Started By
Message
re: NCAA Tournament Selection - SEC
Posted on 3/14/16 at 1:56 pm to MeatPants
Posted on 3/14/16 at 1:56 pm to MeatPants
quote:
That's why I agree with most people on here on why Carolina doesn't belong. But don't tell me how great Tulsa is. I could list ten schools at least and give valid arguments. Carolina does have a valid argument over Tulsa.
And a lot of people who do this crap for a living and follow it better than you or I would agree.
Look at bracket matrix. Out of 59 experts who do this all year long, not one. NOT ONE had Tulsa in. Carolina was at least in on about a third of them.
There is a legit debate at least. You can give the cock fans that at least
Unless I missed it, You haven't provided any of the other relevant Info to debate for Tulsa and sc.
0
Posted on 3/14/16 at 1:57 pm to MeatPants
quote:
Yep. That's why I agree with most people on here on why Carolina doesn't belong. But don't tell me how great Tulsa is.
Nobody said Tulsa was great, but Tulsa's body of work over the course of the season is more deserving of a bid than South Carolina.
That is a fact and the numbers say the same thing.
Posted on 3/14/16 at 1:59 pm to MeatPants
I just gave you a reason why top 50 isn't the end all be all
there is common sense too. Gonzaga is a better and more talented team than Princeton. They just are. But you value a win over Princeton and not gonzaga
That doesn't make sense
What is Tulsa record against teams in tourney. And carolinas. I'd be interested in that
there is common sense too. Gonzaga is a better and more talented team than Princeton. They just are. But you value a win over Princeton and not gonzaga
That doesn't make sense
What is Tulsa record against teams in tourney. And carolinas. I'd be interested in that
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:02 pm to MeatPants
Yeah dj it's flown over your head. It's too far gone for you to notice anymore
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:03 pm to MeatPants
quote:
I just gave you a reason why top 50 isn't the end all be all
Sos and top 50 are in tulsas favor. What relevent factors are in sc's?
Letting jersey names affect your opinion isn't exactly common sense.
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:11 pm to MeatPants
quote:
just gave you a reason why top 50 isn't the end all be all
And you ignore the biggest reason on why it is so important. The Top 50 RPI teams are what makes up the tourney bracket. It is essentially playing against other tourney teams during your season and you are judged on that performance.
Stop ignoring the facts. You're starting to come off as ignorant. This is the way it has been for years. This just didn't start happening yesterday.
quote:
. Gonzaga is a better and more talented team than Princeton
Princeton is in the NIT. They didn't win their league.
Gonzaga is in the NCAA's.
Beating either one of those teams has the same value. Both top 50 wins. Princeton is in too weak of a league to get a bid without winning their conference. They also do not have a conference tourney, which puts them at a disadvantage.
quote:
What is Tulsa record against teams in tourney
That puts Tulsa at a disadvantage because you cannot include RPI 13 SMU as they are banned from post season play this season.
Counting SMU...Tulsa is 6-6 against tourney teams. Again, goes back to a bigger sample size. This is why top 50 wins are so important.
quote:
carolinas.
Looks like 3-1
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:13 pm to MeatPants
Holy crap is Carolina schedule bad. 3-1 against NCAA tourney teams
Tulsa is horrible too. 6-6 against tourney teams. Includes Iona and ualr
It's how you value it. Volume or quantity over actual performance. I would say Carolina was a more quality team that just didn't test itself enough to get a Better gauge
Tulsa was just a dog crap team that got lucky that u conn hit a three quarter court shot or their "cut and dried numbers" wouldn't look so great.
But it's subjective even though some don't think so
Tulsa is horrible too. 6-6 against tourney teams. Includes Iona and ualr
It's how you value it. Volume or quantity over actual performance. I would say Carolina was a more quality team that just didn't test itself enough to get a Better gauge
Tulsa was just a dog crap team that got lucky that u conn hit a three quarter court shot or their "cut and dried numbers" wouldn't look so great.
But it's subjective even though some don't think so
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:15 pm to MeatPants
Gonzaga is not a top 50 win if I'm not mistaken
This post was edited on 3/14/16 at 2:16 pm
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:18 pm to MeatPants
quote:
Gonzaga is not a top 50 win if I'm not mistaken
Yes they are. They're #46 in the RPI per ESPN
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:21 pm to MeatPants
I'm not ignoring it Hawkeye. I think it's important. but you think its the only thing. It's not.
That's all I am saying. The problem is I think me and you are on the same page regarding almost all of this. The only thing I would debate with you is Tulsa worthiness. They just don't belong in at all IMO. I don't give a frick about Carolina worthiness
That's all I am saying. The problem is I think me and you are on the same page regarding almost all of this. The only thing I would debate with you is Tulsa worthiness. They just don't belong in at all IMO. I don't give a frick about Carolina worthiness
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:22 pm to MeatPants
quote:
Tulsa is horrible too. 6-6 against tourney teams. Includes Iona and ualr
Thats pretty good man. 12 games against NCAA tourney teams and they won half of them. Take out SMU who is 13 in RPI and they have 10 games against tourney teams and they're still winning half of them. Thats damn good actually.
quote:
Tulsa was just a dog crap team
Dog crap teams don't win the games they won. Dog crap teams don't go .500 against the tourney field with as many as 10-12 games as a sample size.
quote:
I would say Carolina was a more quality team that just didn't test itself enough to get a Better gauge
You can't use "what you think" as a barometer to include a team in the tourney. You can only use what you know, and what you know is that Carolina only played 2 top 50 teams and only played 4 teams in the NCAA tourney field. 3 of those 4 teams were in their own league, and only one was OOC. So that isn't a good sample size on how a team will fare against tourney teams, who aren't in their own league.
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:25 pm to MeatPants
Gonzaga jumped from 70 to 46 in one week. Wow. You look at lot of teams outsider that top 50 that are tourney teams that should be considered good wins though. That's My point
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:27 pm to MeatPants
Hawkeye don't cut and paste out that three quarter court shot though. U conn getting in the tourney made their numbers look better than they were
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:29 pm to Hawgeye
For example....Arkansas wasn't very good this year, but we still managed to have more wins against NCAAt teams than South Carolina did.
Arkansas went 4-4 against NCAA tourney teams. Texas Tech was an OOC tourney team win. Southern was an OOC tourney win.
South Carolina scheduled so poorly, there was no reason to let them in. Just like every other year.
Arkansas went 4-4 against NCAA tourney teams. Texas Tech was an OOC tourney team win. Southern was an OOC tourney win.
South Carolina scheduled so poorly, there was no reason to let them in. Just like every other year.
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:30 pm to MeatPants
quote:
not ignoring it Hawkeye. I think it's important. but you think its the only thing. It's not.
Yet you can't list any of the other relevent factors. Why is that?
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:32 pm to MeatPants
quote:
U conn getting in the tourney made their numbers look better than they were
Uconn is a 35 RPI team. Nothing about them is a fluke. They may have hit a lucky shot but they still have a solid resume. They have a very good win at Texas OOC and two other top 50 wins in conference. They also have wins away from home against Michigan, Cincinnati, and Temple.
They're solid.
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:33 pm to MeatPants
I'm not using what I think. This is what the committee thinks time and again. I, following what other people who know more than you what the barometers are and not one person felt Tulsa passed that. Not one. At least a third of them felt Carolina did
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:35 pm to MeatPants
Then you start looking at both teams' resume and you can clearly see why one team is in and one team isn't.
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:37 pm to djsdawg
I did it about 50 posts ago. Jesus Christ dj. I listed about ten things that are relevant. It's over your damn head.
Posted on 3/14/16 at 2:39 pm to MeatPants
What everyone is still missing is the NCAA tournament committee frequently gives away games a ton of weight.
Tulsa had 2 more away games and went 6-6 while USCe went 5-5
More telling though is that Tulsa only had 1 road loss outside RPI top 100 (#139). USCe had 3 losses top 140+
Tulsa had 2 more away games and went 6-6 while USCe went 5-5
More telling though is that Tulsa only had 1 road loss outside RPI top 100 (#139). USCe had 3 losses top 140+
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News