Question?

[Handy Johnson]

If the B1G is "down" how can the 5th place team be playing in the National Title game? I guess "down" is a polite way of saying Indiana, Maryland, & Wisconsin aren't very good so Nebraska can pound sand.

[Huskerpapa]

...and the sixth place team won the NIT.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Huskerpapa

[Shawn Eichorst's Toupee]

The notion that the Big Ten is down has nothing to do with the top teams in the league. It's simply because there was no middle of the Big Ten this year. Here's a look at the number of teams each year that were below .500 overall since Nebraska joined the league:

 

2017-2018: 6

2016-2017: 3

2015-2016: 4

2014-2015: 4

2013-2014: 3 (Plus Rutgers in the AAC, so 4 if you count them)

2012-2013: 4 (Plus Rutgers in the Big East, so 5 if you count them)

2011-2012: 2 (Plus Rutgers in the Big East, so 3 if you count them)

 

[Huskerpapa]

1 minute ago, Shawn Eichorst's Toupee said:

The notion that the Big Ten is down has nothing to do with the top teams in the league. It's simply because there was no middle of the Big Ten this year. Here's a look at the number of teams each year that were below .500 overall since Nebraska joined the league:

 

2017-2018: 6

2016-2017: 3

2015-2016: 4

2014-2015: 4

2013-2014: 3 (Plus Rutgers in the AAC, so 4 if you count them)

2012-2013: 4 (Plus Rutgers in the Big East, so 5 if you count them)

2011-2012: 2 (Plus Rutgers in the Big East, so 3 if you count them)

 

Oh sure, bring facts to the discussion.

[rr52]

I realize you can only play the teams that advance but Michigan also benefited from some upsets. They played the #'s 14, 6, 7, 9 & 11 on their way to the championship. And they just got blown out by a #1. I don't think the Big 10 was as bad as lots of people thought and when Villanova makes 3's they are unstoppable. So yes I'm still pissed Nebraska didn't make the tournament. 

[OmahaHusker]

Villanova played an average game tonight and still wiped Michigan. Fact is Michigan didn't play anyone on their way to the championship. Hell they shouldn't have even gotten past Houston.

[nustudent]

9 hours ago, Shawn Eichorst's Toupee said:

The notion that the Big Ten is down has nothing to do with the top teams in the league. It's simply because there was no middle of the Big Ten this year. Here's a look at the number of teams each year that were below .500 overall since Nebraska joined the league:

 

2017-2018: 6

2016-2017: 3

2015-2016: 4

2014-2015: 4

2013-2014: 3 (Plus Rutgers in the AAC, so 4 if you count them)

2012-2013: 4 (Plus Rutgers in the Big East, so 5 if you count them)

2011-2012: 2 (Plus Rutgers in the Big East, so 3 if you count them)

 

bingo

[HuskerFever]

10 hours ago, Shawn Eichorst's Toupee said:

The notion that the Big Ten is down has nothing to do with the top teams in the league. It's simply because there was no middle of the Big Ten this year. Here's a look at the number of teams each year that were below .500 overall since Nebraska joined the league:

 

2017-2018: 6

2016-2017: 3

2015-2016: 4

2014-2015: 4

2013-2014: 3 (Plus Rutgers in the AAC, so 4 if you count them)

2012-2013: 4 (Plus Rutgers in the Big East, so 5 if you count them)

2011-2012: 2 (Plus Rutgers in the Big East, so 3 if you count them)

 

 

FWIW, here's what it looks like this season:

 

Regular Season: Teams Under 50%

Big Ten: 6 (42% of conference)

ACC: 3 (20%)

Big East: 2 (20%)

Pac-12: 2 (16%)

SEC: 2 (14%)

Big 12: 1 (10%)

 

Conference: Teams Under 50%

Big 12: 5 (50%)

Big Ten: 7 (50%)

SEC: 7 (50%)

Pac-12: 5 (41%)

ACC: 6 (40%)

Big East: 3 (30%)

 

Entire Season: Teams Under 50%

Big Ten: 6 (42%)

ACC: 3 (20%)

Big East: 2 (20%)

Pac-12: 2 (16%)

SEC: 2 (14%)

Big 12: 1 (10%)

[Handy Johnson]

I know I'm beating a dead horse, but if the teams I mentioned (Indiana, Maryland, Wisconsin) had our exact same record and schedule, 100% they would have been in.

[HuskerFever]

3 minutes ago, Handy Johnson said:

I know I'm beating a dead horse, but if the teams I mentioned (Indiana, Maryland, Wisconsin) had our exact same record and schedule, 100% they would have been in.

 

See: "Syracuse, #11 in the ACC with an 8-10 conference record"

[The Polish Rifle]

22 minutes ago, Handy Johnson said:

I know I'm beating a dead horse, but if the teams I mentioned (Indiana, Maryland, Wisconsin) had our exact same record and schedule, 100% they would have been in.

Still don't buy this narrative. Quad 1 wins was the barometer this year, and at 1-6 we lined up more with the Davidsons & the Tulanes of the world. I don't think this committee would have put Kentucky or Duke in with a 1-6 quad 1 record. 

[HuskerFever]

9 minutes ago, The Polish Rifle said:

Still don't buy this narrative. Quad 1 wins was the barometer this year, and at 1-6 we lined up more with the Davidsons & the Tulanes of the world. I don't think this committee would have put Kentucky or Duke in with a 1-6 quad 1 record. 

 

Creighton was 2-9 in Quad 1.

[The Polish Rifle]

5 minutes ago, HuskerFever said:

 

Creighton was 2-9 in Quad 1.

Believe they were 3-8 at the time of the selection show

https://herosports.com/college-basketall/bracketology-ncaa-team-sheet-quadrant-1-wins-kansas-north-carolina-ahah

[big red22]

3 hours ago, The Polish Rifle said:

Still don't buy this narrative. Quad 1 wins was the barometer this year, and at 1-6 we lined up more with the Davidsons & the Tulanes of the world. I don't think this committee would have put Kentucky or Duke in with a 1-6 quad 1 record. 

And... Alabama had a 2-8 road record. 

 

And... Oklahoma finished the regular season 4-11

 

And... Arizona State finished 8-10 in a freaking conference that went 0-fer in the tournament

 

I could sit here and point out all the negative blemishes on multiple bubble teams that made it in.  That is the problem.  Folks with your thought process completely rule out the negatives of the teams that had no business getting an invite!

 

Does it matter that their lists would be considerably longer? 

 

The problem lies in what they used for criteria, and to be honest it was a complete joke.  At this point it obviously doesn't matter, but I will forever be pissed about how dumb that criteria was.  Nothing you can post will change my opinion!  Just like nothing I post will change yours.

 

 

[Swan88]

Lots of selection stuff was new this year:

The quad system was new this year;

Valuing early season wins as much as (or more than) late season losses was new this year;

Getting teams into the Tournament (including the Committee Chair's own team) who were <.500 over their last 15 games, with multiple blowout losses in those games, was new this year; and

Omitting a B1G team, whose record got B1G school into the dance for 61 years straight, was new this year.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Swan88

[The Polish Rifle]

53 minutes ago, big red22 said:

And... Alabama had a 2-8 road record. 

 

And... Oklahoma finished the regular season 4-11

 

And... Arizona State finished 8-10 in a freaking conference that went 0-fer in the tournament

 

I could sit here and point out all the negative blemishes on multiple bubble teams that made it in.  That is the problem.  Folks with your thought process completely rule out the negatives of the teams that had no business getting an invite!

 

Does it matter that their lists would be considerably longer? 

 

The problem lies in what they used for criteria, and to be honest it was a complete joke.  At this point it obviously doesn't matter, but I will forever be pissed about how dumb that criteria was.  Nothing you can post will change my opinion!  Just like nothing I post will change yours.

 

 

I wasn't on the committee?.......just pointing out that there was a strong correlation between who the committee chose and quad 1 wins. I'm not arguing that its the right way to do it, just saying it was obvious that's how it was done.

[tcp]

20 hours ago, OmahaHusker said:

Villanova played an average game tonight and still wiped Michigan. Fact is Michigan didn't play anyone on their way to the championship. Hell they shouldn't have even gotten past Houston.

 

True, but Michigan probably played their second worst game of the season (behind their loss to us). You see that shooting percentage? Ugly. 

 

An average Michigan versus an average Nova would'e been a pretty good game. Michigan was terrible. 

[HuskerFever]

6 hours ago, The Polish Rifle said:

Believe they were 3-8 at the time of the selection show

https://herosports.com/college-basketall/bracketology-ncaa-team-sheet-quadrant-1-wins-kansas-north-carolina-ahah

 

Just did a double take and it looks like Creighton actually was 2-9 for Selection Sunday, per NCAA team sheets:

 

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats Library/Selection Sunday - Team Sheets.pdf?Mobile=1&Source=%2Fsolutions%2Frpi%2F_layouts%2F15%2Fmobile%2Fviewa.aspx%3FList%3D6042e1d3%2D70e4%2D49fd%2Dba51%2D8a8d813f8344%26View%3D9c6a45d0%2D60f8%2D4f6e%2D810b%2D8f57e042a3a9%26ViewMode%3DSimple%26PageFirstRow%3D41

[The Polish Rifle]

55 minutes ago, HuskerFever said:

 

Just did a double take and it looks like Creighton actually was 2-9 for Selection Sunday, per NCAA team sheets:

 

https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/Stats Library/Selection Sunday - Team Sheets.pdf?Mobile=1&Source=%2Fsolutions%2Frpi%2F_layouts%2F15%2Fmobile%2Fviewa.aspx%3FList%3D6042e1d3%2D70e4%2D49fd%2Dba51%2D8a8d813f8344%26View%3D9c6a45d0%2D60f8%2D4f6e%2D810b%2D8f57e042a3a9%26ViewMode%3DSimple%26PageFirstRow%3D41

Well that makes me wonder why they weren't closer to the bubble. Didn't realize we had a losing record against quad 2 teams as well, certainly didn't help our cause. I really wish you didn't paste that link, I think the next 4 hours will be spent perusing this.

[HuskerFever]

11 hours ago, HuskerFever said:

22 hours ago, Shawn Eichorst's Toupee said:

The notion that the Big Ten is down has nothing to do with the top teams in the league. It's simply because there was no middle of the Big Ten this year. Here's a look at the number of teams each year that were below .500 overall since Nebraska joined the league:

 

2017-2018: 6

2016-2017: 3

2015-2016: 4

2014-2015: 4

2013-2014: 3 (Plus Rutgers in the AAC, so 4 if you count them)

2012-2013: 4 (Plus Rutgers in the Big East, so 5 if you count them)

2011-2012: 2 (Plus Rutgers in the Big East, so 3 if you count them)

 

 

FWIW, here's what it looks like this season:

 

Regular Season: Teams Under 50%

Big Ten: 6 (42% of conference)

ACC: 3 (20%)

Big East: 2 (20%)

Pac-12: 2 (16%)

SEC: 2 (14%)

Big 12: 1 (10%)

 

Conference: Teams Under 50%

Big 12: 5 (50%)

Big Ten: 7 (50%)

SEC: 7 (50%)

Pac-12: 5 (41%)

ACC: 6 (40%)

Big East: 3 (30%)

 

Entire Season: Teams Under 50%

Big Ten: 6 (42%)

ACC: 3 (20%)

Big East: 2 (20%)

Pac-12: 2 (16%)

SEC: 2 (14%)

Big 12: 1 (10%)

 

I don't know why I dug into this further. It just gets more and more depressing.

 

If you look only at the middle teams in each conference and see how they performed, this is what you get:

 

Regular Season: Middle Teams Under 50%

Big Ten: 1

ACC: 0

Big 12: 0

Big East: 0

SEC: 0

Pac-12: 0

 

Conference: Middle Teams Under 50%

Big 12: 2

Big Ten: 2

SEC: 2

Pac-12: 1

ACC: 1

Big East: 0

 

Entire Season: Middle Teams Under 50%

Big Ten: 1

ACC: 0

Big 12: 0

Big East: 0

SEC: 0

Pac-12: 0

[hhcmatt]

10 hours ago, The Polish Rifle said:

Well that makes me wonder why they weren't closer to the bubble

 

Until they beat Villanova they were real close. You also forget they went undefeated vs non-D1 opponents 

[OmahaHusker]

12 hours ago, The Polish Rifle said:

Well that makes me wonder why they weren't closer to the bubble.

 

They were actually pretty close. I remember USA Today came out with their final bracket just before the Selection Sunday show and it had Creighton as one of the First Four out. I think they were more of a 10 or 11 seed, but the logistics helped them. The fact that they couldn't play in the Midwest region and couldn't be paired against another Big East team inflated their seeding a bit.

[Cazzie22]

Don’t forget the TV network influence.  If Duke, Kentucky, UCLA, North Carolina are ever bubble teams, they will get more consideration than Nebraska.

[Handy Johnson]

The Bluebirds are 1 up on us All-time, we need to settle the score & put em in the rearview mirror for good. BUT, I want them and UNO to thrive. Good basketball is a positive for all 3 programs, plus it helps are RPI.