Bubble Watch

[stever20]

How are Butler/Providence not a lock at this point?

Just looking at the RPI forecast-
Butler just needs 1 more win. Losing out would give them a 60 RPI. Just 1 win gets them up to 50 and therefore safe.

PC- May have a really good case even now. If they lose out their RPI is only 52.2. I think they would get in with that regardless. I'd go ahead and say that Providence is lock city right now, along with Georgetown and Nova of course.

[stever20]

I suggest you read this article by Patrick Stevens. http://www.syracuse.com/patrick-stevens ... ry_package

Again this is the guy who has been the most accurate in the past several years and got every team correct last year.

Thanks for the link. Good info.

Look at his list of "Risers", which includes St. John's.

Look at his list of "Decliners", which includes Cincinnati. Cincy's loss to Tulane shows how much playing in a mid major conference can hurt a team's chances. Once solidly in, they are now drifting toward bubble territory as a result of that loss. Tulsa faces the same problem in that league. Boise State is another example. In the tournament in Sullivan's last list, they are now out as a result of their loss to Fresno State.

When anyone claims that the sky is falling on a team like Xavier, just look at these mid majors. In conference losses to bad (100+) and really bad (200+) teams are devastating both because the loss itself is so damaging and because there are so few other opportunities in conference at this time of the year to make up for it. Cincinnati should thank their lucky stars that Xavier was willing to schedule them at this point in the season to give them a chance to make up for that Tulane loss.

One thing to look at here- with a link that was said to be the most accurate- he's got Tulsa in right now as the 1st of the last 4 teams in.
http://www.syracuse.com/patrick-stevens ... ed_stories

[GumbyDamnit!]

NC St win hurts those close to the bubble. I think Texas A&M is in some trouble. Texas too. And FL loses to a terrible 1 win team Mizzou. I guess they are officially done...or are they? Stever?

[stever20]

NC St win hurts those close to the bubble. I think Texas A&M is in some trouble. Texas too. And FL loses to a terrible 1 win team Mizzou. I guess they are officially done...or are they? Stever?

I wouldn't say the NC St win is that huge- just looking at the Matrix they were the 5th team in. Probably flip quite frankly with A&M if not even a smidge bit more. One thing for bubble teams- it's a major plus now that Syracuse took themselves out of contention, because they were very much in position now at 18-10 with 3 games left. If they won any of the last 3 games, probably would be a lock(granted it's Duke, UVA, and NC State).

Texas is just wild. They are definitely a good team- nary a bad loss on their ledger. Worst loss against Stanford. But they are now only 17-11 with Kansas coming up followed by Baylor.

Tomorrow a huge bubble game with Illinois @ Iowa. Also Oregon @ Cal which is a huge one for Oregon. In the A10 Davidson plays @ Rhode Island which is a big one for both teams quite frankly.

And yes you can stick a fork in Florida. Just a team that never got it going at all this year for whatever reason...

We focus so much on the bubble, but how about Maryland upsetting Wisconsin. Just huge for Nova. Probably means if Nova can win out and win the tourney- they would be a #1 seed. Though Kansas does concern you with their insane SOS(it's historical). And there's still that Gonzaga part as well.

[Bill Marsh]

I suggest you read this article by Patrick Stevens. http://www.syracuse.com/patrick-stevens ... ry_package

Again this is the guy who has been the most accurate in the past several years and got every team correct last year.

Thanks for the link. Good info.

Look at his list of "Risers", which includes St. John's.

Look at his list of "Decliners", which includes Cincinnati. Cincy's loss to Tulane shows how much playing in a mid major conference can hurt a team's chances. Once solidly in, they are now drifting toward bubble territory as a result of that loss. Tulsa faces the same problem in that league. Boise State is another example. In the tournament in Sullivan's last list, they are now out as a result of their loss to Fresno State.

When anyone claims that the sky is falling on a team like Xavier, just look at these mid majors. In conference losses to bad (100+) and really bad (200+) teams are devastating both because the loss itself is so damaging and because there are so few other opportunities in conference at this time of the year to make up for it. Cincinnati should thank their lucky stars that Xavier was willing to schedule them at this point in the season to give them a chance to make up for that Tulane loss.

One thing to look at here- with a link that was said to be the most accurate- he's got Tulsa in right now as the 1st of the last 4 teams in.
http://www.syracuse.com/patrick-stevens ... ed_stories

Another thing to look at is that he also has Xavier in - one spot ahead of Tulsa. It will be interesting to see what his update looks like since this is a week old.

I'll bet my mortgage that Tulsa doesn't get in unless they pull at least one upset between now and Selection Sunday.

[Bill Marsh]

NC St win hurts those close to the bubble. I think Texas A&M is in some trouble. Texas too. And FL loses to a terrible 1 win team Mizzou. I guess they are officially done...or are they? Stever?

The NC State win is huge for them; their RPI IS NOW 37. This takes them off the bubble and puts them in IMO.

Bigger for the Big East is the Syracuse upset of Notre Dame in South Bend. That win boosts St. John's RPI to 39 and solidifies their hold on a bid.

[Bill Marsh]

I suggest you go to UDPRIDE and read the very extensive series written by Chris Rieman regarding the selection process. He sat in the mock selection last week and has put together a rather detailed accounting of the process. In short the selection process is centered around the RPI (your record against RPI top 25, 50, and 100-200, 200+). That said, the committee is free to use other analytical data. From reading alot on this subject my hunch is that around 75% of the decisions are made from info centered around the RPI and 25% from other sources (including gut feel).

Just was looking at it...

One big thing-
http://www.udpride.com/forums/showthrea ... e3&t=26982

SOS is only your opponents records, and not your opponents opponents records.

You say, what does that matter?

It means in terms of the SOS, Tulane is a better opponent than Creighton, DePaul, or Marquette. You say the committee members look deeper. That's true. However, when the committee sees the sheets, the SOS number they see is just opponents records, and not opponents opponents records. That can be a huge difference where they just say Team X has the #85 SOS and Team Y has the #159 SOS.

just looking-
Big East-
Nova SOS on Warren Nolan- 30 NCAA 36
Georgetown WN- 3, NCAA 5
Providence WN- 14, NCAA 14
Butler WN 19, NCAA 21
St John's WN 28, NCAA 33
Xavier WN 18, NCAA 24

So 5 and 6 spot differences for Nova, St John's and Xavier. Just looking for Xavier- I'm guessing part of it is Missouri being only 6-20. Missouri was helping X supposedly out on the opponents-opponents thing because their SOS is #4.

The UD Pride article was a great link. Thanks so much for posting it.

This was actually the 5th in a series of articles, all of which were well worth the read. I really liked the 3rd and 4th articles which took us inside the mock selection process. Interesting to note that Tulsa never hot a mention.

As for the impact of the absurd SOS formula, I think that it has some impact but less than it could because the RPI formula still includes opponents' opponents' W/L%. So, that factor is there. They'll only go to SOS when there's a close call and at that point, they'll probably be looking at the candidates very closely, so SOS in the form that it's presented will only be viewed in the context of the teams' actual records, games played, and margin of victory or loss. Nonetheless, it's a goofy way to measure things by the NCAA.

[stever20]

I suggest you go to UDPRIDE and read the very extensive series written by Chris Rieman regarding the selection process. He sat in the mock selection last week and has put together a rather detailed accounting of the process. In short the selection process is centered around the RPI (your record against RPI top 25, 50, and 100-200, 200+). That said, the committee is free to use other analytical data. From reading alot on this subject my hunch is that around 75% of the decisions are made from info centered around the RPI and 25% from other sources (including gut feel).

Just was looking at it...

One big thing-
http://www.udpride.com/forums/showthrea ... e3&t=26982

SOS is only your opponents records, and not your opponents opponents records.

You say, what does that matter?

It means in terms of the SOS, Tulane is a better opponent than Creighton, DePaul, or Marquette. You say the committee members look deeper. That's true. However, when the committee sees the sheets, the SOS number they see is just opponents records, and not opponents opponents records. That can be a huge difference where they just say Team X has the #85 SOS and Team Y has the #159 SOS.

just looking-
Big East-
Nova SOS on Warren Nolan- 30 NCAA 36
Georgetown WN- 3, NCAA 5
Providence WN- 14, NCAA 14
Butler WN 19, NCAA 21
St John's WN 28, NCAA 33
Xavier WN 18, NCAA 24

So 5 and 6 spot differences for Nova, St John's and Xavier. Just looking for Xavier- I'm guessing part of it is Missouri being only 6-20. Missouri was helping X supposedly out on the opponents-opponents thing because their SOS is #4.

The UD Pride article was a great link. Thanks so much for posting it.

This was actually the 5th in a series of articles, all of which were well worth the read. I really liked the 3rd and 4th articles which took us inside the mock selection process. Interesting to note that Tulsa never hot a mention.

As for the impact of the absurd SOS formula, I think that it has some impact but less than it could because the RPI formula still includes opponents' opponents' W/L%. So, that factor is there. They'll only go to SOS when there's a close call and at that point, they'll probably be looking at the candidates very closely, so SOS in the form that it's presented will only be viewed in the context of the teams' actual records, games played, and margin of victory or loss. Nonetheless, it's a goofy way to measure things by the NCAA.

Part of the Tulsa thing not being in the mock-selection was the timing. It was on Feb 12, so it was after Tulsa had lost to SMU. The Tulsa profile has since gotten better and other at larges have fallen off. Also Texas has taken several more losses and becoming less of a factor.

I was thinking also for Tulsa with the SOS, similar to Xavier with Missouri, the Tulsa game with Creighton is one that is a reason why the SOS is different. Creighton's opponents records are #52 which would have helped Tulsa's opp opps component.

I think the SOS number is thrown around a lot more than you would think. I know we heard it a ton last year with SMU and their OOC schedule. I think that they probably throw around the SOS number more than they do the RPI number.

[Bill Marsh]

If they're judging SOS simply by opponents' W/L%, then that's absurd. If they're talking about actual strength of schedule, then it makes sense.

[stever20]

If they're judging SOS simply by opponents' W/L%, then that's absurd. If they're talking about actual strength of schedule, then it makes sense.

I know. It's absolutely insane. You're telling me that for SOS purposes then lets say RPI #145 Incarnate Word at 13-7 is better than RPI #123 Creighton at 13-15 for Tulsa. That is totally absurd. Or for St John's- #186 Tulane at 13-12 is barely worse than #97 Minnesota at 15-12- there are others but just proving a point. Any idiot knows that Minnesota is much better than Tulane- but for SOS purposes, not really.

And the problem is Bill as you know folks throw around that SOS number probably MORE than the RPI even!!!!!