2022 March Madness

[HuskerFever]

18 minutes ago, hskr4life said:

Right!?  For me Resumes were pretty even and the tip of the scale went to the NET which Oklahoma was by far better in.  Is Rutgers the lowest NET to make an at large and by how much?

 

Here are your NET rankings for at-large bids:

 

04 Baylor

05 Kentucky

09 Texas Tech

10 UCLA

11 Auburn

12 Duke

13 Purdue

15 Illinois

16 Texas

17 UConn

18 LSU

19 Saint Mary's (CA)

20 Arkansas

22 San Francisco

24 Wisconsin

25 San Diego St.

26 Ohio St.

28 Colorado St.

30 Alabama

31 North Carolina

32 Providence

33 Memphis

34 Michigan

35 Southern California

36 Michigan St.

37 Seton Hall

38 Indiana

41 Davidson

42 Marquette

44 TCU

49 Iowa St.

50 Wyoming

53 Notre Dame

55 Creighton

62 Miami (FL)

77 Rutgers

[The Polish Rifle]

19 minutes ago, hskr4life said:

Right!?  For me Resumes were pretty even and the tip of the scale went to the NET which Oklahoma was by far better in.  Is Rutgers the lowest NET to make an at large and by how much?

Worst RPI/NET since the metrics were developed (30 years I think?). MSU had a NET of 76 last year. 

[HuskerFever]

And since we're on the topic, here's the NET rankings for automatic-bids:

 

001 Gonzaga

002 Arizona

003 Houston

006 Kansas

007 Tennessee

008 Villanova

014 Iowa

021 Murray St.

023 Loyola Chicago

027 Virginia Tech

029 Boise St.

046 UAB

052 Vermont

063 Chattanooga

065 South Dakota St.

079 New Mexico St.

081 Richmond

120 Montana St.

124 Saint Peter's

125 Longwood

127 Akron

128 Colgate

137 Delaware

142 Yale

143 Jacksonville St.

153 Cal St. Fullerton

156 Norfolk St.

159 Georgia St.

191 Wright St.

197 Texas Southern

200 Bryant

241 A&M-Corpus Christi

[Norm Peterson]

6 hours ago, Norm Peterson said:

In the post-game, he said he gutted it out and left it all on the floor.

 

At least I'm pretty sure that's what he said.

 

Apparently, my humor is too immature for this board.

 

I still enjoy a good fart joke, what can I say?

[uneblinstu]

@Norm Peterson, maybe it was just a stinky joke? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[49r]

5 hours ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Apparently, my humor is too immature for this board.

 

I still enjoy a good fart joke, what can I say?

 

I had a chuckle, FWIW.

[Bugeaters1]

 

[aphilso1]

I was listening to some local Salt Lake City sports radio today, and they were doing a quiz on the mascots for some of the lesser known schools.  They got Yale, Akron, and Richmond right.  Then one of the hosts got Rutgers.  After a long drawn out pause, his response was "who cares about Rutgers?" I got a pretty good chuckle out of that.  For the record, the other host got the answer half right by saying "Knights."

[AuroranHusker]

1 hour ago, aphilso1 said:

I was listening to some local Salt Lake City sports radio today, and they were doing a quiz on the mascots for some of the lesser known schools.  They got Yale, Akron, and Richmond right.  Then one of the hosts got Rutgers.  After a long drawn out pause, his response was "who cares about Rutgers?" I got a pretty good chuckle out of that.  For the record, the other host got the answer half right by saying "Knights."

 

Rutgers getting in and Nebraska not in 2017-18 will never not upset me. It's sickening how the B1G didn't fight for NU back then. Regrettable on the part of the Big Ten for a 4th pl. team not getting any love from the front office admins.

 

 

[The Polish Rifle]

9 hours ago, AuroranHusker said:

 

Rutgers getting in and Nebraska not in 2017-18 will never not upset me. It's sickening how the B1G didn't fight for NU back then. Regrettable on the part of the Big Ten for a 4th pl. team not getting any love from the front office admins.

 

 

The resume difference is pretty crazy. Rutgers had bad loses, we didn't. But, Rutgers 6-6 against quad 1, we were 0-9. Rutgers beat 8 NCAA teams, we beat 1. I don't think a team that's 0-fer in Quad 1 games is getting an at-large, ever. 

[uneblinstu]

We had our chances in 18-19. That team was talented enough to be a tourney team, but missed out on opportunities to remove any doubt. The UCF loss in the holiday tournament was killer. So was the loss to KU, and coach knew it at the time. There were a couple down the stretch that could have helped, too.

Edited March 15, 2022 by uneblinstu

[Cazzie22]

15 hours ago, Bugeaters1 said:

 

Someone dropped the ball.

[Cazzie22]

15 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

I was listening to some local Salt Lake City sports radio today, and they were doing a quiz on the mascots for some of the lesser known schools.  They got Yale, Akron, and Richmond right.  Then one of the hosts got Rutgers.  After a long drawn out pause, his response was "who cares about Rutgers?" I got a pretty good chuckle out of that.  For the record, the other host got the answer half right by saying "Knights."

The ignorance of some Sports Talk radio hosts infuriates me. Do some research!  Rutgers has a Final Four appearance, not many schools can claim that.

[uneblinstu]

Lol, that was almost 50 years ago and they were basically irrelevant for a lot of the time between then and now. SLC is an NBA and west coast sports town. It shouldn’t be supposing they don’t know anything about Rutgers. 

[HuskerFever]

 

[hhcmatt]

Hunter Thompson is that center from Wyoming who decommitted from Creighton in 2016

[49r]

17 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

Hunter Thompson is that center from Wyoming who decommitted from Creighton in 2016

 

He saw the birds all over the place and changed his mind...

 

 

[aphilso1]

6 hours ago, uneblinstu said:

Lol, that was almost 50 years ago and they were basically irrelevant for a lot of the time between then and now. SLC is an NBA and west coast sports town. It shouldn’t be supposing they don’t know anything about Rutgers. 

 

Yep, SLC is a different kind of sports town.  Jazz are king, for sure.  After that the Utah/BYU rivalry seems to take precedent, followed by West Coast NFL, Real Salt Lake, and winter Olympic sports.  March Madness (and non-local college sports in general) are pretty far down the priority list.  I never hear Top 25 college football or college basketball chatter on the radio.  They'll talk BYU and Utah, and a little bit of big picture Pac-12 stuff.  But that's about it for college sport chatter.  I'm curious if they'll start talking Big 12 football once BYU joins the conference.

[AuroranHusker]

12 hours ago, The Polish Rifle said:

The resume difference is pretty crazy. Rutgers had bad loses, we didn't. But, Rutgers 6-6 against quad 1, we were 0-9. Rutgers beat 8 NCAA teams, we beat 1. I don't think a team that's 0-fer in Quad 1 games is getting an at-large, ever. 

Nebraska beat Michigan by 20, and UM made the NCAA Finale. So, I don't get where you're sayin' NU was 0-fer?!?

 

 

[AuroranHusker]

2 minutes ago, AuroranHusker said:

Nebraska beat Michigan by 20, and UM made the NCAA Finale. So, I don't get where you're sayin' NU was 0-fer?!?

 

 

 

And, even *IF* that wasn't a "Quad 1" win, it's a BS metric to decide who's worthy of a bid. The Big Ten did NOTHING to help NU's cause, absolutely ZILCH! And, I'll never not be pissed about that part of the deal. So, 0-9 or whatever the heck it was, Nebraska finished 13-5 in the freakin' Big Ten conference, and didn't get in. It's craptastic.

 

 

Edited March 16, 2022 by AuroranHusker

[The Polish Rifle]

11 hours ago, AuroranHusker said:

Nebraska beat Michigan by 20, and UM made the NCAA Finale. So, I don't get where you're sayin' NU was 0-fer?!?

 

 

Michigan RPI wasn't high enough to be a quad 1 win. You can argue the usefulness of the metrics, but NET/RPI is a huge factor for the committee and it sunk us that year. 

[brfrad]

1 hour ago, The Polish Rifle said:

Michigan RPI wasn't high enough to be a quad 1 win. You can argue the usefulness of the metrics, but NET/RPI is a huge factor for the committee and it sunk us that year. 

Our RPI was 51.  At the moment, I was upset that we didn't make the big dance.  Looking back, we were probably a bubble team.  The thing that still upsets me is nearly missing the NIT.  There is no reason that we were sent on the road for the 1st round.  We should have been a 1 or 2 seed in the NIT at the very minimum. 

[AuroranHusker]

1 hour ago, The Polish Rifle said:

Michigan RPI wasn't high enough to be a quad 1 win. You can argue the usefulness of the metrics, but NET/RPI is a huge factor for the committee and it sunk us that year. 

 

I know, it just sux.

 

 

[AuroranHusker]

14 minutes ago, brfrad said:

Our RPI was 51.  At the moment, I was upset that we didn't make the big dance.  Looking back, we were probably a bubble team.  The thing that still upsets me is nearly missing the NIT.  There is no reason that we were sent on the road for the 1st round.  We should have been a 1 or 2 seed in the NIT at the very minimum. 

 

The stupid new metrics sunk NU that season, and it sux.

 

 

[hskr4life]

18 minutes ago, brfrad said:

Our RPI was 51.  At the moment, I was upset that we didn't make the big dance.  Looking back, we were probably a bubble team.  The thing that still upsets me is nearly missing the NIT.  There is no reason that we were sent on the road for the 1st round.  We should have been a 1 or 2 seed in the NIT at the very minimum. 

IIRC, we weren’t even a “first four out” team right?