If they're in then Cincy should be as well. Similar overall record and computer ranking.
Cincy actually has better quality wins. Iowa's best win is @MichSt. And they have some bad losses as well.
Bracketology 2024
- Thread starter CoachHines3
- Start date
Cincy actually has better quality wins. Iowa's best win is @MichSt. And they have some bad losses as well.
Cincinnati won't get in unless they win out then upset someone in KC. They just don't have any high end wins over the Top 4 that would make the committee take them at 7-11 in the conference.
Do you have a specific example where they weigh the non con differently? They say they don't and I could see it being used to differentiate between 2 otherwise similar teams, but it'd take some effort to find something egregious that showed they do that.
Neither of those teams should be in the Tournament. They've done nothing to show they belong.
Not afraid. Overrated. I'd take that matchup in E8 all day.
Last year, Tennessee was #4 in NET and had the #2 Non-con SOS. They were 8-8 in Q1 and 4-3 in Q2. They were the #14 overall seed.
Kansas was #9 in net with a non-con SOS of 27. They were 17-8 in Q1 and 4-0 in Q2. They were the #3 overall seed.
Gonzaga was #6 net, #3 non-con SOS. 8-5 in Q1 and a Q3 loss. #10 overall seed.
UConn was #8 in Net, #16 in non-con SOS, 12-6, 7-1 and a Q3 loss and was the overall 13 seed.
UCLA was the 5ht overall seed with a 37 non-con SOS.
Purdue was #4 overall with an non-con of 89 and a Q4 loss.
Marquette was #8 seed with a NET of 12, non-con SOS of 160 and overall SOS of 54.
Kansas State was #11 overall with a NET of 24, SOS of 24 and non-con SOS of 163
Iowa State might get docked for its overall SOS, which is 62 currently and that is weighed down by a terrible non-con SOS, but there doesn't appear to be any indication that non-con SOS has any greater weight than the normal Q1/Q2 records.
It's not necessarily that they don't deserve to be in, it's just that making the tournament as a bubble team is not all that high of a bar for power conference teams. It's practically the same as becoming bowl eligible.
You can actually make a pretty decent case for that right now.
Iowa State is 6-4 in Q1 and 6-2 in Q2. 3-3 in Q1a
Kansas is 7-7 in Q1, 5-0 in Q2, 1 Q3 loss and 5-4 in Q1a.
The better record in Q1a might be enough to put them in ahead, although I'd argue that 6-4 is enough of a sample size to show that Iowa is better in Q1. That will likely be a moot point, though. If Iowa State wins until the Semi's of the Big 12 tournament, then Iowa State's potential 9-5 Q1 record is far and away better than Kansas's likely 9-9 or 8-9 Q1 record.
You can't lose if it doesn't count. Creighton had their nucleus back we had 5 returning scholarship players returning. That's why it's a scrimmage and nobody lost.
We also lost to Virginia Tech and Texas A&M when it counted. Would anyone be afraid if we played either of those teams in the tourney?
- Jan 26, 2019
- 957
- 1,363
- 93
- 32
I just remember seeing UConn pop up as a 4 seed last year and about spit my drink out, was blown away by them when ISU played them in Portland they should have been a 2 seed, maybe 3. Took them as my national champ and the rest is history. Also had Miami in the final four which was completely lucky. Finished 2nd out of 600 people for my works bracket challenge, huge flex.
Wonder what team is going to be criminally under seeded this year?
So a 7 seed isn't protected in the first round? This tournament is ****** on so many levels.
- Jan 26, 2019
- 957
- 1,363
- 93
- 32
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Severe Geomagnetic Storm Watch (and maybe big Northern Lights show)- Latest: Cyclones_R_GR8
