Can't see us getting in if we lose Wednesday

[Day2]

If there’s one thing the 2016 election taught me is that it’s very easy to convince yourself that somethings “in the bag” when it’s the outcome you desperately want to happen.

I meant to compliment you earlier for the “what happens after you die” analogy, as it perfectly encapsulates the two trains of thought regarding where we stand.

The 2016 election analogy doesn’t work as well. In the days leading up to Election Day, Nate Silver kept saying there wasn’t enough polling in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania and how Trump could win if those states went his way. Silver still had Clinton winning, but he could easily explain how she might not.

The arguments for why we might not get in are based more on bad vibes and/or past transgressions by the committee. Nothing you can objectively point to this season. It’s not as simple as saying these three teams steal a bid, these three bubble teams go deep into their conference tournaments, or a combination thereof. It would take so much more than that. A perfect storm of events even more unlikely than Trump winning.

 

[jncuse]

Exactly. There are posters arguing we are in no matter what happens...

You are making two different point. You said the ESPN rankings "of should be in" don't even consider a loss next week which is 100% incorrect. They are based on if you need to do more, and assume you lose out.

If it was based "as of now" we would be a lock. But the downgrade to "should be in" IS BASED on us losing next week.

 

[Cuse'91]

You are making two different point. You said the ESPN rankings "of should be in" don't even consider a loss next week which is 100% incorrect. They are based on if you need to do more, and assume you lose out.

If it was based "as of now" we would be a lock. But the downgrade to "should be in" IS BASED on us losing next week.

To me; if we are not in the "lock" section of the ACC. We are on the "in as of now" side of the bubble. That makes sense to me, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

[CardiacCuse]

the bureaucracy of NCAA will likely find a way to double-down on the NET out of self-preservation and make some really odd and wacky selections/seedings and it will be a huge talking point from sunday until the tourney starts...

i smell a play-in game for SYR somehow----which is a horrible way to get into the tourney regardless of the fact that it happened last year and still lead to a sweet 16....a huge handicap imo


whatever happens this end of season stretch run has really taken a lot of air out of the anticipation for sure....

 

[Day2]

Or the 07 team. I don't get why people are so confident.

It’s 2019, bubbeleh.

 

[Day2]

I remember last year it was you and I who were really shocked how our resume was undervalued.
Lunardi having the ESPN platform pollutes the minds of other matrix brackets I am sure.
We were undervalued last year.
The Buffalo and Maryland wins and road wins at Georgetown, Miami, and Louisville were undervalued.
That is why with 5 road wins this year and the win at Duke I am confident we are in.

The fact that Alsacs and I are on the same page might be the greatest indicator of all.

 

[Briancuse]

The fact that Alsacs and I are on the same page might be the greatest indicator of all.

Alsacs is a great poster but he isn't on the committee.

 

[kcsu]

I'm hoping based on JB's interview on Thurs changes are coming regardless if we make the tourney or not. Have to find ways to improve on offense every year

Hopefully a HUGE change.

 

[Day2]

the bureaucracy of NCAA will likely find a way to double-down on the NET out of self-preservation and make some really odd and wacky selections/seedings and it will be a huge talking point from sunday until the tourney starts...

i smell a play-in game for SYR somehow----which is a horrible way to get into the tourney regardless of the fact that it happened last year and still lead to a sweet 16...a huge handicap imo


whatever happens this end of season stretch run has really taken a lot of air out of the anticipation for sure...

If the committee’s aim is to fly the NET flag, we’re in. Ohio State and Duke were #1 in NET when we beat them. That means the committee was paying extra attention to those games. And because they were both on the road, it means they were two of the biggest wins in all of college basketball this season.

Can’t imagine the committee placing a greater emphasis on three Q3 losses, two of which were on neutral sites.

 

[Day2]

Alsacs is a great poster but he isn't on the committee.

Neither are you.

 

[Alsacs]

The fact that Alsacs and I are on the same page might be the greatest indicator of all.

We aren’t polar opposites. I am a moderate social liberal and fiscal conservative thus I piss off liberals and conservatives.

 

[Alsacs]

Alsacs is a great poster but he isn't on the committee.

I know how the committee does business.
We were screwed in 2007 because the Princeton AD didn’t like us and he used road wins as an excuse.
When you win road games, and have some nonconference wins and show you aren’t playing all soft nonconference games you get in when you are .500 in Conference play.
We didn’t get in 2016 because we were 2-7 on the road and had absolutely nothing in the nonconference.
We got in 2016 and 2018 because we had more than 3 conference road wins and we had solid nonconference wins.

We are fine this year.
We have 5 road wins, beat Ohio State on road and won at Duke.
We will are going to make it.

 

[hoopsupstate]

We’re probably in, but I wouldn’t be shocked if there are a lot of upsets that SU gets left out. This team is not nearly as good as the Gillon, White team and they got left out.

 

[Day2]

We aren’t polar opposites. I am a moderate social liberal and fiscal conservative thus I piss off liberals and conservatives.

We still manage to disagree on most things. When we do agree - especially when it comes to sports - I believe we’re batting 1.000.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[Day2]

We’re probably in, but I wouldn’t be shocked if there are a lot of upsets that SU gets left out. This team is not nearly as good as the Gillon, White team and they got left out.

And that was two years ago, when the bubble teams were better as well.

 

[Alsacs]

We’re probably in, but I wouldn’t be shocked if there are a lot of upsets that SU gets left out. This team is not nearly as good as the Gillon, White team and they got left out.

That team lost 5 nonconference games to P5/former BE teams and had 8 nonconference wins against garbage teams.
Then went 8-1 at home during conference play and 2-7 on the road.
We didn’t have enough neutral/road wins.
That team’s offense was miles better than what we got now but Gillon made the zone less effective.
This year’s team has road wins at BC/Pitt/Wake/Notre Dame/Duke and Ohio State.
We have the road wins and nonconference win thus our resume is stronger this year than in 2016.

Committee wants to see wins away from home since the tournament games are all always away from your home court.
Home wins are worth .7 compare to road wins being worth 1.3 in the minds of the committee.
Our resume is good enough.

 

[Knicks411]

If the committee’s aim is to fly the NET flag, we’re in. Ohio State and Duke were #1 in NET when we beat them. That means the committee was paying extra attention to those games. And because they were both on the road, it means they were two of the biggest wins in all of college basketball this season.

Can’t imagine the committee placing a greater emphasis on three Q3 losses, two of which were on neutral sites.

If they really wanted to back the NET, wouldn't they just, like, seed the field using the NET?

I know how the committee does business.
We were screwed in 2007 because the Princeton AD didn’t like us and he used road wins as an excuse.
When you win road games, and have some nonconference wins and show you aren’t playing all soft nonconference games you get in when you are .500 in Conference play.
We didn’t get in 2016 because we were 2-7 on the road and had absolutely nothing in the nonconference.
We got in 2016 and 2018 because we had more than 3 conference road wins and we had solid nonconference wins.

We are fine this year.
We have 5 road wins, beat Ohio State on road and won at Duke.
We will are going to make it.

I'm not sure the 07 resume was really all that strong anyway, and another thing to remember, they hadn't even expanded the field yet. Probably make it with the additional 3 spots.


In 07, fwiw, we had nothing OOC. (Lost to Wichita State, thy werent good, 17-14) at home and Ok State NIT team) at MSG. Our best OOC win was Penn or Holy Cross.

And the BE wasn't fantastic either. We win @Marquette (8 seed), Nova home (9 seed), and Gtown home (2 seed)

 

[Knicks411]

We’re probably in, but I wouldn’t be shocked if there are a lot of upsets that SU gets left out. This team is not nearly as good as the Gillon, White team and they got left out.

Again, fwiw, we're 39 in Ken Pom, that team was 51 Selection Sunday.

 

[Alsacs]

If they really wanted to back the NET, wouldn't they just, like, seed the field using the NET?



I'm not sure the 07 resume was really all that strong anyway, and another thing to remember, they hadn't even expanded the field yet. Probably make it with the additional 3 spots.


In 07, fwiw, we had nothing OOC. (Lost to Wichita State, thy werent good, 17-14) at home and Ok State NIT team) at MSG. Our best OOC win was Penn or Holy Cross.

And the BE wasn't fantastic either. We win @Marquette (8 seed), Nova home (9 seed), and Gtown home (2 seed)

Our resume was thin but it was a lot better than Arkansas and Stanford who made it.
The NIT seeded us as a 2 seed because they didn’t think we were in the NIT and slotted us into the spot that was supposed to be for Arkansas.

 

[Jasoncuse]

We seem solidly in. That can change if a large number of non-Tourney teams win their auto bids.

Most years, I doubt this would be a Tourney team.

 

[jncuse]

To me; if we are not in the "lock" section of the ACC. We are on the "in as of now" side of the bubble. That makes sense to me, but maybe I'm wrong.

Two different perspectives I suppose, you are not wrong.

 

[Knicks411]

Our resume was thin but it was a lot better than Arkansas and Stanford who made it.
The NIT seeded us as a 2 seed because they didn’t think we were in the NIT and slotted us into the spot that was supposed to be for Arkansas.

Stanford was one I remember, I was looking them up. Was it that much better?

We won 3 games against NCAA teams (@Marquette, 8 seed, Nova home 8 seed, Gtown home 2 seed)
Stanford won @UVA (4 seed) UCLA (2 seed), Washington (3 seed), USC (4 seed), Oregon (3 seed). The pac 12 games were all at home. They won 2 more games against tournament teams, and they were better quality as well. That's just one part, but I dunno.

Arkansas beat So Ill neutral (4 seed) and West Virginia (just missed, just including them to be complete) and Vandy (6 seed) twice.

So yeah, I mean, Arkansas looks a little shaky, but then again, they did have as many wins over tournament teams as we did. Which I know is just one way of looking at it. Arkansas looks pretty close to me. Stanford I kinda think, looking back 12 years later, they had a better resume

 

[syrBossHogg]

He's back

 

[jncuse]

He's back

Here is the fake tweet I posted two weeks ago (before we played Duke). Not that far off.