ESPN Bubble Watch

[Brooky03]

Your posts remind me of a certain line from Major League. Who can name it?

 

[pearl31]

Yes they are very different directions. But Palm does address that

View attachment 55690

Basically he points that there have been situations where the committee has used negatives to negatively adjust seeds, but he does not remember where the committee has positively altered a resume to get a team in the tournament or a noticeably better seed (nor do I)

And we are in the latter situation.

Well, maybe. Our situation this year is unique. And it's as stark a contrast (with JB vs without JB) as you can get. Clearly they can't (and shouldn't) discount those 9 games altogether. But if their objective is (as has been stated ad nauseum through the years) to grant bids to and seed teams based as accurately as possible on who/what those teams truly are (not on who/what they were during a stretch in which a key piece was missing) - then they have to at least take that stark contrast into consideration. i.e., who is the real SU team that would be playing in the tourney? The one with JB coaching, is the answer.

 

[pearl31]

I agree with palm, ive felt that way all year.

if we don't get in...Hops fault.

if we get a crappy seed...Hops fault.

somebody make sure coyle has a list started...

 

[sabach]

Yes they are very different directions. But Palm does address that

View attachment 55690

Basically he points that there have been situations where the committee has used negatives to negatively adjust seeds, but he does not remember where the committee has positively altered a resume to get a team in the tournament or a noticeably better seed (nor do I)

And we are in the latter situation.

However, with the resumes being so close with many teams, you would not necessarily see a clear case of them moving a team into the tourney because of those factors even if they did do it. SU's resume would be clearly undeserving only if we lost out from here on.

 

[KaiserUEO]

totally agree.

all Hop can do is lose.

 

[Orangemen]

One case to consider would be Michigan state in 2000. Started 9-4 without Mateen Cleaves and finished 23-7 overall.

With cleaves they played very well and got a #1 seed in the Midwest. Some of us remember this a little too well.

Either way, they got a #1 seed with 7 regular season losses, which offhand, seems high for a #1 seed.

Again, they did play well with Cleaves back and won some big games, but I wonder if the average team at full strength all year with 7 losses on their resume, including to Wright State, as they had, would have nabbed a #1 seed.

 

[Alsacs]

3 teams have gotten 1 seeds with 7 losses 2 times Michigan State and Kansas.

Michigan State could play themselves up to the 1 line this year.

 

[pearl31]

A couple of results tonight that are good for bubble teams - Akron loses to Kent St and Monmouth loses to Iona

 

[jncuse]

However, with the resumes being so close with many teams, you would not necessarily see a clear case of them moving a team into the tourney because of those factors even if they did do it. SU's resume would be clearly undeserving only if we lost out from here on.

Delayed reply, as I have been away for a few days.

I do concede to you on that point. In a situation that is cloe to 50/50 an absence could well be the factor that puts a team in, and such an insertion would be basically impossible to identify.

But getting back to my point if we end up on the bubble on selection Sunday, that means we finished 1-5 or 2-5 or 2-4. It could be deemed a non factor, because our team is simply inconsistent.

All that being said, I still like our chances at 9-9 and no bad loss in the first game of the ACC. Have not looked at results the last few days or the new matrix, but I suspect my feeling from the past 2-3 weeks still holds true,

 

[kirbivore]

One case to consider would be Michigan state in 2000. Started 9-4 without Mateen Cleaves and finished 23-7 overall.

With cleaves they played very well and got a #1 seed in the Midwest. Some of us remember this a little too well.

Either way, they got a #1 seed with 7 regular season losses, which offhand, seems high for a #1 seed.

Again, they did play well with Cleaves back and won some big games, but I wonder if the average team at full strength all year with 7 losses on their resume, including to Wright State, as they had, would have nabbed a #1 seed.

SU put themselves in MSU's bracket by losing the BET quarterfinal.