Feb 24 & 25 - Weekend Bubble Schedule

[djorange1989]

Wasn't the unbalanced schedule essentially what screwed us in 2007 or the excuse they used? Basically 10-6 wasn't as impressive considering who we played.

Our OOC is what did us in. They made an example out of us to try and convince schools to schedule up. Tools like Gottlieb cheered their decision. We got jobbed.

 

[bpo57]

The committee doesn’t care about covering. Nebraska has basically no good wins (worse than us, yes) so not so sure about them getting in

I know they don't care about covers. Just pointing the 18 for 20 out. That is a staggering figure for anybody that follows sports betting. The betting public and the people that set the lines have been underestimating them all year long.

 

[djorange1989]

I know they don't care about covers. Just pointing the 18 for 20 out. That is a staggering figure for anybody that follows sports betting. The betting public and the people that set the lines have been underestimating them all year long.

Gotcha, that is pretty amazing. I should have put some money down on them

 

[bpo57]

One other point potentially in favour of Nebraska. I saw an interview with the selection chair about a month ago.

All former committees for the past several years have basically outlawed the eye test, and will say that when asked about it. And it generally plays out in their picks.

This was the first time in a while I saw a chair say that the "eye test" at times has to be considered. I find the eye test wrong because certain styles look better than others, it is highly subject to sample size (if you watch a team play the wrong night), and nobody can possibly watch the majority of games of every team.

I would rather go back to emphasizing the back half of the schedule, rather than go to the eye test, if you want to put in teams who are playing well.

Speaking of the tournament chair, he was at the Nebraska game tonight. He's the Creighton AD.

They can deny using the eye test all they want but we know they're watching these games and can't help but be influenced by what they see.

 

[bpo57]

One last thing about Nebraska. By getting the double bye, and if chalk holds, they'd play Michigan in the quarterfinals, a team they drilled by 20 earlier in the year. A win there and they're in the semifinals of the B1G at MSG. I'd like their chances at that point in terms of an invite. Obviously a second win would make them a lock.

 

[pearl31]

Speaking of the tournament chair, he was at the Nebraska game tonight. He's the Creighton AD.

They can deny using the eye test all they want but we know they're watching these games and can't help but be influenced by what they see.

Do you know they use a quadrant system now? Do you know that, in the quadrant system, at-large teams are compared against each other based on q1 and q2 wins?

 

[jdubs30]

One last thing about Nebraska. By getting the double bye, and if chalk holds, they'd play Michigan in the quarterfinals, a team they drilled by 20 earlier in the year. A win there and they're in the semifinals of the B1G at MSG. I'd like their chances at that point in terms of an invite. Obviously a second win would make them a lock.

Michigan is also vastly underrated by the AP/ESPN poll. That'd be a great win for Nebraska - Michigan is as hot as anyone in the country right now.

 

[nycfan]

Michigan is also vastly underrated by the AP/ESPN poll. That'd be a great win for Nebraska - Michigan is as hot as anyone in the country right now.

Yep, was just going to say the same thing -- Michigan has won 5 in row (none of them close) and 7 of 8. The last 3 were all impressive:

1) 10 point win vs Ohio State
2) 9 point win at Penn State
3) 24 point win at Maryland

That would be a real tough game in the tourney for Nebraska, but a win could go a long way for them.

 

[bpo57]

Do you know they use a quadrant system now? Do you know that, in the quadrant system, at-large teams are compared against each other based on q1 and q2 wins?

Yeah I know all about it.

I also know the B1G is a very powerful conference and if one of its members wins 14 games (that would be the case if they win their quarterfinal game) and makes it to the semis then I like their chances. I've also watched them play and they're good. Eye test will come into play as well. I assume you've watched selection sundays for many years now. Do you recall a lot of years where power conferences got stiffed? Yeah me neither.

 

[jncuse]

Speaking of the tournament chair, he was at the Nebraska game tonight. He's the Creighton AD.

They can deny using the eye test all they want but we know they're watching these games and can't help but be influenced by what they see.

There really has been limited evidence of the eye test being a basis for their selections. It typically jives with the metrics for the last handful of year. So I would have to disagree that in recent years they have been doing it.

My point was more that this year the chair was open that the eye test may come into play. It makes it much easier for them to justify certain picks/

 

[pearl31]

man Colorado looked great today vs UCLA. They should be in the tourney

 

[pearl31]

Yeah I know all about it.

I also know the B1G is a very powerful conference and if one of its members wins 14 games (that would be the case if they win their quarterfinal game) and makes it to the semis then I like their chances. I've also watched them play and they're good. Eye test will come into play as well. I assume you've watched selection sundays for many years now. Do you recall a lot of years where power conferences got stiffed? Yeah me neither.

maybe the chair watched their game last week in Champaign, IL, too

 

[bpo57]

Michigan is also vastly underrated by the AP/ESPN poll. That'd be a great win for Nebraska - Michigan is as hot as anyone in the country right now.

Absolutely right. They've been on a roll. And MSU is still one of the teams with a good shot to win it all.

From what I've seen of Nebraska they could take apart most of the teams currently listed on the bubble, particularly the P12 teams.

 

[bpo57]

man Colorado looked great today vs UCLA. They should be in the tourney

Really? Have they won 13 games in their conference?

If Nebraska beats Michigan in the quarters then let's discuss a wager given your dismissive tone.

 

[bpo57]

maybe the chair watched their game last week in Champaign, IL, too

Or maybe the one point loss to Kansas.

 

[jncuse]

I think getting a quality result in the B10 tourney will be huge for Nebraska. It makes the difference between minimal chance to decent chance for me.

Just remember they will be the most dissected team on the bubble early on as they are done first. I think it is important that they have something of recent value next week to help in those discussions.

 

[bpo57]

There really has been limited evidence of the eye test being a basis for their selections. It typically jives with the metrics for the last handful of year. So I would have to disagree that in recent years they have been doing it.

My point was more that this year the chair was open that the eye test may come into play. It makes it much easier for them to justify certain picks/

I know you disagree but I'd prefer the eye test by some experienced and knowledgeable (I know, not so easy to get the right folks together) basketball people as opposed to computerized rankings (garbage in, garbage out). A classic case has been the College Football Committee. Those guys admit to using the eye test and they've done a phenomenal job imo. Much better than the basketball folks.

 

[jncuse]

Or maybe the one point loss to Kansas.

The Illinois win stings more because it is a bad loss.

Until they lost to Illinois, the obvious counter to NIL quality wins, was NIL bad losses. That is gone now, although Michigan has moved back into Q1.

 

[bpo57]

I think getting a quality result in the B10 tourney will be huge for Nebraska. It makes the difference between minimal chance to decent chance for me.

Just remember they will be the most dissected team on the bubble early on as they are done first. I think it is important that they have something of recent value next week to help in those discussions.

I agree and that's why I"m saying I like their chances if they win that quarterfinal game, particularly against Michigan. It also can potentially help to play a semifinal game at MSG when no other big time conference tourney action is going on.

 

[bpo57]

The Illinois win stings more because it is a bad loss.

Until they lost to Illinois, the obvious counter to NIL quality wins, was NIL bad losses. That is gone now, although Michigan has moved back into Q1.

It is a bad loss. But most bubble teams have at least one bad road loss. In fact some have bad home losses.

 

[jncuse]

I know you disagree but I'd prefer the eye test by some experienced and knowledgeable (I know, not so easy to get the right folks together) basketball people as opposed to computerized rankings (garbage in, garbage out). A classic case has been the College Football Committee. Those guys admit to using the eye test and they've done a phenomenal job imo. Much better than the basketball folks.

I am not against the eye test in basketball if correctly applied. It is much easier in football when there are only about 15 contenders and only a handful of meaningful games for each team.

The problem in basketball is the scope needed to correctly apply it is huge. Nobody can watch enough games of each team. The field is way too deep. There is also a clear bias in basketball against teams that are good offensively and those that are not. Good defensive teams don't pass the eye test, but they are just as good.

 

[bpo57]

I am not against the eye test in basketball if correctly applied. It is much easier in football when there are only about 15 contenders and only a handful of meaningful games for each team.

The problem in basketball is the scope needed to correctly apply it is huge. Nobody can watch enough games of each team. The field is way too deep. There is also a clear bias in basketball against teams that are good offensively and those that are not. Good defensive teams don't pass the eye test, but they are just as good.

Maybe a combo is in order. If it were the case that these guys didn't watch any of the action then that would be disturbing. If that's the case then get a few computer geeks in the room and have them hash it out cuz otherwise they're not bringing much to the table.

 

[jncuse]

It is a bad loss. But most bubble teams have at least one bad road loss. In fact some have bad home losses.

Yes but all the other teams have much more quality wins.

That was my point. If you called them out on quality wins, they could always claim they were well ahead in bad losses.

 

[jncuse]

Maybe a combo is in order. If it were the case that these guys didn't watch any of the action then that would be disturbing. If that's the case then get a few computer geeks in the room and have them hash it out cuz otherwise they're not bringing much to the table.

They could watch many games. But if I told you BPO, you are now a committee member, you can go watch 30, even 50, games live between January and March 10. Seems like many games, but are you going to get great coverage in the end of the 25 teams that were identified as bubble candidates in early January. Do you watch Syracuse when we played Virginia Tech, or when we played Wake Forest or god forbid Notre Dame.

 

[pearl31]

Really? Have they won 13 games in their conference?

If Nebraska beats Michigan in the quarters then let's discuss a wager given your dismissive tone.

Look at that murderers' row!
The real number to look at/think about with Nebraska? 1. 1 win against a tournament team.