Remaining OOC Schedule Before Conference Play

[stever20]

Loyola Marymount dropped 40 spots when they lost to UCLA a few weeks ago.... One thing looking at San Francisco and NC State- their 1 loss was against a top 10 opponent. So didn't hurt them as much....

Until the selection committee starts sending 14 and 15 loss teams to the tourney, it's tough to think otherwise. I just do not see the committee sending a ton of 17-15 teams to the tourney in the least.... That would be such a major sea change for the committee. I sure do not think you can count on them all of a sudden opening the flood gates. There's only 1 conference with 20 conference games this year- and it's the Big Ten. And they're projected to have 11 teams with at least 18 wins. With only 2 of the 11 with a 18-13 record. So 9 teams projected from 20 conference game Big Ten with at least 19-12 record entering Big Ten tourney. Yeah, that's not going to lead to a sea change and allow a ton of 14 loss teams into the tourney.

The RPI is totally irrelevant, so I don't know why you continue to quote it like it means anything in the least.....

And even looking at NET- only 3 teams solidly in tourney. Butler in the last 4 in type of situation(normally top only 45-46 are in NCAA tourney). And that's now. If those 8 projected losses happen, lets see what the NET looks like then and then talk.

Sorry but when looking at the situation- the season IS split in 2. OOC play determines the maximum bids possible. If everyone enters conference play but St John's, Marquette, DePaul, and Georgetown- it's going to mean most likely any team going 9-9 in conference play won't make the tourney- except for Marquette and maybe St John's(only if they beat Duke). So that limits the maximum number of bids to how many teams can finish over .500 in conference play. I don't disagree with your statement about Nova having the high ceiling. But if they have 5 OOC losses, their floor is a lot different as well. What I'm saying is not about individual teams. I'm talking about the conference in general. Any team can win 11-12 teams and make the tourney easily. BUT the maximum number of teams is pretty close to set.

[marquette]

Why is every team going 9-9 in conference? Is this a new rule? Also, a few weeks ago NET was much more volatile, less so now.

[adoraz]

Loyola Marymount dropped 40 spots when they lost to UCLA a few weeks ago.... One thing looking at San Francisco and NC State- their 1 loss was against a top 10 opponent. So didn't hurt them as much....

Until the selection committee starts sending 14 and 15 loss teams to the tourney, it's tough to think otherwise. I just do not see the committee sending a ton of 17-15 teams to the tourney in the least.... That would be such a major sea change for the committee. I sure do not think you can count on them all of a sudden opening the flood gates. There's only 1 conference with 20 conference games this year- and it's the Big Ten. And they're projected to have 11 teams with at least 18 wins. With only 2 of the 11 with a 18-13 record. So 9 teams projected from 20 conference game Big Ten with at least 19-12 record entering Big Ten tourney. Yeah, that's not going to lead to a sea change and allow a ton of 14 loss teams into the tourney.

The RPI is totally irrelevant, so I don't know why you continue to quote it like it means anything in the least.....

And even looking at NET- only 3 teams solidly in tourney. Butler in the last 4 in type of situation(normally top only 45-46 are in NCAA tourney). And that's now. If those 8 projected losses happen, lets see what the NET looks like then and then talk.

Sorry but when looking at the situation- the season IS split in 2. OOC play determines the maximum bids possible. If everyone enters conference play but St John's, Marquette, DePaul, and Georgetown- it's going to mean most likely any team going 9-9 in conference play won't make the tourney- except for Marquette and maybe St John's(only if they beat Duke). So that limits the maximum number of bids to how many teams can finish over .500 in conference play. I don't disagree with your statement about Nova having the high ceiling. But if they have 5 OOC losses, their floor is a lot different as well. What I'm saying is not about individual teams. I'm talking about the conference in general. Any team can win 11-12 teams and make the tourney easily. BUT the maximum number of teams is pretty close to set.

Seriously, this type of post should get you banned.

I'm only going to repeat this one final time, as I've already told you multiple times. I use RPI for conference rankings because conference rankings aren't available by NET at the moment (at least, I haven't seen them anywhere). Is it that hard to understand? The rest of my post only focused on NET.

Next time you ask a stupid question, I am putting you on ignore forever. I don't mind a troll, but I won't converse with a dumb troll. That's no fun.

Rest of your post I could very easily dispute, but what's the point? You'll never admit you're wrong about anything, even though you are ALWAYS wrong. It's just a repeat of the last 5 years where you assume worst case scenario about all teams. I understand analytics very well, in the sense that all your projections, while technically possible, have very low odds of actually happening.

[stever20]

Why is every team going 9-9 in conference? Is this a new rule? Also, a few weeks ago NET was much more volatile, less so now.

There is a finite number of teams that will finish over .500.

I don't care what a teams NET is, if they are only like 17-14 they aren't making the tourney.

[stever20]

Loyola Marymount dropped 40 spots when they lost to UCLA a few weeks ago.... One thing looking at San Francisco and NC State- their 1 loss was against a top 10 opponent. So didn't hurt them as much....

Until the selection committee starts sending 14 and 15 loss teams to the tourney, it's tough to think otherwise. I just do not see the committee sending a ton of 17-15 teams to the tourney in the least.... That would be such a major sea change for the committee. I sure do not think you can count on them all of a sudden opening the flood gates. There's only 1 conference with 20 conference games this year- and it's the Big Ten. And they're projected to have 11 teams with at least 18 wins. With only 2 of the 11 with a 18-13 record. So 9 teams projected from 20 conference game Big Ten with at least 19-12 record entering Big Ten tourney. Yeah, that's not going to lead to a sea change and allow a ton of 14 loss teams into the tourney.

The RPI is totally irrelevant, so I don't know why you continue to quote it like it means anything in the least.....

And even looking at NET- only 3 teams solidly in tourney. Butler in the last 4 in type of situation(normally top only 45-46 are in NCAA tourney). And that's now. If those 8 projected losses happen, lets see what the NET looks like then and then talk.

Sorry but when looking at the situation- the season IS split in 2. OOC play determines the maximum bids possible. If everyone enters conference play but St John's, Marquette, DePaul, and Georgetown- it's going to mean most likely any team going 9-9 in conference play won't make the tourney- except for Marquette and maybe St John's(only if they beat Duke). So that limits the maximum number of bids to how many teams can finish over .500 in conference play. I don't disagree with your statement about Nova having the high ceiling. But if they have 5 OOC losses, their floor is a lot different as well. What I'm saying is not about individual teams. I'm talking about the conference in general. Any team can win 11-12 teams and make the tourney easily. BUT the maximum number of teams is pretty close to set.

Seriously, this type of post should get you banned.

I'm only going to repeat this one final time, as I've already told you multiple times. I use RPI for conference rankings because conference rankings aren't available by NET at the moment (at least, I haven't seen them anywhere). Is it that hard to understand? The rest of my post only focused on NET.

Next time you ask a stupid question, I am putting you on ignore forever. I don't mind a troll, but I won't converse with a dumb troll. That's no fun.

Rest of your post I could very easily dispute, but what's the point? You'll never admit you're wrong about anything, even though you are ALWAYS wrong. It's just a repeat of the last 5 years where you assume worst case scenario about all teams. I understand analytics very well, in the sense that all your projections, while technically possible, have very low odds of actually happening.

Now to your question. Warren Nolan has conference NET. Right now Big East is 4th. Now, I will admit that looking at the average NET ratings, it looks really close between ACC and Big East. 59.26-60.60.

And quick question for you. How many 14 loss teams have made the tourney from the Big East since the split? I'll help you. ZERO. But we have seen 3 13 loss teams not selected.

[adoraz]

Loyola Marymount dropped 40 spots when they lost to UCLA a few weeks ago.... One thing looking at San Francisco and NC State- their 1 loss was against a top 10 opponent. So didn't hurt them as much....

Until the selection committee starts sending 14 and 15 loss teams to the tourney, it's tough to think otherwise. I just do not see the committee sending a ton of 17-15 teams to the tourney in the least.... That would be such a major sea change for the committee. I sure do not think you can count on them all of a sudden opening the flood gates. There's only 1 conference with 20 conference games this year- and it's the Big Ten. And they're projected to have 11 teams with at least 18 wins. With only 2 of the 11 with a 18-13 record. So 9 teams projected from 20 conference game Big Ten with at least 19-12 record entering Big Ten tourney. Yeah, that's not going to lead to a sea change and allow a ton of 14 loss teams into the tourney.

The RPI is totally irrelevant, so I don't know why you continue to quote it like it means anything in the least.....

And even looking at NET- only 3 teams solidly in tourney. Butler in the last 4 in type of situation(normally top only 45-46 are in NCAA tourney). And that's now. If those 8 projected losses happen, lets see what the NET looks like then and then talk.

Sorry but when looking at the situation- the season IS split in 2. OOC play determines the maximum bids possible. If everyone enters conference play but St John's, Marquette, DePaul, and Georgetown- it's going to mean most likely any team going 9-9 in conference play won't make the tourney- except for Marquette and maybe St John's(only if they beat Duke). So that limits the maximum number of bids to how many teams can finish over .500 in conference play. I don't disagree with your statement about Nova having the high ceiling. But if they have 5 OOC losses, their floor is a lot different as well. What I'm saying is not about individual teams. I'm talking about the conference in general. Any team can win 11-12 teams and make the tourney easily. BUT the maximum number of teams is pretty close to set.

Seriously, this type of post should get you banned.

I'm only going to repeat this one final time, as I've already told you multiple times. I use RPI for conference rankings because conference rankings aren't available by NET at the moment (at least, I haven't seen them anywhere). Is it that hard to understand? The rest of my post only focused on NET.

Next time you ask a stupid question, I am putting you on ignore forever. I don't mind a troll, but I won't converse with a dumb troll. That's no fun.

Rest of your post I could very easily dispute, but what's the point? You'll never admit you're wrong about anything, even though you are ALWAYS wrong. It's just a repeat of the last 5 years where you assume worst case scenario about all teams. I understand analytics very well, in the sense that all your projections, while technically possible, have very low odds of actually happening.

Now to your question. Warren Nolan has conference NET. Right now Big East is 4th. Now, I will admit that looking at the average NET ratings, it looks really close between ACC and Big East. 59.26-60.60.

And quick question for you. How many 14 loss teams have made the tourney from the Big East since the split? I'll help you. ZERO. But we have seen 3 13 loss teams not selected.

Warren NET conference ratings are helpful, and show NET conference ratings are nearly identical to RPi conference ratings. In other words, nothing about my argument changed and you were just starting arguments for the sake of it. Again, I don't like wasting time like that with stupid questions. Nobody likes to read this back and forth when it isn't necessary.

As for 14 loss teams... this is such a silly argument and I won't bother to look into all the information you are withholding. Conference play hasn't even started yet, we have no clue which teams will win how many games. Again, I don't have time to play along with hypothetical scenarios like that.

If you haven't figured it out yet, the problem with you is you're the boy who cried wolf. You have had the EXACT same talking point every single year. If you genuinely believe we will have a bunch of teams on the wrong side of the bubble this year (which of course has a higher likelihood than the previous 2-3 years), you need to at a minimum acknowledge that you've been wrong about this in the past.

85% of what we worry about never actually happens. Imagine spending the last 6 years concerned about how the BE would perform, only to have all these wonderful things actually happen.

[stever20]

The problem with this year compared to the other 6 years is that the Big East has never potentially entered conference play this bad.....

2014- 3 with 4+ losses
1 1 loss, 2 2 loss, 4 3 loss, 1 4 loss, 2 5 loss
2015-3 with 4+ losses
1 0 loss, 1 1 loss, 1 2 loss, 4 3 loss, 2 4 loss, 1 7 loss
2016-4 with 4+ losses
1 0 loss, 2 1 loss, 3 2 loss, 1 4 loss, 1 5 loss, 2 6 loss
2017-3 with 4+ losses
2 0 loss, 1 1 loss, 2 2 loss, 2 3 loss, 1 4 loss, 1 6 loss, 1 7 loss
2018-2 with 4+ losses
1 0 loss, 2 1 loss, 3 2 loss, 2 3 loss, 1 4 loss, 1 5 loss
2019 if all projected losses happen- 6 with 4+ losses
1 0 loss, 3 2 loss, 5 4 loss, 1 5 loss
not only would there be more 4+ loss teams, but 3 of the 4 teams with fewer than 4 losses all have really bad SOS that complicates things more. It would be set up with only 31 losses as the worst case scenario quite frankly.

The thing is while yes we don't know which teams will do exactly what, we do know that only 4-5 teams max are going to win more than 9 conference games.

And I don't know how silly of an arguement it is when no Big East team has made the tourney with 14 losses. NONE. So a team with 4 OOC losses, plus 9 conference losses, and 1 BET loss has 14 losses.

I think the short term problem this year is the bottom of the conference has improved a lot. DePaul might win as many games this year as them and St John's won combined(ok- maybe a bit of hyperbole- they won 8 last year). Conference play looks like it's going to be a bloodbath.

[stever20]

The other thing that I feel about RPI/NET is folks are wanting to use RPI more....

part of the reason why?
Avg RPI rating right now- 55.0 with 3 top 30 teams and 6 top 41 teams. 8 top 75 teams. For one of the top 30 teams, 9 tier 1 conference games. For 31-41- 10.
Avg NET rating right now- 60.6 with 2 top 30 teams and 4 top 50 teams. 7 top 75 teams. For one of top 30 teams, 7 tier 1 conference games. For 31-50- 8.

The league is obviously no where near as well set up in NET as they are RPI.

[Xavier4036]

Stever, does this ever get tiresome for you? Making stuff up, projecting the worse-case scenario at all times for the Big East from November through March, twisting and manipulating data all to diminish the Big East - on a Big East board.... yet the conference proves you wrong time and time again.

Big East is a top 3 conference annually, gets 50-70% of the conference in the tournament, 2 out of the last 3 national champions, highest attended conference tournament championship in the country (and at MSG), a great TV contract with FOX that pays big money and nearly every game on national TV, and a group of like-minded basketball focused institutions.

Just stop with your doomsday, worst-case only scenarios for the Big East - because none of what you write here has proven to actually happen in reality over the last 5 years.

[sju88grad]

Stever, you are exhausting......