Kinda wild that Memphis isn’t a “P5”, because their b-ball program is far more like the good P5 programs than it’s like those other programs they’re being grouped with in that tweet.
Not sure what makes it brutal. Oral Roberts is probably a better than average 12 seed but if Dook can't beat ORU then there isn't much to say. Tennessee is the 4 seed and they've been a train wreck lately. They'd have trouble scoring 70 in the layup line and now they're without their PG and best player. Purdue to me is hands-down the weakest 1 seed. They go life and death with RU and PSU. That league is very mediocre.
Compared to other 4 and 5s, imo, they have worst draw. They are a young team. Playing experience right out of the gate isn’t great
I agree that the inexperience could catch up with them. We've also seen many times where a team looks great winning their conference tournament and then comes out flat as a pancake in the NCAAT. I'm not buying into Duke as a powerhouse - just not impressed with either TENN or Purdue. I think both are notably weaker than their comparable seeds.
Take Colgate if your betting.Texas is a flaky team. They have the ability but a good shooting team like Colgate can easily pull it off.
you couldn't be more wrong. This Texas team is okay but nothing special. They have won multiple games they should have lost. Texas may very well win, but they sure are notgoing to blow Colgate's doors off unless all the shooters go cold.
They’re not a good team by any means. The point is that anything can happen in conference play. You play each other 1-3 times a year, every year. Virginia only beat Louisville by three on the road. Should we all pick them to lose to Furman since Louisville is so bad?
I don't think he is saying that. I think he is saying the base rankings of the net are flawed. After all there is no info on how it is determined at the start of the year who the "good" schools will be.Because of that it is highly possible schools start the year in the wrong quadrant. This will slowly correct itself during the year but not enough for there to be true value in the net to draw any definitive conclusion. It is a useful metric but has its flaws.
One problem I have with the current system--
5 teams in Maui won their league regular season title this year--Gonzaga, UCLA, Purdue, Marquette, and Kansas.
The Big 12/SEC Challenge effectively did that this year. Probably had a lot to do with A&M getting a 7-seed and WVU making the field comfortably.
It’s not a head to head eval though . It’s multiple teams being simultaneously evaluated against each other . Let’s say Clemson deserved to get in ahead of nc state based on head to head but nc state deserves to get in vs another bubble team based on head to head and that team deserved to get in over Clemson in a head to head ??
They aren't a good team agreed but I just think it's funny that in football, every conference says that winning on the road is difficult but the same somehow doesn't apply to basketball...
Anything can happen in conference play, that doesn’t excuse bad losses, that just makes them possible. This really isn’t a difficult concept if people ignore head to head (as you should because the resumes aren’t even close)
If you say so. Maybe for a storied program like Syracuse, but Louisville is still more talented than we are 4 wins or not.
South Carolina fans are celebrating that their football team beat Clemson and kept them from making the college football playoffs and their basketball team beat Clemson and kept them out of the NCAA tournament.
Definitely shouldn’t be a 9 seed, a low 10 at best. I do think this iteration of the big 12 might be the best conference in a long time though. Every team in the top 70 of net, Oklahoma (who was last) still had 6 quad 1 wins. The entire conference had 1 Quad 3 and 1 Quad 4 loss.
