Bracketology and Team Resumes

[IU_FanClub]

6 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

If they win one and lose the next they would still have losing record against the top 3 Quads (12-13)and have a Non Con Sos 314.  Those 2 are major red flags for bubble teams trying to get in.   Usually if you have that bad of non con sos you are safely in the field or you are completely left out.    Drake last year had the worst non con Sos ever to get selected to the first 4 and theirs was around 260.  IU could still get in with just 1 one if things fall the right way but if I was IU I would recommend winning more then 1 to feel safe 

Yeah 2 would be ideal but I blindly believe 1 does it

[vemmeistars]

7 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

If they win one and lose the next they would still have losing record against the top 3 Quads (12-13)and have a Non Con Sos 314.  Those 2 are major red flags for bubble teams trying to get in.   Usually if you have that bad of non con sos you are safely in the field or you are completely left out.    Drake last year had the worst non con Sos ever to get selected to the first 4 and theirs was around 260.  IU could still get in with just 1 one if things fall the right way but if I was IU I would recommend winning more then 1 to feel safe 

I still don't grasp why non conference schedule mattes that much for a power 5 team with a top 50 overall sos. The non conference SOS should be a bigger factor for teams like SMU, VCU, Dayton, etc.

[IUc2016]

1 minute ago, vemmeistars said:

I still don't grasp why non conference schedule mattes that much for a power 5 team with a top 50 overall sos. The non conference SOS should be a bigger factor for teams like SMU, VCU, Dayton, etc.

I am with you. It really doesn't make sense,

and that's not to excuse the poor scheduling this year. 

[vemmeistars]

Also, why is Notre Dame ahead of IU? IU has analytics advantage (Net rankings 44 vs. 50, KP 44 vs. 48), tougher strength of schedule, and a lot less Q3/Q4 games than Notre Dame (13 vs. 18).

IU is 6-11 in Q1/Q2 and ND is 4-8 in Q1/Q2, so maybe that's a wash along with both teams sharing a Q3 loss.

[Five Prime]

Agree, SOS is SOS.  Who gives a **** if it's in conference vs ooc

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich]

1 minute ago, vemmeistars said:

Also, why is Notre Dame ahead of IU? IU has analytics advantage (Net rankings 44 vs. 50, KP 44 vs. 48), tougher strength of schedule, and a lot less Q3/Q4 games than Notre Dame (13 vs. 18).

IU is 6-11 in Q1/Q2 and ND is 4-8 in Q1/Q2, so maybe that's a wash along with both teams sharing a Q3 loss.

Well for as much as they say "conference record doesn't matter," there isn't a way the committee has it sitting in the back of their mind that Indiana is 9-11 in the B1G and Notre Dame went 15-5. 

[Uspshoosier]

2 minutes ago, vemmeistars said:

I still don't grasp why non conference schedule mattes that much for a power 5 team with a top 50 overall sos. The non conference SOS should be a bigger factor for teams like SMU, VCU, Dayton, etc.

If I’m remembering right from when I went through the mock selection process.  They tend to reward the team that challenged themselves more in the games they had control of scheduling.   Teams don’t have control of the conference scheduling but they do have control on the non conference scheduling.  If IU done a little better in conference this a non issue no matter how bad their non con sos is but since they are near the cut line it becomes an issue.  Wake is a team that I think is closer to the cut line then most think.  If they lose today or even against Miami I think they could he left out because of their non con sos  

 

IU’s non con schedule went downhill partly because teams that were suppose to be better turned out not to be.   Marshall was suppose to contend for conference USA and they stunk. They were in the 80’s net last year.  Louisiana, St. John’s and Cuse all underperformed which sunk IU’s non con sos 

[Five Prime]

Also, if it's flipped (non con 50, conf 300) is it better?  And why?  Because of apparent control over non con schedule?

[vemmeistars]

I appreciate the explanation, I just think that rationale if flawed and irrelevant if you play in a great conference. If the BIG played like the ACC this year, then I would get IU being punished for not challenging themselves out of conference. 

 

[IUc2016]

1 minute ago, Uspshoosier said:

If I’m remembering right from when I went through the mock selection process.  They tend to reward the team that challenged themselves more in the games they had control of scheduling.   Teams don’t have control of the conference scheduling but they do have control on the non conference scheduling.  If IU done a little better in conference this a non issue no matter how bad their non con sos is but since they are near the cut line it becomes an issue.  Wake is a team that I think is closer to the cut line then most think.  If they lose today or even against Miami I think they could he left out because of their non con sos  

 

IU’s non con schedule went downhill partly because teams that were suppose to be better turned out not to be.   Marshall was suppose to contend for conference USA and they stunk. They were in the 80’s net last year.  Louisiana, St. John’s and Cuse all underperformed which sunk IU’s non con sos 

But let's also not forget the 2 games that IU has no control of when it comes to non-conference scheduling. They played St. John's and at Syracuse. Those are two games that IU probably doesn't schedule but the big ten scheduled for them. Pretty ridiculous imo

 

[Uspshoosier]

7 minutes ago, vemmeistars said:

Also, why is Notre Dame ahead of IU? IU has analytics advantage (Net rankings 44 vs. 50, KP 44 vs. 48), tougher strength of schedule, and a lot less Q3/Q4 games than Notre Dame (13 vs. 18).

IU is 6-11 in Q1/Q2 and ND is 4-8 in Q1/Q2, so maybe that's a wash along with both teams sharing a Q3 loss.

Notre Dame has 7 wins away from home and they have a win against Kentucky (4)and a road win against another tournament quality team. IU only has 4 wins away from home.  This is where playing in a weaker conference has an advantage.    Notre dame  got play 6 road games against NET 137 or worse one of those being a non con game at Howard.  IU only go to play 2 teams on the road with a net over 100.  Minny-107, Nebraska-138.   
 

Notre dame isn’t as safe as some think either.  
I got Notre dame slightly ahead but it’s closer then some bracketologist has it 

[Uspshoosier]

Basically all IU had to do was schedule a team in the top 150 when their game against Asheville got cancelled and the non conference sos wouldn’t of been an issue.  I really thought they should of done something that week.  Once you saw where your non con sos was going you should of done everything possible to help it out.   San Francisco is probably safer in because they scheduled a game on a neutral court against Loyola on the fly when one of their games got canceled. They lost but their non con sos jumped way up after that game.  

[HoosierAloha]

11 minutes ago, IUc2016 said:

But let's also not forget the 2 games that IU has no control of when it comes to non-conference scheduling. They played St. John's and at Syracuse. Those are two games that IU probably doesn't schedule but the big ten scheduled for them. Pretty ridiculous imo

 

IU did have control over how they performed in those games. One, we hung barely hung on and the other we forgot to play the first half. I'd imagine our NET and other metrics might be a little different had we taken care of business. I can see how we try to find a scapegoat though.

[IUc2016]

Just now, HoosierAloha said:

IU did have control over how they performed in those games. One, we hung barely hung on and the other we forgot to play the first half. I'd imagine our NET and other metrics might be a little different had we taken care of business. I can see how we try to find a scapegoat though.

umm how you play has nothing to do with non-conference strength of schedule. think you have missed the boat here 

 

[Uspshoosier]

3 minutes ago, HoosierAloha said:

IU did have control over how they performed in those games. One, we hung barely hung on and the other we forgot to play the first half. I'd imagine our NET and other metrics might be a little different had we taken care of business. I can see how we try to find a scapegoat though.

2 different arguments.  He is right IU had no control of those 2 teams being scheduled and you are right that IU had control over how they preformed in those games once they were  on the schedule 

[IUc2016]

1 minute ago, Uspshoosier said:

2 different arguments.  He is right IU had no control of those 2 teams being scheduled and you are right that IU had control over how they preformed in those games once they were  on the schedule 

thank you. I am in no way saying IU should be in the tournament. Was just discussing the reasoning for considering non con sos

[HoosierAloha]

3 minutes ago, HoosierAloha said:

IU did have control over how they performed in those games. One, we hung barely hung on and the other we forgot to play the first half. I'd imagine our NET and other metrics might be a little different had we taken care of business. I can see how we try to find a scapegoat though.

 

Just now, IUc2016 said:

umm how you play has nothing to do with non-conference strength of schedule. think you have missed the boat here 

 

NET and other metrics (see: efficiency), you know the things we could control that would help us get over that incredibly difficult bubble hump we have struggled with for 5 or 6 years?

I can see where we would blame the Big 1.o or ACC or Big East as we're the only ones that have games scheduled for us...

[IUc2016]

Just now, HoosierAloha said:

 

NET and other metrics (see: efficiency), you know the things we could control that would help us get over that incredibly difficult bubble hump we have struggled with for 5 or 6 years?

I can see where we would blame the Big 1.o or ACC or Big East as we're the only ones that have games scheduled for us...

okay I tried. THAT IS NOT WHAT THE DISCUSSION IS ABOUT. 

Usps already told you what we were talking about, get real man 

[HoosierAloha]

1 minute ago, IUc2016 said:

okay I tried. THAT IS NOT WHAT THE DISCUSSION IS ABOUT. 

Usps already told you what we were talking about, get real man 

That's what I was doing. Bringing more data points to the discussion.

1) there are games IU has little or no input on opponent - we can't do anything about that besides taking care of busines

2) there is a majority of noncon games IU decides their opponent - we control this

We're looking to blame it on the few games IU doesn't control WHO but does control HOW and not the games IU does control the WHO. It makes sense...

Heck, even in the games we controlled the WHO we struggled to finish which hurt efficiency (nothing to do with noncon SOS) and NET numbers.

[IUc2016]

1 minute ago, HoosierAloha said:

That's what I was doing. Bringing more data points to the discussion.

1) there are games IU has little or no input on opponent - we can't do anything about that besides taking care of busines

2) there is a majority of noncon games IU decides their opponent - we control this

We're looking to blame it on the few games IU doesn't control WHO but does control HOW and not the games IU does control the WHO. It makes sense...

Heck, even in the games we controlled the WHO we struggled to finish which hurt efficiency (nothing to do with noncon SOS) and NET numbers.

again, as both USPS and I have said, you are making a separate argument.

have a good day.