction in 2016 Bracketology threads just keep some of these in mind:


1. "The AAC at least has 4 teams that could easily make the tourney. The A10 may struggle to get 2 in." Feb 8th, 2015
"A10 has a very real shot at maybe only having 1 team make the tourney." Feb 11, 2015
Reality : AAC sends 2 and the A10 sends 3.

2. "My biggest thing is with how they have been playing, I just do not think they are playing well enough to get to 19 wins. St John's last 11 has gone 4-7." Feb 9, 2015
"St John's has to win 4 games to get in. Just looking right now they are a 68% favorite vs Seton Hall. But then they're now a dog to Xavier(49%), 51% vs Georgetown, and 53% @ Marquette. I'm sorry- but to expect this years St John's team to win all of those games- is comical- they've shown nothing to indicate they can do it." Feb 13th, 2015
Reality: SJU got in the tourney comfortably.

3. Also, UConn absolutely still has a shot at an at large. All it would take from there would be a win or two in the conference tourney and voila they are in. Feb 10th, 2015
Reality: Uconn didn't make the tourney.

4. "You might not like it, but there is no splitting hairs there at all about which one would get in. It'd be Florida and it wouldn't be close." Feb 10, 2015
Reality: Florida didn't get in "and it wasn't close."

5. "So pretty much, the Tulsa/Temple winner will make it almost certainly. And loser(especially if it's Temple), has a very real chance of making it as well." Feb 10, 2015
Reality: Neither Temple nor Tulsa made the tourney as we all know and as many on this BE board predicted.

6. "And for Xavier- their problems would be at least 3 bad losses and a bad road/neutral record. You get 1 of those and it's a red flag for the committee. All 3 of those and you pretty much have zero chance." Feb 10, 2015
Reality: Xavier made the tourney comfortably.

7. "Same with UConn. They have 14 wins. They have 3 games left where they are between a 65-85% chance of winning. Give them those 3 and they have 17 wins. They then have 4 games where they are underdog. If they can get 2 of those 4 games, they are 19-11, and have a very real shot at an at large. In a lot of ways, I'd rather have the UConn situation where they need to get 2 of 3 close to pick'em type games vs St John's, who needs to get 3 of 3 close pick'em type games." Feb. 13, 2015
Reality: SJU got in comfortably and UCONN wasn't close.

8. "And yeah, Temple of the teams you mentioned is pretty close to a shoe-in right now." Feb 13, 2015
Reality: They weren't.

9. "I don't love the AAC, I just think they are far better than folks here want to give them credit for. When people stay absolutely idiotic stuff like AAC may get only 2 bids, when they have 4 top 45 teams in the RPI, plus UConn still lurking- that just gets to me." Feb 14, 2015
Reality: Stever does love the AAC--he moderates an AAC fan forum for God's sake. Also, as we all know and predicted, the AAC was a 2 bid league. So much for those "idiotic" statements.

10.The all-time capper:
"My point on UConn especially- while yes today they wouldn't go over St John's, today isn't the end of the season." Feb 14th, 2015

What I love best about #10 is that it captures the true MO of Stever. When presenting bubble teams from a conference like the AAC he assumes that everything will just magically fall into place, and expects that every BE bubble team will lose any close game.

So there you go...Top 10 predictions from last February. Enjoy his crystal ball predictions for 2016.

The problem with Stever is that he makes predictions in a vacuum. You can't say team X needs more wins and they'll get an at large bid because team X is being judged against 30-40 other teams. You really don't know how those last 8 bids are going to shake out until the last weekend.

Ouch!!! lol

ta111 wrote:The problem with Stever is that he makes predictions in a vacuum. You can't say team X needs more wins and they'll get an at large bid because team X is being judged against 30-40 other teams. You really don't know how those last 8 bids are going to shake out until the last weekend.

The thing is you can say that. Take Georgetown. We need 4 more wins to get an at large bid. Why 4? Because no 15 loss team has ever gotten in at large. If they don't get the 4 wins, they won't be judged....

And yes that goes with Creighton. IF they don't get at least 3 more wins, they won't get in the group of teams that would be judged.

About the other stuff. You can't say I was wrong about Xavier last year because they weren't presented to the tourney with an 18-14 record. We have no idea what the committee would have done with that. NONE. You bring up the A10/AAC. If UConn had beaten SMU, UConn would have been in and Dayton out. Also if Wyoming hadn't won, Temple would have been in.

stever20 wrote:

ta111 wrote:The problem with Stever is that he makes predictions in a vacuum. You can't say team X needs more wins and they'll get an at large bid because team X is being judged against 30-40 other teams. You really don't know how those last 8 bids are going to shake out until the last weekend.

The thing is you can say that. Take Georgetown. We need 4 more wins to get an at large bid. Why 4? Because no 15 loss team has ever gotten in at large. If they don't get the 4 wins, they won't be judged....

And yes that goes with Creighton. IF they don't get at least 3 more wins, they won't get in the group of teams that would be judged.

About the other stuff. You can't say I was wrong about Xavier last year because they weren't presented to the tourney with an 18-14 record. We have no idea what the committee would have done with that. NONE. You bring up the A10/AAC. If UConn had beaten SMU, UConn would have been in and Dayton out. Also if Wyoming hadn't won, Temple would have been in.

I think it's pretty safe to say you were wrong with Xavier since you said they had about a zero chance of making the tournement when they got a 6 seed...

JohnW22 wrote:

stever20 wrote:

ta111 wrote:The problem with Stever is that he makes predictions in a vacuum. You can't say team X needs more wins and they'll get an at large bid because team X is being judged against 30-40 other teams. You really don't know how those last 8 bids are going to shake out until the last weekend.

The thing is you can say that. Take Georgetown. We need 4 more wins to get an at large bid. Why 4? Because no 15 loss team has ever gotten in at large. If they don't get the 4 wins, they won't be judged....

And yes that goes with Creighton. IF they don't get at least 3 more wins, they won't get in the group of teams that would be judged.

About the other stuff. You can't say I was wrong about Xavier last year because they weren't presented to the tourney with an 18-14 record. We have no idea what the committee would have done with that. NONE. You bring up the A10/AAC. If UConn had beaten SMU, UConn would have been in and Dayton out. Also if Wyoming hadn't won, Temple would have been in.

I think it's pretty safe to say you were wrong with Xavier since you said they had about a zero chance of making the tournement when they got a 6 seed...

This is where folks here are a joke. I said if Xavier presented themselves as 18-14, losing to Creighton and 1st rd BET game, they wouldn't get in. But they did win, and then won 2 BET games. It's a HUGE difference, folks on here know it but don't want to say that. I myself said that once they beat Creighton watch them go on a run in the BET since the pressure of making the tourney is off their shoulders.

stever20 wrote:

ta111 wrote: We have no idea what the committee would have done with that. NONE. You bring up the A10/AAC. If UConn had beaten SMU, UConn would have been in and Dayton out. Also if Wyoming hadn't won, Temple would have been in.

Yeah, funny post, and my issue is just above. We don't care about the conferences that you do. I still remember last year stever20 going on and on about tulsa. So, i finally looked up their record. Literally, laughed and said what's he talking about and why is he talking about it on, the Big East board??? Again, we all know that. The only thing this guy roots for, Is NOT the BE.

In stever's defense. The Big East seems to have had gotten the benefit of the doubt the from the committee thus far whereas the AAC got none. Now maybe that is just variance but I think it is more likely the committee simply respects the round-robin and the fact there are no nights off in the BE.

Edit: Should be noted. The BE is a pure basketball conference. I am sure the committe has more favorable feelings towards it then a conference like the AAC which is positioned solely for football.

Gr8 research.

Stever is not credible. He pushes an anti-Big East/ pro-AAC agenda. But gr8 for someone to do the leg work like this.

This is great. Before it happens, you can make up all the fantasy scenarios you want and defend them no matter how crazy they are. Because they "might" happen. But once we see the results, the proof is in the pudding. And in this case, the results say this person making these predictions didn't have a clue.

GumbyDamnit! wrote:2. "St John's has to win 4 games to get in. Just looking right now they are a 68% favorite vs Seton Hall. But then they're now a dog to Xavier(49%), 51% vs Georgetown, and 53% @ Marquette. I'm sorry- but to expect this years St John's team to win all of those games- is comical- they've shown nothing to indicate they can do it." Feb 13th, 2015
Reality: SJU got in the tourney comfortably.

Comical is these predictions now that we have seen the results.

3. Also, UConn absolutely still has a shot at an at large. All it would take from there would be a win or two in the conference tourney and voila they are in. Feb 10th, 2015
Reality: Uconn didn't make the tourney.

Didn't UConn get their "win or two" in the conference tourney? What happened? I don't recall seeing them make it. Voila !!

5. "So pretty much, the Tulsa/Temple winner will make it almost certainly. And loser(especially if it's Temple), has a very real chance of making it as well." Feb 10, 2015
Reality: Neither Temple nor Tulsa made the tourney as we all know and as many on this BE board predicted.

Didn't someone win that Temple/Tulsa game? Certainly they must have gotten in? No?

8. "And yeah, Temple of the teams you mentioned is pretty close to a shoe-in right now." Feb 13, 2015
Reality: They weren't.

No ambiguity here. A shoe-in !! Well, assuming he meant shoo-in. Or maybe he just meant they had their shoes in the bags packed for the NIT.

9. "I don't love the AAC, I just think they are far better than folks here want to give them credit for. When people stay absolutely idiotic stuff like AAC may get only 2 bids, when they have 4 top 45 teams in the RPI, plus UConn still lurking- that just gets to me." Feb 14, 2015
Reality: Stever does love the AAC--he moderates an AAC fan forum for God's sake. Also, as we all know and predicted, the AAC was a 2 bid league. So much for those "idiotic" statements.

"Absolutely idiotic stuff like the AAC may get only 2 bids." Uhh, that was exactly what they got. How was it idiotic?