College Bball Thread

[Uspshoosier 49,904]

Just now, Uspshoosier said:

Tie game with 1:30 to go 

N Texas up 2 with 1:12 to go 

[Uspshoosier 49,904]

3 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

N Texas up 2 with 1:12 to go 

Lol Davis with a ridiculously hard 3 

FAU up 3 with .4 to go 

[Demo 21,606]

1 minute ago, Uspshoosier said:

Lol Davis with a ridiculously hard 3 

FAU up 3 with .4 to go 

Wow, I know the N Texas kid who took the 3 at :25 has had a good game, but you can’t take that one. You have got to play for the win or the OT. 

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 9,023]

23 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

A lot teams lose to that trash on their court.    The amount of contact allowed in that building is laughable.   Purdue clearly one of the top 2 teams this year is in a battle only up 4 with 3 to go.    Muck it up and hope for the best is Rutgers only chance.  Interesting to see how they play next year with actual NBA talent on the team 

I'm gonna assume they play the same. It's an embarrassment how the Big Ten allows it with Rutgers and Northwestern but... *Conspiracy time*... They want Northwestern and Rutgers to win for the media markets. Just what I believe. They allow that crap at Maryland too.

[johnsoniu 6,942]

Niagra/Manhattan great finish in regulation. Niagra scores go ahead 2 with 4.2 seconds. While 3 of their guys woof at the crowd, manhattan hits a streaking player length of the court for tying layup at buzzer

[RaceToTheTop 28,154]

First of my WAR rankings for the season.  Calculated it for about 50 teams I thought could be in consideration for top 25, but possible I missed one.  Records are against D1 only.

Top 25:

1. Purdue, 19-2 WAR +7.74
2. U Conn 18-2, WAR +5.66
3. Houston 18-2,  WAR +5.42
4. UNC 17-3, WAR +5.22
5. Kansas 16-4,  WAR +4.84
6. Wisconsin 16-4, WAR +4.74
7. Arizona 15-5, WAR +4.01
8. Utah St, 16-2, WAR +3.91
9. Dayton 16-3, WAR +3.83
10. Ole Miss, 17-3, WAR +3.81
11. Texas Tech 16-3, WAR +3.69
12. San Diego St 14-4, WAR +3.54
13. Marquette 15-5, WAR +3.49
14. South Carolina 17-3, WAR +3.29
15. Auburn 16-4, WAR +3.28
16. Tennessee 15-4, WAR+3.10
17. Alabama 14-6, WAR +3.08
18. Florida Atlantic 17-4, WAR +2.94
19. New Mexico 16-3, WAR +2.86
20. Indiana State 17-3, WAR +2.86
21. Kentucky 15-4, WAR +2.78
22. Nevada 16-4, WAR +2.77
23. Illinois 15-5, WAR +2.75
24. Iowa St 16-4, WAR +2.61
25. Grand Canyon 18-2, WAR +2.51

Other WAR +2 teams:

Clemson 13-6, WAR +2.26, Baylor 13-5, WAR +2.25, Northwestern 15-5, WAR +2.24, Oklahoma 15-5, WAR +2.19, Colorado St 13-5, WAR +2.18, Creighton 16-5, WAR +2.13, Duke 15-4, WAR +2.10

 

[Uspshoosier 49,904]

Nevada/New Mexico at 10.   MWC after dark 

[Uspshoosier 49,904]

10 hours ago, Uspshoosier said:

Nevada/New Mexico at 10.   MWC after dark 

New Mexico rolled.   They are a dangerous team when healthy 

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 9,023]

I like seeing smaller schools get at large bids over bad power conference schools anyways, but this is definitely a year where I'd rather see teams like James Madison, App State, Indiana State, Drake Grand Canyon, and 6 MWC teams get in. Power conference teams have been extra bad this year.

AAC- 2 bids

ACC- 4-6

A10- 2 bids

Big 12- 9-10

Big Ten- 4 bids

Big East- 3-6

Pac12- 1-2 bids

SEC- 6-9

 

[RaceToTheTop 28,154]

1 hour ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

I like seeing smaller schools get at large bids over bad power conference schools anyways, but this is definitely a year where I'd rather see teams like James Madison, App State, Indiana State, Drake Grand Canyon, and 6 MWC teams get in. Power conference teams have been extra bad this year.

AAC- 2 bids

ACC- 4-6

A10- 2 bids

Big 12- 9-10

Big Ten- 4 bids

Big East- 3-6

Pac12- 1-2 bids

SEC- 6-9

 

Right now there would be 4 — maybe 5– big ten teams in depending on how you view Nebraska.  Bad year for the Big Ten.

Michigan State’s remaining schedule, though, is very weak so even at 12-8 now they have an easier path to get in.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 9,023]

28 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Right now there would be 4 — maybe 5– big ten teams in depending on how you view Nebraska.  Bad year for the Big Ten.

Michigan State’s remaining schedule, though, is very weak so even at 12-8 now they have an easier path to get in.

 The committee will find a way to throw them in. Guaranteed.

[str8baller 6,292]

4 hours ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

I like seeing smaller schools get at large bids over bad power conference schools anyways, but this is definitely a year where I'd rather see teams like James Madison, App State, Indiana State, Drake Grand Canyon, and 6 MWC teams get in. Power conference teams have been extra bad this year.

AAC- 2 bids

ACC- 4-6

A10- 2 bids

Big 12- 9-10

Big Ten- 4 bids

Big East- 3-6

Pac12- 1-2 bids

SEC- 6-9

 

That is my general preference too, but this years Indiana team is a really good example of how hard it is in a major conf versus a small or even a mid major.  
 

We had tons of close calls against smaller schools this year but pretty much pulled it out every time at the end. Against better teams and in the B1G those same performances result in close losses and often demoralizing blowouts to top programs.  
 

Personally i hope FAU (they will) and Ind St get in no matter what so I have someone to cheer for. Those other schools look to be pretty borderline, at best.  
 

Let’s say IU goes 7-4 down the stretch and wins a BTT game against someone like UM to get to 20 wins. Our pure efficiency stats probably have us behind someone like Drake, indicating we are a worse team, but Drake will have 4-6 losses versus teams as bad or worse than the worst B1G team. Should they really be in over us in that scenario? 

[LamarCheeks 20,750]

Wow, I'm a tad biased -- as my nephew went to South Carolina and I have a very good friend who is an alum -- but the Gamecocks are getting no love this week. They're 17-3 and crushed Kentucky last week and still haven't cracked the Top 25. I'm not into analytics all that much, so I'm sure there's a reason, but still ... 

They play at No. 5 Tennessee tomorrow night, so I guess we'll see how they really stack up. 

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 9,023]

3 hours ago, str8baller said:

That is my general preference too, but this years Indiana team is a really good example of how hard it is in a major conf versus a small or even a mid major.  
 

We had tons of close calls against smaller schools this year but pretty much pulled it out every time at the end. Against better teams and in the B1G those same performances result in close losses and often demoralizing blowouts to top programs.  
 

Personally i hope FAU (they will) and Ind St get in no matter what so I have someone to cheer for. Those other schools look to be pretty borderline, at best.  
 

Let’s say IU goes 7-4 down the stretch and wins a BTT game against someone like UM to get to 20 wins. Our pure efficiency stats probably have us behind someone like Drake, indicating we are a worse team, but Drake will have 4-6 losses versus teams as bad or worse than the worst B1G team. Should they really be in over us in that scenario? 

I'm going to say as of now, Drake is better than Indiana. We weren't playing a bunch of top of their league small schools.

FGCU- 9-13(3-4) tied for 7th in the ASUN

Army 6-15(2-6) tied for last in the Patriot

Wright State 12-10(7-4) 4th in the Horizon

Louisville 6-14(1-8) last in the ACC

Harvard 10-7(1-3) tied for last in the Ivy with 5 teams(odd, yes)

North Alabama 9-12(3-4) tied for 7th in the ASUN

Kennesaw State 13-8(4-3) tied for 4th in the ASUN

Morehead State 16-5(7-1) best team we played of the small schools. Beat em by 1.

The only team we played on Appalachian State, James Madison, Indiana State, Drake etcs level or even close to it, was Morehead State. Who we greatly struggled to beat. This Indiana team isn't good. I'm not talking hypotheticals of "what if Indiana finishes like this." As of now, those teams are better and well ahead of Indiana of getting an at-large bid.

[str8baller 6,292]

3 hours ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

 only team we played on Appalachian State, James Madison, Indiana State, Drake etcs level or even close to it,

My point being Iowa, Maryland, NW, Michigan, etc… are all ranked right around there. That’s the top of their conf and the bottom of ours.  
 

That’s the comparison because they have plenty of Texas southerns and gramblings on their schedule too.   
 

It’d be our awful Quad 1 losses vs their Quad 3 losses, I guess. I’m not sure how you quantify that even though I like the idea of a Drake getting an at large. 

[IUHoosierJoe 1,738]

6 minutes ago, str8baller said:

My point being Iowa, Maryland, NW, Michigan, etc… are all ranked right around there. That’s the top of their conf and the bottom of ours.  
 

That’s the comparison because they have plenty of Texas southerns and gramblings on their schedule too.   
 

It’d be our awful Quad 1 losses vs their Quad 3 losses, I guess. I’m not sure how you quantify that even though I like the idea of a Drake getting an at large. 

I think you make a good point here.  The way teams are evaluated now in terms of Quad wins and losses, a mid-major has an almost impossible task in making it as an at-large.  They'd have to schedule like Gonzaga and then actually win a chunk of those games.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 9,023]

48 minutes ago, str8baller said:

My point being Iowa, Maryland, NW, Michigan, etc… are all ranked right around there. That’s the top of their conf and the bottom of ours.  
 

That’s the comparison because they have plenty of Texas southerns and gramblings on their schedule too.   
 

It’d be our awful Quad 1 losses vs their Quad 3 losses, I guess. I’m not sure how you quantify that even though I like the idea of a Drake getting an at large. 

And there is no doubt all of them are better than Michigan, Iowa and Maryland. I'd even say that even though MSU beat OSU, ISU is better. It took a ton of home cooking for MSU to beat ISU. The Big Ten isn't good. At all. It just has the conference name so people have a perception.

[Uspshoosier 49,904]

36 minutes ago, IUHoosierJoe said:

I think you make a good point here.  The way teams are evaluated now in terms of Quad wins and losses, a mid-major has an almost impossible task in making it as an at-large.  They'd have to schedule like Gonzaga and then actually win a chunk of those games.

Mid majors always had an impossible tasks of getting at-larges.   Quads have always been used back in the rpi days they just never said what they were and road and neutral games were not weighted.  
 

Q1 was 1-50 

Q2 - 51-100

Q3-101-150

Q4- 151 +
 
Mid majors have been getting the shaft for ever   One of the worst ones I remember was Monmouth  back in 2016    Always an uphill battle for mid majors    

 

[IUHoosierJoe 1,738]

2 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Mid majors always had an impossible tasks of getting at-larges.   Quads have always been used back in the rpi days they just never said what they were and road and neutral games were not weighted.  
 

Q1 was 1-50 

Q2 - 51-100

Q3-101-150

Q4- 151 +
 
Mid majors have been getting the shaft for ever   One of the worst ones I remember was Monmouth  back in 2016    Always an uphill battle for mid majors    

 

Oh, I don’t disagree with that.  And mid-majors that get automatic bids are often seeded too low.  The biggest example of that last year was Florida Atlantic, although it didn’t matter.  Thought they should have easily been a 4 or 5 seed.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 9,023]

12 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Mid majors always had an impossible tasks of getting at-larges.   Quads have always been used back in the rpi days they just never said what they were and road and neutral games were not weighted.  
 

Q1 was 1-50 

Q2 - 51-100

Q3-101-150

Q4- 151 +
 
Mid majors have been getting the shaft for ever   One of the worst ones I remember was Monmouth  back in 2016    Always an uphill battle for mid majors    

 

And I've kept saying, those at large mid majors perform better than the mediocre power conference teams that get in. If a power conference team struggles the entire season, they are probably going to lose come March. It's what those teams do.