3 Teams Now Solidly On the Bubble

[Omaha1]

Having a team in the play in game would be fine by me. Get to see a Big East team on center stage plus the upside of an additional NCAA unit.

[marquette]

Having a team in the play in game would be fine by me. Get to see a Big East team on center stage plus the upside of an additional NCAA unit.

5 in is excellent considering the season we are having. Regardless of seeding (though those 2 and 3 seeds are nice).

[Bill Marsh]

I was reading two threads at once, thus the Jonathan Vilma mix-up. Here's the first link:

http://www.gostanford.com/ViewArticle.d ... =208066217

"[Mike Tranghese] cited weak non-conference schedules as the reason teams such as Alabama and Richmond were kept out of the field, and Georgetown was seeded No. 10 in the West Region after entering the week ranked No. 18."

And this isn't a "mid-major thinking" (a phrase that is thrown around without thought on this board). On another thread, I used the ACC's Virginia and the Big 10's Iowa as teams in 2013 that were hurt by poor non-conference scheduling, despite winning 23 and 25 wins respectively. Virginia is a borderline case, the perfect example of how weak the bubble is, but Iowa looked like a tournament team, except for non-conference SOS and conference record (.500).

I'm not buying it. Sometimes a committee chair like Tranghese is trying to make a point.I'm not going to research 2001, but if it came down Alabama and Georgia from the same conference and one had a better OOC schedule, then it was a tie breaker between 2 teams for whom all other things were equal. Richmond is a mid major, so we know that OOC is important for them.

I'll repeat what I said before. Virginia had the #76 RPI and Iowa was #81. They were not tournament teams. They were not on the bubble. Not either of them.

[CTYankee10]

Georgetown, Providence, and St John's would have to win their first round games in the BE tournament to have a chance to get in if current standings held serve. I think outside of a bad weekend in Atlantis and a stretch where they had to play Creighton and Nova in the same week, Xavier has been one of the more consistent teams on a very weak bubble in college basketball.

It's not outside the realm of possibility that the BE gets 5 bids - this bubble is so soft. Lunardi (although an A-10 homer) had St Joe's in his last 4 out, and they are terrible...they lost to Nova by 30 on their home court.

[HoosierPal]

....... St Joe's in his last 4 out, and they are terrible...they lost to Nova by 30 on their home court.

So anyone who looses by 30 on their home court is terrible. Better check the Big East scores of January 20.

[XUFan09]

I was reading two threads at once, thus the Jonathan Vilma mix-up. Here's the first link:

http://www.gostanford.com/ViewArticle.d ... =208066217

"[Mike Tranghese] cited weak non-conference schedules as the reason teams such as Alabama and Richmond were kept out of the field, and Georgetown was seeded No. 10 in the West Region after entering the week ranked No. 18."

And this isn't a "mid-major thinking" (a phrase that is thrown around without thought on this board). On another thread, I used the ACC's Virginia and the Big 10's Iowa as teams in 2013 that were hurt by poor non-conference scheduling, despite winning 23 and 25 wins respectively. Virginia is a borderline case, the perfect example of how weak the bubble is, but Iowa looked like a tournament team, except for non-conference SOS and conference record (.500).

I'm not buying it. Sometimes a committee chair like Tranghese is trying to make a point.I'm not going to research 2001, but if it came down Alabama and Georgia from the same conference and one had a better OOC schedule, then it was a tie breaker between 2 teams for whom all other things were equal. Richmond is a mid major, so we know that OOC is important for them.

I'll repeat what I said before. Virginia had the #76 RPI and Iowa was #81. They were not tournament teams. They were not on the bubble. Not either of them.

We're having this discussion over two threads, so I won't repeat myself, other than to say:

1) RPI has an imperfect correlation with tournament bids.

2) It is a fact that they were among the first six who didn't get an at-large bid, as explicitly stated in the other article I linked. If that's not the definition of a bubble team, then the term ceases to have meaning.