Bubble conversations
- Thread starter UR Fan 2
- Start date
One thing I really wish the committee would make evident at some point is what percentage of games in a certain quadrant or of a certain type teams are expected to win. I suppose we can figure it out in the end, but every year it seems that P5 schools are rewarded for winning one or two games late in the year against a top-50 type team. Well great, but if you were 3-10 against top-50 teams before that, is it really meaningful that you are now 4-10 against them? I think there should be some rough across-the-board standard there. And maybe there is, who knows.
I don't get what you are saying. How exactly do you think conference record is used? If an 8-10 team gets in over a 9-9 or better team, how can you say conference records are relevant? I don't see where the NCAA says they use conference records. Looks like they look at conference schedules and results, without focusing on the final conference record. History proves this to be true. Otherwise, a team below another would never get in over them. Was it relevant for us to be above VCU in the standings a few years ago? Was it relevant for St. Bona. to finish tied for 1st a few years ago? Was it relevant when all these teams with below .500 records got in over teams above them in their conference? When it comes to bubble teams, how are you saying conference records are relevant? In what way?
I agree. It is so frustrating when a team is even worse than what you mentioned (maybe 1-7 or 2-9 against the top 50), and then they get a win over a borderline top 25 team (often at home), and we hear, that might be enough to get them in the dance. Ugghhhhhh!!!!
I think you're mixing up relevant vs. most important. Conference record is relevant, meaning it is one thing they look at. The scenario you just laid out implies it would be THE determining factor, which I'm not saying.
I'm not saying it, the NCAA is. It's up to them to decide how to use it.
????? So, if the NCAA is saying it, how are they saying conference records are relevant when Oklahoma went 7-11 in the Big 12 last year (7-12 after losing their 1st round tourney game) and got a 9 seed?
Back to what you said, if Arkansas ends up on the bubble, in what way will their conference record be relevant?
Back to what you said, if Arkansas ends up on the bubble, in what way will their conference record be relevant?
I think the idea is that conference record is one factor that could be used. If you are 6-12 in conference and finished 10th but all six wins were against top-25 teams and you also did great OOC, you might make it. If you go 12-6 but only beat bottom-feeders and had a bad OOC, you might not. Etc. It's like a sliding scale factor.
They intentionally don't make selection criteria clear so they can justify any selection they want.
They haven't even sold out the game yet. Unless Toppin gets rerouted to Hawaii, I don't see a path to victory for the lamb chops.
Lunardi thinks conference record is important.
The NCAA is saying conference record can be used in selecting at large bids, Oklahoma getting in last year doesn't disprove this. Apparently they had enough other positives that outweighed their bad conference record.
Which is exactly my point when I say conference records are irrelevant. Your examples used the whole season when deciding a bid, which is exactly what the committee does. If conference records were relevant a 6-12 conference team or Oklahoma at 7-11 last year would NEVER get in.
Oklahoma getting in at 7-11 does not disprove that the committee does not worry about conference records? Really? What does this tweet from lunardi have to do with anything? He has had plenty of sub .500 conference teams in his bracket. If you read his question and answer tweets, he tries to give short answers and be funny. In this case, all he accomplished was contradicting himself because I think he had Oklahoma in last year. So, how can he penalize Arkansas this year and not Oklahoma last year for their conference records? Oh, I know. Because he looked at their whole season. All of their games. That is my point. He should have said because Arkansas' overall resume isn't good enough right now. Not, because they are 4-8 IC. That is only 12 games of their season. The whole season is looked at. Which is why 36 out of 94 brackets on bracket matrix have Arkansas in the dance right now. Obviously, at 4-8 in the SEC, if conference records were relevant, 0 out of 94 brackets would have Arkansas in the dance right now.
So, you are wrong when you say they look at conference records. They don't. What you quoted from the committee rules shows that they do not look at conference record. It shows that they look at the imbalance schedules in a conference, which could explain why they can pick teams with lower conference records getting in over teams above them in the conference.
But, I give up. Even though a 6-12 conference team has made it, and just last year a 7-11 conference team made it, sounds like you are holding onto your how is Arkansas mentioned with a 4-8 conference record question no matter the facts.
Last edited:
I think we're all mostly saying the same thing here. The team that is 6-12 in conference and gets an at large is an outlier and just have a ton of great wins. The team that is 12-6 in a good conference and doesn’t must not have many good wins. Generally speaking, going 6-12 in conference isn’t a great plan for making the tournament.
And I would say that in a league like ours, conference finish may factor into things more than in P5 leagues. There may only be one at large from the A10. Tough to justify taking the fourth or fifth place team, as an example, unless the OOC wins that team has are much more significant.
And I would say that in a league like ours, conference finish may factor into things more than in P5 leagues. There may only be one at large from the A10. Tough to justify taking the fourth or fifth place team, as an example, unless the OOC wins that team has are much more significant.
If the committee is looking at overall record and IC record is part of that, aren't they looking at IC record? Having said that, I would love to see a 50% IC record qualifier as part of the equation for making the dance.
But, in your examples, again you are showing the whole season being looked at, which is my point. Of course, you want to finish as high as possible in your conference because it means you had a lot of wins. And, the more wins and fewer losses you have overall, the better chance you have at the dance. No question it's really really hard for a 6-12 conference team to make the dance because that is 12 losses in barely more than half their schedule. But, because the committee looks at a whole season, we do have examples of this being done.
My only point was this - 4700 initially said conference record is irrelevant. The selection committee says it can be used, so to me that says it must be relevant. To what extent, I don't know. It might be the least important factor they are allowed to use for all I know. But they are allowed to use it during their selections so it is relevant.
Go Spiders!
Go Spiders!
I can compromise a little here. We might disagree on the meaning of the committee rules that you posted, but that goes back to giving the committee an out to use whatever they want to justify getting teams in. I can see where the committee might say they were regular season champs of their conference when discussing a team, so there maybe could be a few examples out there of conference records being relevant. So I'll give you that. Enjoyed our debate. Go Spiders!
We have never finished with a better conference record than VCU since they joined the A10. (We will this year though!)
If you're talking about the year we tied them for fourth, and had the tiebreaker (only used for seeding the A10 tournament), that has no relevance to this discussion. Nobody is saying the committee uses conference tournament tiebreakers in their decision process. Besides, VCU won the A10 tournament that year so they were the Automatic Qualifier.
Last edited:
Hopefully Dayton destroys VCU by 25+ tonight and finishes their season.
I believe Dayton is favored by 3
SLU at UMass is the other interesting game tonight. UMass home court seems to suck the energy out of every opposing team...
Bracket matrix has us as the First Team out, appearing in 38 of 93 of the brackets they follow. I like this site because it gives you a look at all of the brackets out there, rather than just the big 2 of Palm and Lunardi.
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
Just keep winning baby and our position is going to improve.
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
Just keep winning baby and our position is going to improve.
38 of 94, one more showed up with this:
BUBBLE ACTION
Last Four In
Virginia, Indiana, Stanford, Utah State
First Four Out
Georgetown, Arkansas, Richmond, Mississippi State
Next Four Out
Alabama, VCU, NC State, UNC-Greensboro
Rick, looking at some of these brackets site, yes indeed you could have your own bracket. Lots of dudes with a lot of spare time on their hands. Obviously, I'm partial to the ones with the Spiders in their brackets though.
Some guy blew up Twitter last night with an intentionally random bracket that had UNC in, George Mason as one of the last ones in or out (can't remember which) and some other random stuff. Pretty funny.
The majority of teams with losing records that have gotten in have come in very recent past. It was very infrequent if you go back say from 2015 or prior. I've seen stats on that and wish I could pull it up but can't remember where it was now. That's because the system is even rigged more to the big conferences.
And more interesting, but in no way surprising, these teams with losing conf records historically perform poorly in the tournament.
NCAA needs to wise up here.
One other thing always remember when looking at any bracket, they are factoring 0 conf bid stealers at the moment. So if you're the last one or two in you're in an even more precarious position.
And more interesting, but in no way surprising, these teams with losing conf records historically perform poorly in the tournament.
NCAA needs to wise up here.
One other thing always remember when looking at any bracket, they are factoring 0 conf bid stealers at the moment. So if you're the last one or two in you're in an even more precarious position.
A team with a conference losing record should never receive an at-large bid. They shouldn't make the NIT either. These post-season tournaments are for winning teams-teams that have had a great season.
Similar threads
