St Johns Georgetown and UConn

[AZcuse77]

A little good news after a rough loss... All three of our "bad" OOC losses are now in the top 100 of KenPom. Georgetown crushed Marquette today and is almost top 50 now. St Johns took down Seton Hall. UConn is now over .500 in the AAC after winning 4 of 5. All three have a shot to finish with winning records in league and overall and finish in top 50 or top 100 of KenPom.

Yes they are still bad losses to bad teams... but BC may end up being the only >100 KenPom loss if the committee follows through on looking at the more useful metrics than RPI this year. That could give us a better shot at getting in with a 10-8 ACC record and a tourney win or two. I still think we'll need at least 19 wins but maybe not 20 if our bad losses finish strong.

 

[NineOneSeven]

That's not a positive at all. I hope Uconn loses every game for the rest of eternity.

 

[AZcuse77]

That's not a positive at all. I hope Uconn loses every game for the rest of eternity.

Heh I hear ya... well at least root for Wisconsin and South Carolina... All 5 of our OOC losses actually look better than when they happened. Wisky is in the top 10 and South Carolina is top 20. It will certainly benefit Cuse for these teams to finish strong regardless of dislike for UConn and GTown.

 

[dasher]

That's not a positive at all. I hope Uconn loses every game for the rest of eternity.

That is ridiculous. And just plain spiteful. Try and be gracious for once in your life. A win by UConn 27 years down the road wouldn't be such a bad thing.

 

[orangenirvana]

A little good news after a rough loss... All three of our "bad" OOC losses are now in the top 100 of KenPom. Georgetown crushed Marquette today and is almost top 50 now. St Johns took down Seton Hall. UConn is now over .500 in the AAC after winning 4 of 5. All three have a shot to finish with winning records in league and overall and finish in top 50 or top 100 of KenPom.

Yes they are still bad losses to bad teams... but BC may end up being the only >100 KenPom loss if the committee follows through on looking at the more useful metrics than RPI this year. That could give us a better shot at getting in with a 10-8 ACC record and a tourney win or two. I still think we'll need at least 19 wins but maybe not 20 if our bad losses finish strong.

Bad losses are irrelevant. Root for the teams SU has beaten.



And never root for Georgetown and uconn.

 

[Briancuse]

Bad losses are irrelevant. Root for the teams SU has beaten.



And never root for Georgetown and uconn.

Not really, the committee looks at them.

 

[iommi]

Bad losses are irrelevant. Root for the teams SU has beaten.



And never root for Georgetown and uconn.

Better let the committee know that is the way it is going to be this year, since that's not the way it normally works.

 

[longtimefan]

Bad losses are irrelevant. Root for the teams SU has beaten.



And never root for Georgetown and uconn.

Yes. "Good" wins are a bigger positive than "bad" losses are a negative. Or, at least that's been the rule in the past. Although we know that the committee can change priorities from year to year.

 

[iommi]

When's the last time a team with quality wins didn't make the tournament because they had too many "bad losses"? If you have evidence to suggest otherwise (committee member mentioning bad losses as a criteria) then I'll certainly listen.

Let me do that off the top of my head. Seriously, it is a criteria and committee guys have said so when teams have been snubbed. It's not that important to me to look up. But it is something they look at.

 

[AZcuse77]

Bad losses are irrelevant. Root for the teams SU has beaten.



And never root for Georgetown and uconn.

The committee has in the past said great wins do count more than bad losses, but they certainly never said bad losses are irrelevant. Combine that with the fact that they certainly do look at not just record but ratings indexes (even if its going to shift away from RPI and towards the more accurate ones) and even if this were true we would still want teams we lost to on our schedule (and beat) in OOC to do well.

 

[orangenirvana]

The committee has in the past said great wins do count more than bad losses, but they certainly never said bad losses are irrelevant. Combine that with the fact that they certainly do look at not just record but ratings indexes (even if its going to shift away from RPI and towards the more accurate ones) and even if this were true we would still want teams we lost to on our schedule (and beat) in OOC to do well.

I'll concede this point. Our only truly bad loss (outside Top 100) is Boston College. Hopefully the good wins have cancelled that out at least.

Meanwhile I'm rooting hard for Florida State over Notre Dame right now.

 

[orangecuse]

The committee has in the past said great wins do count more than bad losses, but they certainly never said bad losses are irrelevant. Combine that with the fact that they certainly do look at not just record but ratings indexes (even if its going to shift away from RPI and towards the more accurate ones) and even if this were true we would still want teams we lost to on our schedule (and beat) in OOC to do well.

Not to mention that two of the aforementioned losses were at home, one of them a 33 point defeat, and another while honoring an SU all time legend in the Pearl. The third ugly loss is our home away from home in MSG. When taking all of that into account and have zero quality OOC wins...B-R-U-T-A-L.