Jump to content

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, HB said:

USC got hosed.  This whole stystem blows.  Devalues conferences 

Some conferences should be devalued.  That’s why there are 1 bid leagues.  But USC and Nebraska didn’t finish 10-8 or 9-7 and get passed over by 8-10 teams. 

 

The whole end of season arguement is maddening as well.  Obviously it matters if Notre Dame was so close. You can’t pick and choose when how teams finish up matter in some cases and doesn’t matter in other cases.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TZAHL said:

Some conferences should be devalued.  That’s why there are 1 bid leagues.  But USC and Nebraska didn’t finish 10-8 or 9-7 and get passed over by 8-10 teams. 

 

The whole end of season arguement is maddening as well.  Obviously it matters if Notre Dame was so close. You can’t pick and choose when how teams finish up matter in some cases and doesn’t matter in other cases.  

 

Certainly not a good look for the committee this year.  Teams were very scattered.  It didn't look like there was one metric that they focused on and favored more than another metric.  Whoever posted the graphic of someone throwing darts at a board had it correct.  Something needs to change.  Soon.  Whether there is a hard metric that you focus on or whatever it is.  Something has got to change.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TZAHL said:

Some conferences should be devalued.  That’s why there are 1 bid leagues.  But USC and Nebraska didn’t finish 10-8 or 9-7 and get passed over by 8-10 teams. 

 

The whole end of season arguement is maddening as well.  Obviously it matters if Notre Dame was so close. You can’t pick and choose when how teams finish up matter in some cases and doesn’t matter in other cases.  

We just pick and choose when to have Palmer "injured" next year.   If we have a tough game against a team, we could say we didn't have Palmer.

 

You know what's even more maddening, is we could have beat PSU and Illinois, went 15 - 3, and 24 - 8, and still missed the tournament.  We were no better off than MTSU,  which Wisconsin, Indiana, Maryland probably would have won their conference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MilesDavis said:

Ours as of right now. It’s a metric that continues as the postseason finishes. TCU finished like 35 when they win the NIT

I’m assuming a loss at MSU won’t hurt it and a win would make it go up.  So we do pretty much have the same beef as usc just with a different metric. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shawn Eichorst's Toupee said:

I've looked at literally no other metric, but merely looking at conference finishes makes this seem like a head scratcher:

 

USC: finishes 2nd in PAC 12, gets 1 seed in NIT

Arizona State: finishes 9th in PAC 12, gets 11 seed in NCAA

To add on, when its put up or shut up time, ASU gets bounced in the first round, USC makes it to the title game. I have never seen winning so devalued in a sport before. Good God.

Edited by The Polish Rifle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i can understand why we didn't make it. that's fine, all things considered (but I am not fine with barely making the NIT field. that's a hose).

But this USC case is pretty egregious. 

 

This is one of the worst handjobs I've seen the committee perform, but that could also be my memory. 

 

All we can do is just be fans of our team and cheer them on, and hope like hell that when they sleep at night and dream, they all dream of ripping out every black heart of every person on every NCAA committee of all time and eating it in front of a boys choir. 

 

Okay, maybe not that many hearts, because that would be a really long dream...but still.....

 

Get 'em next year. Hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shawn Eichorst's Toupee said:

I've looked at literally no other metric, but merely looking at conference finishes makes this seem like a head scratcher:

 

USC: finishes 2nd in PAC 12, gets 1 seed in NIT

Arizona State: finishes 9th in PAC 12, gets 11 seed in NCAA

 

This committee's body of work is a steaming pile best flushed down the toilet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, brfrad said:

We just pick and choose when to have Palmer "injured" next year.   If we have a tough game against a team, we could say we didn't have Palmer.

 

You know what's even more maddening, is we could have beat PSU and Illinois, went 15 - 3, and 24 - 8, and still missed the tournament.  We were no better off than MTSU,  which Wisconsin, Indiana, Maryland probably would have won their conference.

I'm fairly sure we would have been in if we would have beat Penn State and Illinois. Our RPI would have been in the mid-30s. Quad 1 wins still wouldn't have been there, but that's just one aspect. It just became important to Nebraska because most of our other metrics were in the 50s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, HuskerActuary said:

I'm fairly sure we would have been in if we would have beat Penn State and Illinois. Our RPI would have been in the mid-30s. Quad 1 wins still wouldn't have been there, but that's just one aspect. It just became important to Nebraska because most of our other metrics were in the 50s.

USC had a 34 RPI, and were left out.  They also had wins on the road over NCAA bubble teams.  Illinois and Penn State were not bubble teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, brfrad said:

USC had a 34 RPI, and were left out.  They also had wins on the road over NCAA bubble teams.  Illinois and Penn State were not bubble teams.

Yeah, and USC being left out may have been the worst choice made by the committee. They should have been in. And I believe that if Nebraska won those two games, at 24-8, we would have been in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, HuskerActuary said:

I'm fairly sure we would have been in if we would have beat Penn State and Illinois. Our RPI would have been in the mid-30s. Quad 1 wins still wouldn't have been there, but that's just one aspect. It just became important to Nebraska because most of our other metrics were in the 50s.

 

30 minutes ago, brfrad said:

USC had a 34 RPI, and were left out.  They also had wins on the road over NCAA bubble teams.  Illinois and Penn State were not bubble teams.

 

Yeah that's hard to swallow. The Pac-12 was the worst power conference once again this year, but USC did make a solid case to be in the tournament. Once I found out USC didn't make it in, it made me think that we may have needed to make the Big Ten championship game and even then that may not have been enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×