Too early for blind resumes?

[Hall2012]

Looks like that's all I'm getting, so for anyone who hasn't looked it up yet:

A. TCU
B. Oklahoma St.
C. Seton Hall
D. Kansas State
E. Georgetown

Obviously this varies heavily on opinion, but as of his last bracket (Monday), Lunardi has the 3 Big XII schools in, Seton Hall last 4 out, and Georgetown nowhere to be seen. And yet, there's little to separate them. So right now he has 7 Big XII teams in and 5 Big East. It just as easily could be the opposite. Kansas State is a prime example of the kind of team the committee punishes for a terrible non-conference schedule. While Georgetown, despite the most losses has by far the best wins of the group and played a very tough schedule. While they're not even on Lunardi's radar, they're an example of the type of team the committee may reward despite a less than stellar record.

So my point is, I don't think that 9-9, .500 conference record is a golden number this year. Our bubble teams are competing against other bubble teams, not a static number. There will likely be teams getting in the tourney with a sub-.500 conference record this year. We just need them to be Big East teams.

[stever20]

Looks like that's all I'm getting, so for anyone who hasn't looked it up yet:

A. TCU
B. Oklahoma St.
C. Seton Hall
D. Kansas State
E. Georgetown

Obviously this varies heavily on opinion, but as of his last bracket (Monday), Lunardi has the 3 Big XII schools in, Seton Hall last 4 out, and Georgetown nowhere to be seen. And yet, there's little to separate them. So right now he has 7 Big XII teams in and 5 Big East. It just as easily could be the opposite. Kansas State is a prime example of the kind of team the committee punishes for a terrible non-conference schedule. While Georgetown, despite the most losses has by far the best wins of the group and played a very tough schedule. While they're not even on Lunardi's radar, they're an example of the type of team the committee may reward despite a less than stellar record.

So my point is, I don't think that 9-9, .500 conference record is a golden number this year. Our bubble teams are competing against other bubble teams, not a static number. There will likely be teams getting in the tourney with a sub-.500 conference record this year. We just need them to be Big East teams.

The thing for Georgetown if they don't get the .500 conference record is with all their OOC losses, they would be having at least 14 losses before the BET. So 15 losses assuming the Hoya's don't win the BET(where they would get in regardless). 15 loss teams just do not make the tourney at large any more.

[Hall2012]

Looks like that's all I'm getting, so for anyone who hasn't looked it up yet:

A. TCU
B. Oklahoma St.
C. Seton Hall
D. Kansas State
E. Georgetown

Obviously this varies heavily on opinion, but as of his last bracket (Monday), Lunardi has the 3 Big XII schools in, Seton Hall last 4 out, and Georgetown nowhere to be seen. And yet, there's little to separate them. So right now he has 7 Big XII teams in and 5 Big East. It just as easily could be the opposite. Kansas State is a prime example of the kind of team the committee punishes for a terrible non-conference schedule. While Georgetown, despite the most losses has by far the best wins of the group and played a very tough schedule. While they're not even on Lunardi's radar, they're an example of the type of team the committee may reward despite a less than stellar record.

So my point is, I don't think that 9-9, .500 conference record is a golden number this year. Our bubble teams are competing against other bubble teams, not a static number. There will likely be teams getting in the tourney with a sub-.500 conference record this year. We just need them to be Big East teams.

The thing for Georgetown if they don't get the .500 conference record is with all their OOC losses, they would be having at least 14 losses before the BET. So 15 losses assuming the Hoya's don't win the BET(where they would get in regardless). 15 loss teams just do not make the tourney at large any more.

It's true, history isn't on their side. No team with more than 14 losses has made the tourney since expansion. Furthermore (based on the CBS source I'm looking at, 2012 UConn was the last team to reach the NCAA tournament with a sub-.500 conference record. So based on past history, it seems one of Georgetown and Seton Hall is f'd because there doesn't seem to be a realistic way they both reach .500.

The good news is, we're not competing against history, we're competing against the rest of this year's bubble. The committee needs to find 36 teams for at large bids. With only 2 possible (and unlikely) mid-major bid thief scenarios, there's room for error. Pretty much all the power conference bubble teams are hanging under .500 right now. So who does the committee take? An 8-10 Big East team or a 10-8 AAC/A10 team?

If there's a year for those trends to be broken, this is looking like it.

[stever20]

Looks like that's all I'm getting, so for anyone who hasn't looked it up yet:

A. TCU
B. Oklahoma St.
C. Seton Hall
D. Kansas State
E. Georgetown

Obviously this varies heavily on opinion, but as of his last bracket (Monday), Lunardi has the 3 Big XII schools in, Seton Hall last 4 out, and Georgetown nowhere to be seen. And yet, there's little to separate them. So right now he has 7 Big XII teams in and 5 Big East. It just as easily could be the opposite. Kansas State is a prime example of the kind of team the committee punishes for a terrible non-conference schedule. While Georgetown, despite the most losses has by far the best wins of the group and played a very tough schedule. While they're not even on Lunardi's radar, they're an example of the type of team the committee may reward despite a less than stellar record.

So my point is, I don't think that 9-9, .500 conference record is a golden number this year. Our bubble teams are competing against other bubble teams, not a static number. There will likely be teams getting in the tourney with a sub-.500 conference record this year. We just need them to be Big East teams.

The thing for Georgetown if they don't get the .500 conference record is with all their OOC losses, they would be having at least 14 losses before the BET. So 15 losses assuming the Hoya's don't win the BET(where they would get in regardless). 15 loss teams just do not make the tourney at large any more.

It's true, history isn't on their side. No team with more than 14 losses has made the tourney since expansion. Furthermore (based on the CBS source I'm looking at, 2012 UConn was the last team to reach the NCAA tournament with a sub-.500 conference record. So based on past history, it seems one of Georgetown and Seton Hall is f'd because there doesn't seem to be a realistic way they both reach .500.

The good news is, we're not competing against history, we're competing against the rest of this year's bubble. The committee needs to find 36 teams for at large bids. With only 2 possible (and unlikely) mid-major bid thief scenarios, there's room for error. Pretty much all the power conference bubble teams are hanging under .500 right now. So who does the committee take? An 8-10 Big East team or a 10-8 AAC/A10 team?

If there's a year for those trends to be broken, this is looking like it.

I get what you're saying. But my point, especially for Georgetown, is that 17-15 teams just do not get considered ever. Seton Hall may have a good shot, should they get 8 wins- and 18 overall. It's the overall record that's hurting Georgetown now, not just the conference record.

Also another problem in this scenario is the AAC 3rd team for instance could easily finish like Memphis at 22-9 and 12-6 in conference play. Then pick up #23 in the conference tourney vs 6 seed.

[stever20]

I think it would be really interesting if the committee did start(actually restart) considering teams like a 17-15 Georgetown. I think it's possible, but I wouldn't bet anything that mattered on it quite frankly. I mean, I don't think there's any doubt that Georgetown is one of the 36 best at large teams. But the basketball committee is a lot more of a more deserving rather than the best(which is more what college football CFP does). It'll be interesting to see if that changes soon.

[Hall2012]

I get what you're saying. But my point, especially for Georgetown, is that 17-15 teams just do not get considered ever. Seton Hall may have a good shot, should they get 8 wins- and 18 overall. It's the overall record that's hurting Georgetown now, not just the conference record.

Also another problem in this scenario is the AAC 3rd team for instance could easily finish like Memphis at 22-9 and 12-6 in conference play. Then pick up #23 in the conference tourney vs 6 seed.

For the most part I agree with you, and I'm by no means saying anything's guaranteed, or even particularly likely. Georgetown will almost certainly finish with a lot of losses for an NCAA team. I just feel like the selection committee repeatedly makes their point on non conference SOS by punishing teams that play weak schedules. This Georgetown team is the perfect chance for them to double down on that stance and reward a difficult schedule, and it would set a great precedent encouraging teams to challenge themselves moving forward.

Thank of it this way. If you replace those Maryland, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma State losses with 3 wins over RPI 150ish teams, now the Hoyas are 16-7 and probably sitting pretty. Yes, Georgetown has 10 losses, but 9 of them are to RPI top 50 opponents. And they have proven themselves with 3 top 15 wins. They may get left out because of a high loss total, but to me, that penalizes them for playing a tough schedule and sets a dangerous precedent. If they can split their last 8 games and avoid a bad loss to SJU or DePaul, I think the Hoyas deserve serious consideration.

[Savannah Jay]

Based on very quick research, it doesn't look like any team has ever received an at large with 15 losses. A number have with 14 losses, include 16-14 records by 1991 Nova and 2001 Georgia. So the position that 17-15 teams "don't ever get considered" might be a tad overstated (because they probably have been at least considered). It's not unheard of for a team 2 games over .500 record get in the tourney.

Relative to Memphis taking a bid from the Big East (or anyone else), they have a steep hill to climb. They have an RPI in the 80s and RPI "killer" games looming against South Florida ad Tulane. I think they need better than 6-3 the rest of the way (which would get them to 22-9) and one of the wins needs to be Cincy. I am not sure anyone has received an at large with an RPI higher than 67 in the past 15 years.

Found this nugget from a message board a couple years ago illustrating the bids by RPI range.
http://i.imgur.com/mvpJLAx.png

[stever20]

Based on very quick research, it doesn't look like any team has ever received an at large with 15 losses. A number have with 14 losses, include 16-14 records by 1991 Nova and 2001 Georgia. So the position that 17-15 teams "don't ever get considered" might be a tad overstated (because they probably have been at least considered). It's not unheard of for a team 2 games over .500 record get in the tourney.

Relative to Memphis taking a bid from the Big East (or anyone else), they have a steep hill to climb. They have an RPI in the 80s and RPI "killer" games looming against South Florida ad Tulane. I think they need better than 6-3 the rest of the way (which would get them to 22-9) and one of the wins needs to be Cincy. I am not sure anyone has received an at large with an RPI higher than 67 in the past 15 years.

Found this nugget from a message board a couple years ago illustrating the bids by RPI range.
http://i.imgur.com/mvpJLAx.png

The way the committee did things back in 1991 and 2001 is a far cry from how they are now. Had exactly 1 since 2001 make it with 14 losses- Arizona in 2008 who finished at 19-14. In the expanded schedule era(where teams are playing 32+ games)- you've needed more than just to be 2 games over .500. I think if Georgetown can get to 18 wins, no matter 14 or 15 losses, they would be pretty safe.

As far as Memphis- looked at RPI forecast, and if they get to 22-9, their projected RPI is 62. They just make the final in the tourney, they'd be likely in pretty easily with how weak this bubble is.

[Savannah Jay]

Based on very quick research, it doesn't look like any team has ever received an at large with 15 losses. A number have with 14 losses, include 16-14 records by 1991 Nova and 2001 Georgia. So the position that 17-15 teams "don't ever get considered" might be a tad overstated (because they probably have been at least considered). It's not unheard of for a team 2 games over .500 record get in the tourney.

Relative to Memphis taking a bid from the Big East (or anyone else), they have a steep hill to climb. They have an RPI in the 80s and RPI "killer" games looming against South Florida ad Tulane. I think they need better than 6-3 the rest of the way (which would get them to 22-9) and one of the wins needs to be Cincy. I am not sure anyone has received an at large with an RPI higher than 67 in the past 15 years.

Found this nugget from a message board a couple years ago illustrating the bids by RPI range.
http://i.imgur.com/mvpJLAx.png

The way the committee did things back in 1991 and 2001 is a far cry from how they are now. Had exactly 1 since 2001 make it with 14 losses- Arizona in 2008 who finished at 19-14. In the expanded schedule era(where teams are playing 32+ games)- you've needed more than just to be 2 games over .500. I think if Georgetown can get to 18 wins, no matter 14 or 15 losses, they would be pretty safe.

As far as Memphis- looked at RPI forecast, and if they get to 22-9, their projected RPI is 62. They just make the final in the tourney, they'd be likely in pretty easily with how weak this bubble is.

Is there recent history of mid-majors getting at large bids with an RPI in the 60s?

[stever20]

Based on very quick research, it doesn't look like any team has ever received an at large with 15 losses. A number have with 14 losses, include 16-14 records by 1991 Nova and 2001 Georgia. So the position that 17-15 teams "don't ever get considered" might be a tad overstated (because they probably have been at least considered). It's not unheard of for a team 2 games over .500 record get in the tourney.

Relative to Memphis taking a bid from the Big East (or anyone else), they have a steep hill to climb. They have an RPI in the 80s and RPI "killer" games looming against South Florida ad Tulane. I think they need better than 6-3 the rest of the way (which would get them to 22-9) and one of the wins needs to be Cincy. I am not sure anyone has received an at large with an RPI higher than 67 in the past 15 years.

Found this nugget from a message board a couple years ago illustrating the bids by RPI range.
http://i.imgur.com/mvpJLAx.png

The way the committee did things back in 1991 and 2001 is a far cry from how they are now. Had exactly 1 since 2001 make it with 14 losses- Arizona in 2008 who finished at 19-14. In the expanded schedule era(where teams are playing 32+ games)- you've needed more than just to be 2 games over .500. I think if Georgetown can get to 18 wins, no matter 14 or 15 losses, they would be pretty safe.

As far as Memphis- looked at RPI forecast, and if they get to 22-9, their projected RPI is 62. They just make the final in the tourney, they'd be likely in pretty easily with how weak this bubble is.

Is there recent history of mid-majors getting at large bids with an RPI in the 60s?

First off, I don't think the AAC is looked at as a mid-major.

2nd off, even if it was- last year- Tulsa was 58. Temple was 60. If Memphis made the final, they would be in the low-mid 50's.

also- Vandy last year was 63. Syracuse was 72.