Nebraska on the Selection Committee Board

[HuskerActuary]

We are probably around the eighth team out right now. We are starting to show up on quite a few "next four out"s on the brackets that have been updated since yesterday on Bracket Matrix. Unlike what Shelby Mast says, I definitely think we'll be nearing the true bubble with a win tomorrow... i.e. showing up in at least, say, 10% of brackets.

Edited January 28, 2018 by HuskerActuary

[AuroranHusker]

4 minutes ago, HuskerActuary said:

We are probably around the eighth team out right now. We are starting to show up on quite a few "next four out"s on the brackets that have been updated since yesterday on Bracket Matrix. Unlike what Shelby Mast says, I definitely think we'll be nearing the true bubble with a win tomorrow... i.e. showing up in at least, say, 10% of brackets.

 

What does Shelby Mast say about Wisconsin-Nebraska?

[hskr4life]

At some point, and I am kind of at this point, you just have to realize that we can only play the schedule we have and you have to start looking the more we keep winning.  At some point the "crap league," "crap schedule," "limited good wins and bad losses," has to at least be paired with "we have a team that has won 5 in a row with 3/5 on the road and that 5 game stretch includes wins @Minnesota and @Wisconsin.

 

I don't care how good or bad a league is perceived to be, it is still tough to win on the road no matter who you play.  So a good showing these next two games would be nice.

[HuskerActuary]

1 minute ago, AuroranHusker said:

 

What does Shelby Mast say about Wisconsin-Nebraska?

https://twitter.com/BracketWAG/status/957579188994654208

[AuroranHusker]

Just now, HuskerActuary said:

https://twitter.com/BracketWAG/status/957579188994654208

 

That's about 10 wins in a row. Sheesh, no pressure. haha

[HuskerFever]

32 minutes ago, tcp said:

...we can't forget that most of the committee watch a lot of game sat the end of the season...

 

And we'll be sitting at home a week earlier than other teams. This make me a little uneasy thinking about it at times.

[hskr4life]

Just now, HuskerFever said:

 

And we'll be sitting at home a week earlier than other teams. This make me a little uneasy thinking about it at times.

 

But all of their attention will be focused on our Big 10 tourney run the week before 

[Art Vandalay]

1 hour ago, Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty said:

 

I think people in this thread need to stop referencing the Big Ten. The selection committee has said in the past that they don't evaluate conferences, they evaluate teams. That means two things: they don't care about our conference record, and they don't care about our conference placement. 14-4 and 4th place are meaningless. The committee will never say, "well, we only have four Big Ten teams in right now, and we feel like they deserve a fifth." It is all about the team's resume.

 

Here is what matters:

1. Whatever analytical metric they use to evaluate teams, whether it's RPI, KenPom, or something else.

2. Quadrant Records, specifically how did you fare in the Q1 and Q2 games? They like to see that you are capable of winning big games.

 

Neither of these two measures will be in our favor. Our RPI and KenPom ratings are stuck in the low- to mid-60s. And when I say stuck, I mean stuck. Even if we finish 7-0, those ratings are not going to be much better than 50. Finish 6-1, and the rating gets worse. If we then got bounced in the first game at MSG, that'd put us at 23-10 with a very iffy RPI in the mid- to low-50s. If you matched that resume up with our 2014 resume when we were 19-12 with the #48 RPI and some quality wins, the 2018 team would lose that battle.

 

People are getting too enamored with the win total and the conference standings and not focusing on the important things. Unless we really impress the committee in the Big Ten Tourney with a big win over (most likely) Michigan, then a close loss in the semis against Purdue... 22 wins will not be enough with our resume, and 23 will be very close.

 

If you believe conference affiliation means nothing I have some ocean front property out by Elkhorn for you. 

 

It does not guarantee anything for sure but it happens every year a few teams from the Power leagues get in over less leagues and they should because most of the time they are better teams but the metrics might not show that. They play tougher teams day in day out over the season and the people in that room take that under consideration. We just need to keep winning, if we finish in 4th place alone in the BIG10 they are going to have a hard time keeping us out if they put Michigan in. Better conference record, destroyed them heads up, etc that is where the eye test stuff has to come in. 

[Swan88]

If we keep winning, we’ll have our shot at one-or more ranked teams in the B1G Tournament.

There’s way too much agonizing-over-schedule these days: if we keep winning, we’re in; if we don’t, we aren’t.

[ATupe]

It is very hard to believe that if we win out or lose one more to end regular season, we won't get in.  We'd be on a heck of a role, you just don't see them leave teams like us out in year's past.  Recency seems to be important to the committee.

[Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty]

56 minutes ago, Art Vandalay said:

 

If you believe conference affiliation means nothing I have some ocean front property out by Elkhorn for you. 

 

It does not guarantee anything for sure but it happens every year a few teams from the Power leagues get in over less leagues and they should because most of the time they are better teams but the metrics might not show that. They play tougher teams day in day out over the season and the people in that room take that under consideration. We just need to keep winning, if we finish in 4th place alone in the BIG10 they are going to have a hard time keeping us out if they put Michigan in. Better conference record, destroyed them heads up, etc that is where the eye test stuff has to come in. 

 

Can you provide some examples where a Power Conference team gets in over a mid-major, when the PC team has a notably worse RPI and worse record against quality opponents, and where seemingly a big reason they got in is because they had a good conference record? If that were the case, shouldn't Washington in 2012 have gotten a bid? They finished 1st in the Pac-12 with a 21-10 (14-4) record. But since their resume didn't support it (lack of big wins, RPI in the 70s), they were NIT-bound.

 

Obviously the Power Conferences get more bids in general, but that's also when the metrics support it. You say the PC teams play tougher teams day-in day-out, which is true, but that's also reflected in the metrics. I would argue that any time a mid-major seemingly gets snubbed, it's because the committee truly felt the PC team had the better overall resume.

 

Even if it's true that the committee considers conference standings, that still won't work in our favor this year. Currently, the Big Ten is sixth in conference RPI. The last two years, the sixth conference received four (2017 Pac-12) and three (2016 SEC) bids. We just aren't used to the Big Ten being so down like it is this year, so it's hard to wrap our minds around the 4 seed missing the dance.

Edited January 29, 2018 by Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty

[Swan88]

“Currently, the Big Ten is sixth in conference RPI.”

 

So . . . how is a conference to raise its RPI once it gets into conference play?  The answer is, under current projections, “It can’t.”  

Are we saying that a conference making a run in November and December (or that gets lucky around the holidays) is locked into a high RPI for March?  Or a conference with a bunch of newcomers and a tough-go in the early season is relegated to mostly-NIT?  That’s silliness, bordering on the ridiculous.  

Teams—and conferences—progress and regress over the course of a season: and that’s patently obvious in the current season.

Here’s betting the fourteen-team B1G does better than the current three- or four-team projection.

[49r]

@Swan88 I really like the SEC/Big 12 challenge being this weekend (it's a great slot for it being between the off week before the Super Bowl).  I'd love to see the B1G/ACC or Gavitt Games during the same weekend too.

[hskr4life]

5 minutes ago, Swan88 said:

“Currently, the Big Ten is sixth in conference RPI.”

 

So . . . how is a conference to raise its RPI once it gets into conference play?  The answer is, under current projections, “It can’t.”  

Are we saying that a conference making a run in November and December (or that gets lucky around the holidays) is locked into a high RPI for March?  Or a conference with a bunch of newcomers and a tough-go in the early season is relegated to mostly-NIT?  That’s silliness, bordering on the ridiculous.  

Teams—and conferences—progress and regress over the course of a season: and that’s patently obvious in the current season.

Here’s betting the fourteen-team B1G does better than the current three- or four-team projection.

 

Interesting take here.  Actually, that is a really good question.  We had a lot of young B1G teams early on and some teams that were still trying to gel.  Also, Purdue lost to Western Kentucky and Tennessee, and hasn't lost since.

 

C-USA is an interesting example

 

Middle Tennessee is a great start.  They lead the conference yet their best win is over fellow counterpart Western Kentucky.  They also boast losses to Belmont and Marshall.  They are projecting to be on the bubble and are even in some brackets.

 

Old Dominion is tied for 2nd in that conference and is projected on the bubble in some places.  Their best wins are Dayton and Indiana State.  They have solid losses to William and Mary and Temple. 

 

Western Kentucky has lost to Middle Tennessee and Belmont along with Missouri State, Ohio, and Wisconsin.  Not real bad losses.  However they have beaten Purdue when they stunk it up in paradise and SMU.  

 

So does this league deserve 2 teams in?  It's looking like that could happen if MTSU and WKU win a majority of their games except against each other.  We should certainly be in over the second place team if we were on the bubble.  If we are chastised for not playing the best competition in the Big 10, you have to do the same for those teams that play in lesser conferences.  However, they seem to be aided by strong beginnings and not who they are playing now.

 

The bubble is certainly a relm where you can get lost in conversations for days if you want to...   

[royalfan]

18 minutes ago, Swan88 said:

“Currently, the Big Ten is sixth in conference RPI.”

 

So . . . how is a conference to raise its RPI once it gets into conference play?  The answer is, under current projections, “It can’t.”  

Are we saying that a conference making a run in November and December (or that gets lucky around the holidays) is locked into a high RPI for March?  Or a conference with a bunch of newcomers and a tough-go in the early season is relegated to mostly-NIT?  That’s silliness, bordering on the ridiculous.  

Teams—and conferences—progress and regress over the course of a season: and that’s patently obvious in the current season.

Here’s betting the fourteen-team B1G does better than the current three- or four-team projection.

 

Plus when you consider that the Big 10 has elite coaching the teams get better, the league gets better.  Too much reliance on those early season games would be a big mistake and I agree the selection folks are somewhat unlikely to make it.  The prestige of the league in general, will give some benefit of doubt when human nature is involved.  No matter how you slice it, it would sure be nice if we won the Penn St and or Kansas game.  Flip side, we are in deep trouble without buzzer beater win.  

[royalfan]

Things like Rutgers being 348 in KenPom non conference strength of schedule just cannot happen.  It is pathetic and weighs the entire league down.  

[hskr4life]

Just now, royalfan said:

 

Plus when you consider that the Big 10 has elite coaching the teams get better, the league gets better.  Too much reliance on those early season games would be a big mistake and I agree the selection folks are somewhat unlikely to make it.  The prestige of the league in general, will give some benefit of doubt when human nature is involved.  No matter how you slice it, it would sure be nice if we won the Penn St and or Kansas game.  Flip side, we are in deep trouble without buzzer beater win.  

 

This I think is bigger than the losses to KU and @PSU.  We have a long long ways to climb if we don't win that game.  A lot longer than we currently do.

 

NCAA teams don't lose games like Illinois at home.  That was close.  I think it shows that.. in the end... it will all work itself out.

[rr52]

As of late this afternoon Bracketmatrix had updated (only 24 of 91 brackets were updated today) and Huskers were still only listed on only 1. Purdue-#1, MSU-#3, OSU-#5 and Michigan-#8 are listed. Maryland is in next 4 out and Huskers are 14th team out. I think it's very safe to say that these 6 teams are only ones still alive for NCAA tourney unless one of the other 8 would win conference tourney. 6 teams already have 6 conference losses and 3 others have 5 and I can't imagine any of them winning there final 8 or 9 games especially with most of them having RPI's in the 100's to negate any chance of getting Big Dance invite. So I guess it will ultimately come down to the performance on the floor and winning basketball games. Which is how it should be.

[HuskerActuary]

6 minutes ago, rr52 said:

As of late this afternoon Bracketmatrix had updated (only 24 of 91 brackets were updated today) and Huskers were still only listed on only 1. Purdue-#1, MSU-#3, OSU-#5 and Michigan-#8 are listed. Maryland is in next 4 out and Huskers are 14th team out. I think it's very safe to say that these 6 teams are only ones still alive for NCAA tourney unless one of the other 8 would win conference tourney. 6 teams already have 6 conference losses and 3 others have 5 and I can't imagine any of them winning there final 8 or 9 games especially with most of them having RPI's in the 100's to negate any chance of getting Big Dance invite. So I guess it will ultimately come down to the performance on the floor and winning basketball games. Which is how it should be.

Penn State has a puncher's chance, especially with Reaves back

[Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty]

32 minutes ago, Swan88 said:

“Currently, the Big Ten is sixth in conference RPI.”

 

So . . . how is a conference to raise its RPI once it gets into conference play?  The answer is, under current projections, “It can’t.”  

Are we saying that a conference making a run in November and December (or that gets lucky around the holidays) is locked into a high RPI for March?  Or a conference with a bunch of newcomers and a tough-go in the early season is relegated to mostly-NIT?  That’s silliness, bordering on the ridiculous.  

Teams—and conferences—progress and regress over the course of a season: and that’s patently obvious in the current season.

Here’s betting the fourteen-team B1G does better than the current three- or four-team projection.

 

This is definitely a great point and I’m not arguing against it. I think you’re missing my point, though.

 

The only point I’m making is that Nebraska’s chances of making the tournament lie solely in Nebraska’s resume. The committee does not care about our conference. They care about our RPI (or KenPom), our Quadrants, and the eye test. They do not care about our conference record or our conference standings. If we have 23 wins, our RPI is 55th, and we have zero wins in the first Quadrant, we will be sweating it out come Selection Sunday. That is the only point I’m trying to make.

 

Unfortunately, based on the point you brought up, we haven’t had a good opportunity to boost our RPI or Q1 record in conference play because the Big Ten performed so poorly in the non-con. I agree with you that that is a flaw in the ratings systems because it judges a conference only on early season results. Hopefully that’s where the eye test comes into play, and the committee sees us as a tourney team.

[rr52]

1 minute ago, HuskerActuary said:

Penn State has a puncher's chance, especially with Reaves back

They have Iowa, Maryland, OSU and Michigan at home and play MSU, Illinois, Purdue and Huskers on the road. They are 5-5 and CBSSports is showing their RPI at 114. They need to win 7 of those 8 to get to 12-6. I think they are out. 

[HuskerFever]

Sure would be nice if the women's hoops team could share some of those road wins with us...

 

 

[Swan88]

26 minutes ago, Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty said:

. I think you’re missing my point, though.

 

Not arguing with you Cookie.  You are probably right.

IT’s simply absurd, is my point . . . and I’m hoping reason will win out over blind reference to an arbitrary system.

[Swan88]

If Rutgers’s RPI is, truly, 348, that proves the irrationality of the ranking system.  Anyone who actually believes there are 347 teams better than Rutgers is delusional.  Just ask:

 

St. John’s, who lost to Rutgers 80-78 in an exhibition game

Seton Hall, who lost to Rutgers 71-65

Michigan State, who beat Rutgers twice: 62-52 & 76-72

Wisconsin, who lost to a Rutgers 64-60

Iowa, who lost to Rutgers 80-64

 

Again, I’m betting on rationality prevailing over ridiculousness.

Edited January 29, 2018 by Swan88

[AuroranHusker]

14 minutes ago, Swan88 said:

If Rutgers’s RPI is, truly, 348, that proves the irrationality of the ranking system.  Anyone who actually believes there are 347 teams better than Rutgers is delusional.  Just ask:

 

Seton Hall, who lost to Rutgers 71-65

Michigan State, who beat Rutgers twice: 62-52 & 76-72

Wisconsin, who lost to a Rutgers 64-60

Iowa, who lost to Rutgers 80-64

 

Again, I’m betting on rationality prevailing over ridiculousness.

 

Swan, it's Rutgers' non-conference strength-of-schedule (for RPI purposes) that was 348th.

 

 

 

Edited January 29, 2018 by AuroranHusker