Jump to content

Nebraska on the Selection Committee Board

hhctony

By hhctony
in The Haymarket Hardwood

 Share

Recommended Posts

big red22

big red22

Posted
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty said:

 

  • Minnesota - The good Minnesota has not been around since December. They're not good anymore.

I am responding to this and this alone, because I know the committee uses computers much like you do.

 

They aren't good anymore, I get it... What does that have to do with the fact that we beat them at full strength?  This is where computers need to take a step back, because the information is flawed. 

 

The Minnesota game needs to be brought up and it needs to matter when the committee discusses our resume, because that team we beat was predicted to finish 2nd in our league at that point in the year!

Edited by big red22
  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

hhcmatt
hhcmatt

What the heck are you talking about? It's ok to admit that they have a good program. They were impressively able to get out of the MVC and into the Big East. And then you're jumping all over the guy w

Ron Mexico
Ron Mexico

I want to kick Stewart Mandel in the nuts.

HuskerFever
HuskerFever

We didn't get in. Fine. But I will never forget how unsupportive the Big Ten and BTN were this season. Unforgettable.

Posted Images

royalfan

royalfan

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty said:

 

I never said they suck more than any teams have sucked before. I simply said that we have five teams that I deem to be pretty bad, whereas the other major conferences have between zero and four.

  • Illinois - Winning at home against DePaul doesn't disprove what I said. I said the teams I listed are on or below their level. So I would expect Illinois to win that game at home. The Missouri game was a nice upset. But they also lost to UNLV, NMSU, and Wake Forest.
  • Wisconsin - I'm not comparing anyone to Western Kentucky. I don't think they're that good, and they will not get an at-large bid with their resume so we don't need to worry about them. Wisconsin is terrible this year and if you don't see that then I guess there's no point in continuing this discussion.
  • Minnesota - The good Minnesota has not been around since December. They're not good anymore.
  • Rutgers - Nice win against Seton Hall. They also lost to Stony Brook and Hartford.
  • Iowa - Agree, Iowa sucks!

What major conference team that I didn't list in my last post would you consider to be worse than any these five?

 

You are falling into the trap others are.  Believing the Big ten is down so bad, due to a small sample size of out of league games.  Only complex, accurate metrics can paint the true picture for those of you.  

 

As for teams that are worse than any of those that you didn't list, based on scoreboards of games,   entering last night at least, Georgetown worse than almost all of them, Iowa St., Washington worse than most of them, Colorado worse than most of them, as well as Georgia and South Carolina 

Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty

Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty

Posted
Posted
Just now, big red22 said:

I am responding to this and this alone, because I know the committee uses computers much like you do.

 

They aren't good anymore... What does that have to do with the fact that we beat them at full strength?  This is where computers need to take a step back, because the information is flawed. 

 

The Minnesota game needs to be brought up and it needs to matter, because that team we beat was predicted to finish 2nd in our league at that point in the year!

 

I acknowledged that in my original post. But yes, I'll edit my statement to say that 7 of our 11 wins are against the bottom feeders. And yes, the committee doesn't only use computers to make their choices. Everyone knows that. Like you, I hope that our first win against Minnesota is recognized for what it is.

Nebrasketball1979

Nebrasketball1979

Posted
Posted

This is an excellent article by Dirk Chatlain explaining why the RPI and specifically our strength of non conference scheduling numbers are bogus.  Hopefully someone on the committee is bright enough to recognize, understand, and have meaningful discussions on this in the room!!!  

 

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/chatelain/mad-chatter-why-tim-miles-rpi-problem-is-a-hoax/article_1224d3c6-11a7-11e8-86b9-c3eba667942d.html

 

And for the love of god, next year just schedule Chadron State instead of Deleware St :D

Swan88

Swan88

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty said:
  • Rutgers - Nice win against Seton Hall. They also lost to Stony Brook and Hartford.

Yes.  And Rutgers beat St. John's in an opening-season exhibition win (one of those early charity games) when St. John's was at full strength.

Norm Peterson

Norm Peterson

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Nebrasketball1979 said:

This is an excellent article by Dirk Chatlain explaining why the RPI and specifically our strength of non conference scheduling numbers are bogus.  Hopefully someone on the committee is bright enough to recognize, understand, and have meaningful discussions on this in the room!!!  

 

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/chatelain/mad-chatter-why-tim-miles-rpi-problem-is-a-hoax/article_1224d3c6-11a7-11e8-86b9-c3eba667942d.html

 

And for the love of god, next year just schedule Chadron State instead of Deleware St :D

 

Yeah, North Dakota won their conference last year and has only 8 wins this year.  So, you have that working against us.  That's one of the things Chatelain says Miles mentioned in an interview last night.

 

But, in addition to teams that failed to be as good as we expected, Miles pointed out that some of our losses were better than they look as were some of our wins.

 

We've previously detailed teams who lost major contributors during or after the game we played against them, and it was a pretty long list.

 

Boston College lost maybe their best player to a season-ending injury during their game against us.

St. John's lost certainly their second best player shortly after we played them full strength.

Minnesota lost perhaps their best player to ... extenuating circumstances after they played us the first time.

UCF lost their 7'6" center in mid season.

North Texas lost a really promising freshman in our game, his second. He put up 19 points in his debut.

Eastern Illinois lost their starting PG (9 pts, 5 assists) in game #8.

And, in fairness to Delaware State, they lost a couple of starters early in the season (one played 7 games, the other 4) and it's hard enough to offset the loss of one starter, let alone two.

 

That seems like a freakish number of teams that have lost significant contributors to season-ending problems early in the season, which undoubtedly affected their overall records and, therefore, our SOS.

jdostal

jdostal

Posted
Posted

Regarding the B1G being down, I feel as though the truth lies somewhere in the middle. It is certainly not as strong as some of the other P5 conferences.

 

How much weaker is it? Well, on kenpom, the difference between us and the Big 12 (the "top conference") is half the size of the difference between the B1G and the AAC (the best mid-major). So I take great umbridge with folks saying our resume resembles that of one of those mid-major teams trying to get an at large bid. The teams we're playing night in, night out are still far FAR FAR and away better than whomever Buffalo is playing.

 

Basically, my point is that even when the B1G is down like it is this year, it's still in the same league as all the other major conferences. People trying to discount our resume saying it's basically like such and such MVC team from some year are full of shit.

 

image.png

Art Vandalay

Art Vandalay

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Yeah, North Dakota won their conference last year and has only 8 wins this year.  So, you have that working against us.  That's one of the things Chatelain says Miles mentioned in an interview last night.

 

But, in addition to teams that failed to be as good as we expected, Miles pointed out that some of our losses were better than they look as were some of our wins.

 

We've previously detailed teams who lost major contributors during or after the game we played against them, and it was a pretty long list.

 

Boston College lost maybe their best player to a season-ending injury during their game against us.

St. John's lost certainly their second best player shortly after we played them full strength.

Minnesota lost perhaps their best player to ... extenuating circumstances after they played us the first time.

UCF lost their 7'6" center in mid season.

North Texas lost a really promising freshman in our game, his second. He put up 19 points in his debut.

Eastern Illinois lost their starting PG (9 pts, 5 assists) in game #8.

And, in fairness to Delaware State, they lost a couple of starters early in the season (one played 7 games, the other 4) and it's hard enough to offset the loss of one starter, let alone two.

 

That seems like a freakish number of teams that have lost significant contributors to season-ending problems early in the season, which undoubtedly affected their overall records and, therefore, our SOS.

 

E Illi lost their top 3 PGs I believe, unbelievable bad luck for them

HuskerFever

HuskerFever

Posted
Posted

The Indiana/Illinois BTN postgame is talking about how the Big Ten has a chance to get 6 teams into the tournament. Stating that there cannot be any surprises in the Big Ten tournament. Meaning that the favored teams win.

 

Seems like a stretch to me.

HuskerFever

HuskerFever

Posted
Posted

"They're winning the games they have to. They're also winning road games. And these things matter."

 

"If they had just beaten Kansas... they're in."

 

"If Nebraska can hold on and win out, I think they'll be in."

 

"Look at the eye test. They look like an NCAA tournament team. They can be dangerous. But do they have the resume? They're 0-6 in the top quadrant."

 

"Getting the double bye is critical, because that almost guarantees a higher caliber team."

 

"(Penn State) A win at Ohio State might be enough to get themselves in."

big red22

big red22

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, big red22 said:

I am responding to this and this alone, because I know the committee uses computers much like you do.

 

They aren't good anymore, I get it... What does that have to do with the fact that we beat them at full strength?  This is where computers need to take a step back, because the information is flawed. 

 

The Minnesota game needs to be brought up and it needs to matter when the committee discusses our resume, because that team we beat was predicted to finish 2nd in our league at that point in the year!

I have to add to this... I was listening to the Fox Sports 1 bracketologist last night, and he said that Providence needs to be in.  One of his reasons why was, Providence lost to Minnesota when they were good, so that can't be counted as a bad loss against them. That in itself is how ridiculous these bracketologists are!  They can't help Nebraska but they can help Providence?  If these so called expert actually dug into our resume and looked deep we'd be in if we went 1-2 in the next three games.

Edited by big red22
Nebrasketball1979

Nebrasketball1979

Posted
Posted

Lunardi's latest update is up and this is his bubble

 

image.png 

 

To recap, on Lunardi's Monday update, Nebraska was behind Boise State as 2nd out.  Now we are behind St. Bonaventure who jumped over us.  You might wonder what St. Bonaventure did over the past three days?  Well, they beat RPI #192, a 10-16 La Salle squad on the road.  So, if I'm understanding correctly, Nebraska beats Maryland, an RPI top 70 team and another team on the bubble and we get jumped by St. Bonaventure.  Um, ok.

 

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

atskooc

atskooc

Posted
Posted

All of these updates (Lunardi et al) are there for the same reason mock drafts are: to get you talking. 

 

I bet Lunardi had no reason at all for putting St Bonaventure ahead of us other than to get fans of the two teams yapping.  He needs to stay important in order to stay employed.  Paying attention to him merely fans the flame. 

 

I hate mock drafts, bracket projections, and preseason rankings all for the same reason: they're a sham.

 

Is Lunardi in the room making decisions on Sunday? Nope.  His opinion matters as much as mine does in this matter.

jdostal

jdostal

Posted
Posted

I am like 75% certain that his editors told him to put us in his articles because they know we'll click if we're close. So in his mind we are probably in the next four out and he'll keep us as the second team out until we actually pass that point in his mind.

 

So don't click on Lunardi's BS

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...