Swan88

Looks like Syracuse is no longer ahead of us:

Here's a video: https://scout.com/college/basketball/recruiting/Video/2018-G-Ochai-Agbaji-2017-summer-highlight--8016879?View=Full

Brian had a placid demeanor, which was often mistaken for a lack of fire and intensity. But he had plenty of fire and intensity and demonstrated it, consistently, by playing hard and well. And he’s kept on playing the game for many years hence—not bad for someone who “never really cared for the game.” If you watch the 2015-16 video above, you’ll see the same (but slightly heavier) Brian that played at Nebraska. And I’ll repeat, Brian never deserved the derision, including the put-downs of his effort and intensity, that he received from this fan base.

Agreed. He played very well while at Nebraska--for all the reasons you mention, Norm. Brian never deserved the grief and derision he's received from this fan base. And we desperately needed him to stay for another season, rather than leaving early for the pros back home.

He has a Wiki page. Here is a highlight reel of his 2015-16 season:

Two points: 1. A lot of Roby's fouls come when he's trying to clean up after someone else's defensive error; and I hate it when a ref does the old Leslie Nielsen umpire routine from Naked Gun when calling a foul on the Huskers. 2. One of my favorite plays of the night came in the last couple minutes: one of Wisconsin's bigs got the ball in front of the basket, with no Husker in front of or beside him; he went up for a two-hand dunk, except that Watson, standing behind him, went up first and blocked it from behind! Nebraska got the rebound.

And we still out-rebounded them by two: 34-32.

This article is based on a highly-realistic, mock selection committee exercise. And thanks, Cookie, for posting!! What it shows is one thing: decisions are highly-subjective and based on Committee votes. There is no such thing as a formula that directs the process. Instead, it's like any other decision-making committee: (i) standard information and instructions are provided to everyone, (ii) everyone does whatever independent research he/she wants to do (they all have access to the internet throughout the entire season), and (iii) subjective decisions are made by voting. This is far-and-away removed from a fixed-system or a math-based formula. Here are a couple illustrations from the article: --"Committee members [will have] preconceived notions" because "throughout the season, a plethora of ratings lists (RPI, BPI, Sagarin, KenPom, etc.) are sent out to the committee members." --"In addition . . . one coach from each conference submits a "Coaches Advisory Poll" on the first of each month, ranking the teams in his conference."

Sixteen teems plus Mississippi State would beg to differ. But I know what you mean. The dickens is that a rim-out on Anton Gill's final shot is the difference between a win and a loss against Kansas. And we haven't had a bad loss since the blowout against Michigan St., which happened fifteen games ago, on December 3. I remember walking, two days later, from my car to the Vault for the Minnesota (then ranked in the mid-teens) game thinking, "We're gonna' get blown out again tonight, the season is going into the tank, and Miles is going to get fired." But the Huskers played a great game and have been on an upward trajectory ever since, a few disappointments along the way notwithstanding!

That’s terrible reasoning for bringing down an entire conference (this is responding to Dog, not Donkey). Granted, Rutgers scheduled poorly and had some terrible luck in December. But they are still a more-than-decent team. To repeat, just ask the following teams, all of which have played tough schedules: 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 To repeat again: Rutgers beat TWO teams from the beloved and adored and incomparable Big East! Not bad for a team with a terrible record that brings down the entire Conference.

Ah . . . Thanks for the clarification. But that even proves the point: How can you play (and defeat) two Big East teams (one in an exhibition) and play Florida State and still have a schedule ranked that low?

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.

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.

“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.

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.

Here’s an observation from long ago: rooting for Nebraska to win is the only thing a Husker fan can do with certainty. Otherwise, it’s like gambling: it’s hard to make the right picks on what’s actually in the best interests of Nebrasketball. The exception is a final game or two in the season, when it’s easier to see, with clarity, the impact of other teams’ games on Nebrasketball.

I thought the turning point came in the middle of the first half, during a tight game, when Glynn Watson put intense, full court defensive pressure on their point guard. That pressure got them out of their usual rhythm, and the Huskers pulled away to a solid half time lead.

Cookie Belcher and Tyronn Lue are cousins.

The players aren’t lacking confidence on their collective abilities. Gotta love this quote: ”We wanted to go back home 2-0,” Copeland said. “We thought we were better than Ohio State, we just came up short that game. We learned a lot, and we’ll carry it on with us for the rest of the season.”

Many years ago, that same group had a vibrant, free basketball board with lots of discussion. But the same type of "fans" were so unceasingly and unbearably negative that the free basketball board died: and it's still dead. I, for one, left that free board long ago for that very reason and moved here instead. I'm still on Red Sea Scrolls because of Robin Washut's premium information on Nebrasketball and because of Husker football. But the unceasing drip of negativity from that group of fans toward Nebrasketball is almost too much to bear--and to pay for.

There is a different type of "fans" that we see occasionally on this board and unceasingly on Red Sea Scrolls. It's the person who is, actually, a fan of another basketball team, is anti-Nebrasketball to-the-core but feigns otherwise, and is unceasingly negative.

I agree, Norm, on leave-computing-to-the-math-genius concept. But we now have updated information. Here's what Husker Actuary wrote on January 3: "Guys, our SOS is going to drag us down if we end up around the 20 win mark. Don't you remember feeling great when the conference schedules were released saying that we got a pretty good deal out of it? The flip side of that is needing more wins (alongside our non-conference SOS which is also not good). I think 22 wins is necessary to feel decent about chances, 23 wins would be a lock. 21 = out." Since January 3, the Huskers beat Wisconsin and #23 Michigan and played #13 Ohio St. to a toss-up with a minute to go on the road. Here's guessing Husker Actuary did not make such assumptions in doing the math on January 3. So . . . it would be nice to see Husker Actuary run the numbers again using updated information, provide an updated assessment, and show his calculations.

Thought I'd edit that for you a little bit.