http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
On the bubble of the bubble:
"(For the record, we're also keeping an eye on Valparaiso, as well as a few other long-shot mid-majors that might sneak onto the page at some point in the coming weeks. Keep the faith.)"
Quote from: valpocleveland on February 02, 2016, 01:32:43 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
On the bubble of the bubble:
"(For the record, we're also keeping an eye on Valparaiso, as well as a few other long-shot mid-majors that might sneak onto the page at some point in the coming weeks. Keep the faith.)"
Utter garbage. Oregon State, Wisconsin, and Gonzaga are on there, but Valpo isn't. This guy is a moron.
Quote from: a3uge on February 02, 2016, 02:17:22 PM
Quote from: valpocleveland on February 02, 2016, 01:32:43 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
On the bubble of the bubble:
"(For the record, we're also keeping an eye on Valparaiso, as well as a few other long-shot mid-majors that might sneak onto the page at some point in the coming weeks. Keep the faith.)"
Utter garbage. Oregon State, Wisconsin, and Gonzaga are on there, but Valpo isn't. This guy is a moron.
Certifiably!
Quote from: valpocleveland on February 02, 2016, 01:32:43 PMOn the bubble of the bubble:
"(For the record, we're also keeping an eye on Valparaiso, as well as a few other long-shot mid-majors that might sneak onto the page at some point in the coming weeks. Keep the faith.)"
I'll confess I was looking forward to Bubblewatch's debut.
Nice for Valpo to get mentions here and there. As a quality team Oregon was willing to schedule (with Baylor). Also "If it weren't for Valparaiso, Florida would be the best defensive team absolutely no one talked about."
Oregon State's barely included, "After two road losses at Arizona and Arizona State last weekend, the Beavers are best described as a long shot. At least for now.". But, of course, they have the opportunity for quality wins that we don't.
I'm a bit sore to see Monmouth listed while we're not, but they do have some high quality wins. I'm not shocked.
It'd be more fun to be included, for sure. And, we'll see what happens (as with the national rankings) if we keep logging wins while other teams add some losses.
We would kill Monmouth...
Quote from: valpotx on February 03, 2016, 02:31:42 AM
We would kill Monmouth...
Although the Valpo bench is going to have to help Nick Davidson match Monmouth's sideline celebrations. It's a very tough assignment. ;)
Here is what sucks. Our non-con SOS is 45 and our non-con rpi is 16. Since that time we have gone 9-1 and our SOS has dropped to 151 and our RPI has dropped to 35. We picked a bad year to be really good. The HL is killing us. With the exception of the WSU game, we have destroyed the league by an average of 20+ points. I would much rather have been winning these games by 4-7 points and playing against teams that are 50-80 places better in the RPI.
Oh well... But yes, it is ridiculous that we were not mentioned. Georgetown and IPFW have very similar RPI's, but we beat IPFW, not Georgetown. So once again, it doesn't matter what the RPI is, Georgetown is a big win and IPFW is not. So, Monmouth scheduled tough and we did not. Even though that is not exactly true. Oh, and who cares that lots of teams upset Georgetown this year. haha
Rant over.
Quote from: SanityLost17 on February 03, 2016, 05:15:08 PMOur non-con SOS is 45 and our non-con rpi is 16. Since that time we have gone 9-1 and our SOS has dropped to 151 and our RPI has dropped to 35. We picked a bad year to be really good. The HL is killing us. With the exception of the WSU game, we have destroyed the league by an average of 20+ points. I would much rather have been winning these games by 4-7 points and playing against teams that are 50-80 places better in the RPI.
Yeah, it's not great. But, our end-of-season RPI can still look pretty good.
The forecast (RPI Forecast) ending the regular season is 29 if we don't lose another (36%), 37 if we lose one more (37%), 46 if we lose two (18%). Playing two 100-200 RPI teams on a neutral court may not hurt our RPI. Better if they'd count as away games, of course! Oakland's forecast at 120, Milwaukee, Green Bay, Wright State are forecast in the 150-180 range, Detroit 225.
I'd feel OK about an RPI of better than 30 come bracketing time. Not too much below our computer numbers from more advanced metrics, probably (KenPom 20-25, or Sagarin's already in our RPI range, 36-39, not that this is a good thing).
I worry more about the quality of competition. Is our offense getting pushed the way it will in the NCAA tournament? Are we improving like we need to be if we want a good chance of going on a run? Is our defense really getting tested in appropriate ways?
You'd sure consider trading up, and playing in the B10, or some such, this year. Not that anyone's going to make the offer.
#16 Utah and #22 Colorado will make the Oregon swing this week to play the #3 Ducks and the #63 Beavers. Oregon St needs a couple wins just to move back into the bubble competition and a sweep by Oregon could strengthen their position even more.
Friday fun fact. Elon, with a record of 12-10, would be the second best RPI team in the HL, by about 10 places. Things are not looking good if we can't win the conference tourney, because we are going to lose at least 1 more regular season game.
Quote from: justducky on February 04, 2016, 11:48:08 AM
#16 Utah and #22 Colorado will make the Oregon swing this week to play the #3 Ducks and the #63 Beavers. Oregon St needs a couple wins just to move back into the bubble competition and a sweep by Oregon could strengthen their position even more.
Well, they are off to a pretty solid start with Oregon beating Colorado by 20 and Oregon State beating Utah by 2!
Quote from: vu72 on February 05, 2016, 03:29:35 PM
Quote from: justducky on February 04, 2016, 11:48:08 AM
#16 Utah and #22 Colorado will make the Oregon swing this week to play the #3 Ducks and the #63 Beavers. Oregon St needs a couple wins just to move back into the bubble competition and a sweep by Oregon could strengthen their position even more.
Well, they are off to a pretty solid start with Oregon beating Colorado by 20 and Oregon State beating Utah by 2!
I saw the replay of the finish of Oregon St/Utah. What was that guy thinking trying to block a half court shot? I guess you just chalk it up to Ute-full enthusiasm. :o
I don't know about a block, but I'd maybe not have minded a body on Benzinger, or a hand in the face, on that 3/4 court shot at the buzzer...
With the Oregon St win over Colorado they have leapt back to RPI 42 while we dropped 15 on the day to #47. I wonder what the next bracket matrix will show?
If we won out the regular season what are our remaining at-large hopes? It is difficult to follow all the moving parts but I know we would still be high in the conversation or better. Thoughts?
Quote from: justducky on February 06, 2016, 10:10:59 PM
With the Oregon St win over Colorado they have leapt back to RPI 42 while we dropped 15 on the day to #47. I wonder what the next bracket matrix will show?
If we won out the regular season what are our remaining at-large hopes? It is difficult to follow all the moving parts but I know we would still be high in the conversation or better. Thoughts?
Seems much like the stock market. It's all on paper (or a computer screen) and changes a lot before settling down to the final price (position).
Quote from: bbtds on February 06, 2016, 10:19:58 PM
Quote from: justducky on February 06, 2016, 10:10:59 PM
With the Oregon St win over Colorado they have leapt back to RPI 42 while we dropped 15 on the day to #47. I wonder what the next bracket matrix will show?
If we won out the regular season what are our remaining at-large hopes? It is difficult to follow all the moving parts but I know we would still be high in the conversation or better. Thoughts?
Seems much like the stock market. It's all on paper (or a computer screen) and changes a lot before settling down to the final price (position).
Your response is a classic non-answer, answer. I didn't know your background was political. ::) Who else would like to dodge the question?
Well, Well... What an interesting week for the non-locks in NCAA Basketball. So much parody in college basketball this season, it is ridiculous. Here are some of the notable results for the top 25 and receiving vote teams that scramble the big picture going into the second week of February:
Teams that lost a game:
#8/#8 Texas A&M- Lost at Vandy and at Home to South Carolina
#11/#11 Providence- Lost at DePaul and at Home to Villanova
#12/-- SMU- Lost at Houston (USF road game on Sunday) (Also not post-season eligible but in AP Poll...)
#13/#14 Iowa State- Lost at Home to West Virginia and barely get by Ok St on the road
#15/#13 Baylor- Lost at Home against Texas and at West Virginia
#18/#16 Purdue- Lost at Maryland
#19/#18 Louisville- Didn't lose a game, but lost their post-season, so I guess that counts? They beat UNC and BC.
#20/#19 Kentucky- Lost at Tennessee, but crushed Florida at home
#21/#22 Wichita State- Beat SIU at home, but dropped the road game at Illinois State
#22/#21 Indiana- Crushed Michigan on the road, and then falls to Penn State in State College?
#25/#23 South Carolina- Double-Digit Loss at Georgia, and then beats Texas A&M in College Station
RV/#25 St. Mary's- Double-digit loss at BYU and a road win at San Diego
RV/RV Utah- Road loss to Oregon State (Still play at Oregon on Sunday)
RV/RV VCU- Wins at LaSalle and loses at home to rising George Washington
RV/RV Notre Dame- Road loss at Miami, but rebound with a close home win over UNC
RV/RV Michigan- Blowout homes losses to Indiana and Michigan State
RV/RV Pittsburgh- Home loss to Virginia
RV/RV Florida- Limps by Arkansas at home and gets blown out at Kentucky
RV/RV St. Joseph's- Loses at home to St. Bonaventure by 10 and then hammers Fordham on the road
--/RV Clemson- Wins at Wake, and loses at Virginia Tech
--/RV Washington- Beat Arizona State at home in OT, but lost to Arizona at home
UCLA- Lost at USC
Colorado- Road losses to Oregon and Oregon State
Vanderbilt- Beats Texas A&M at home and goes on to lose at Mississippi
Cincinnati- Home win over USF and a close road loss to Memphis
Bubble Worthy Teams that Won Out this week (through late Saturday):
#17/#15 Miami (FL)- Beat Notre Dame at home (Still to play at GT on Sunday)
#23/#20 Arizona- Swept the Washington schools on the road
#24/#24 Dayton- Crushed lowly George Mason in the DC Suburbs
RV/RV USC- Home win over UCLA
RV/RV Valpo- Took care of business against UIC in Chicago
RV/RV Duke- Wins at GT and home over NC State
RV/RV Texas- Wins at Baylor and home over in-state rival Texas Tech
RV/-- San Diego State- Home wins over Colorado State and New Mexico (OT)
--/RV Gonzaga- Big win at LMU and survived at Pepperdine
--/RV Monmouth- Defeated Siena on the road and Fairfield at home
--/RV Butler- Home win over Georgetown and a road win over St. John's
--/RV California- Home win over Stanford
--/RV Seton Hall- Beat Marquette and Georgetown at home
Wisconsin- Beat Ohio State at home
LSU- Wins at Auburn and at home against Miss St; Now 1st Place SEC
Georgia- Beat South Carolina and Auburn at home
Florida State- Home win over NC State and a road win over Wake Forest
Syracuse- Home win over Virginia Tech
George Washington- A home win over Davidson and a road win over VCU
St. Bonaventure- Beat St. Joseph's on the road (Home game vs. SLU on Sunday)
Connecticut- Crushes Memphis on the road by 20 (Home game vs. ECU on Sunday)
Little Rock- Stifles Troy and South Alabama at home with their defense
Seeing how many "bubble teams" lost over the past couple days and with other middle of the pack power conference teams just holding serve over conference cellar dwellers, it is very difficult to see why we are not on the Bubble Watch. I know that we have a declining SOS and we lack a "sexy" win over a perennial NCAA tourney name like Monmouth does. But we have a top 50 RPI and non-conference SOS and a 20-4 record. Oregon State is now a Top 50 RPI win and none of our losses are "landmines" per se. The life of a true mid-major is hard. Little room for error and no appreciation when you could have $$$ schools like Syracuse, Wisconsin, and Butler in the tourney instead of the trendy NCAA upset-worthy Valpo...
Another food for thought is how this past week will impact the AP/Coaches/Mid-Major Polls... Valpo faithful voters in Seth Davis and Graham Couch will likely continue their support, but will Valpo get any additional love? Wichita State lost to ISU tonight, which has the same flavor as Valpo losing to Wright State a couple weeks ago (First place loses to Mid-100 RPI 2nd place team). But I'm sure that name recognition and the foresight to see ISU as the MVC team to beat Wichita the last two times will keep them much more afloat... *sigh*
I say, let's focus on NKU and then get some revenge on WSU at home this week and only revisit this March 9th, if needed.
Quote from: SanityLost17 on February 05, 2016, 03:20:26 PM
Friday fun fact. Elon, with a record of 12-10, would be the second best RPI team in the HL, by about 10 places.
Thats pretty weak. The horizon has got to do better. I watched Elon in person a few weeks back and wasn't impressed.
Quote from: valpolaw on February 07, 2016, 08:03:52 AM
Quote from: SanityLost17 on February 05, 2016, 03:20:26 PM
Friday fun fact. Elon, with a record of 12-10, would be the second best RPI team in the HL, by about 10 places.
Thats pretty weak. The horizon has got to do better. I watched Elon in person a few weeks back and wasn't impressed.
They had a great OOC schedule (FOR THEM). 7-4 record, 85 RPI. They had road losses in buy-games to Michigan, Syracuse, and Duke... But played 200+ RPI teams in 6 of those games, winning ALL of them. They lost to 121 at home and beat 139 on the road. And they still had a 149 OOC SOS, despite getting their payday from the big schools.
The Colonial actually have SIX teams that have projected top 100 OOC RPIs! 8 of their 10 teams started conference play with winning records. They are currently 9th in RPI.
William & Mary has an RPI of 30, but have THREE conference losses, a loss to HOWARD, and 0 top 100 RPI wins OOC... But since the rest of their conference 1) scheduled well, and 2) beat the bad teams, their conference losses are top 100 RPI losses, instead of losses to teams struggling to stay above .500. Is William & Mary better than Valpo? Hell no, and the selection committee should see right through it... But last year the committee elevated Buffalo when they had no decent wins, but scheduled well. I think Valpo is in a much better place with a top 50 RPI road win, but we could be in much, much better shape if the conference pulled its weight. Our OOC RPI is 13! If the Horizon League wasn't ass this year, we should be top 25 even with a couple losses.
And again, there's only been 1 team to miss the tournament with a top 30 RPI (Missouri State), and that was before the bubble expanded to 2 more teams. Combine that with UConn and Louisville that are ineligible, it should be a no brainer that a top 25 RPI team make the field.
Here's a graph of people googling "valpo" or "valparaiso university" over time. Notice the big spikes every March: https://goo.gl/SnLZFw
Check out these page view statistics from Valpo's Wikipedia page: https://goo.gl/bFxbmM
They exploded on Jan 25, a Monday, the day polls come out. Presumably, the two are related. This year, people are taking notice well before March. Let's hope Valpo can capitalize on this increased (and free) national attention.
Speaking of which, if you haven't yet, give Valpo a good rating on Google: https://goo.gl/yhYqGo
It might seem frivolous, but for many people, a quick google of "valpo" after seeing that name on a bracket will be their first encounter with the school. It would be great if the first thing they saw was a good rating with a solid number of reviewers. Early impressions matter!
Quote from: Vale O. Paradise on February 07, 2016, 12:56:08 PM
Here's a graph of people googling "valpo" or "valparaiso university" over time. Notice the big spikes every March: https://goo.gl/SnLZFw
Check out these page view statistics from Valpo's Wikipedia page: https://goo.gl/bFxbmM
They exploded on Jan 25, a Monday, the day polls come out. Presumably, the two are related. This year, people are taking notice well before March. Let's hope Valpo can capitalize on this increased (and free) national attention.
Speaking of which, if you haven't yet, give Valpo a good rating on Google: https://goo.gl/yhYqGo
It might seem frivolous, but for many people, a quick google of "valpo" after seeing that name on a bracket will be their first encounter with the school. It would be great if the first thing they saw was a good rating with a solid number of reviewers. Early impressions matter!
Man, we really need to join the Missouri Valley - Drake and Bradley get thousands more searches than Valpo!
https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=valpo%2C%20Drake%2C%20Bradley&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT%2B7
Quote from: justducky on February 06, 2016, 10:54:17 PM
Quote from: bbtds on February 06, 2016, 10:19:58 PM
Quote from: justducky on February 06, 2016, 10:10:59 PM
With the Oregon St win over Colorado they have leapt back to RPI 42 while we dropped 15 on the day to #47. I wonder what the next bracket matrix will show?
If we won out the regular season what are our remaining at-large hopes? It is difficult to follow all the moving parts but I know we would still be high in the conversation or better. Thoughts?
Seems much like the stock market. It's all on paper (or a computer screen) and changes a lot before settling down to the final price (position).
Your response is a classic non-answer, answer. I didn't know your background was political. ::) Who else would like to dodge the question?
Exactly. Much like a parent giving the child the sex talk.
Quote from: a3uge on February 07, 2016, 02:31:45 PM
Quote from: Vale O. Paradise on February 07, 2016, 12:56:08 PM
Here's a graph of people googling "valpo" or "valparaiso university" over time. Notice the big spikes every March: https://goo.gl/SnLZFw (https://goo.gl/SnLZFw)
Check out these page view statistics from Valpo's Wikipedia page: https://goo.gl/bFxbmM (https://goo.gl/bFxbmM)
They exploded on Jan 25, a Monday, the day polls come out. Presumably, the two are related. This year, people are taking notice well before March. Let's hope Valpo can capitalize on this increased (and free) national attention.
Speaking of which, if you haven't yet, give Valpo a good rating on Google: https://goo.gl/yhYqGo (https://goo.gl/yhYqGo)
It might seem frivolous, but for many people, a quick google of "valpo" after seeing that name on a bracket will be their first encounter with the school. It would be great if the first thing they saw was a good rating with a solid number of reviewers. Early impressions matter!
Man, we really need to join the Missouri Valley - Drake and Bradley get thousands more searches than Valpo!
https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=valpo%2C%20Drake%2C%20Bradley&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT%2B7 (https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=valpo%2C%20Drake%2C%20Bradley&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT%2B7)
Hate the Drake!
Quote from: Vale O. Paradise on February 07, 2016, 12:56:08 PMCheck out these page view statistics from Valpo's Wikipedia page: https://goo.gl/bFxbmM
They exploded on Jan 25, a Monday, the day polls come out. Presumably, the two are related.
Except the spike is Friday January 15, right?
Quote from: justducky on February 06, 2016, 10:10:59 PM
With the Oregon St win over Colorado they have leapt back to RPI 42 while we dropped 15 on the day to #47. I wonder what the next bracket matrix will show?
If we won out the regular season what are our remaining at-large hopes? It is difficult to follow all the moving parts but I know we would still be high in the conversation or better. Thoughts?
I can relate to your frustration trying to understand how our projected RPI after the UIC win suddenly became several places lower than before the win. As you noted on 1 of your posts somewhere, it makes no sense. Thankfully, heres a rack-up that does make sense. Note that if we win our last 7 games our expected RPI is 28.1, which is better than where we were before the UIC game.
Final Record/Expected RPI/Probability
25-4 28.1 35.30%
24-5 36.9 41.68%
23-6 48.1 18.49%
22-7 59.7 4.15%
21-8 72.0 0.35%
20-9 85.5 0.02%
As to your question regarding our at-large chances, my guess is if we lose in the semi-finals we won't make it, but if we lose the championship game we might. That is assuming we win our remaining regular season games and whoever beats us in the championship game is not some surprise upset winner with a bad RPI and record. I hope this adds a little clarity.
http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Valparaiso.html (http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Valparaiso.html)
I plugged into RPI Wizard wins for every game and added a Milwaukee win (current 4 seed) on a neutral site. Then I compared an Oakland loss on a neutral site vs. a Youngstown St. loss also on a neutral site (current 2 seed vs. 7 seed).
Loss vs. OaklandLoss vs. Youngstown St.
I would hope that an RPI of 29 would get us an at large. Last year Murray State (47), Old Dominion (41), Richmond (64), Colorado St. (37), and Miami (48) all missed out. Dayton (29) was one of the last 4 in last year.
I have a feeling this will go down to the last few hours of trying to decide which 2 of 3 teams will make it on the day the selection committee makes it's hurried and final choices. Should I go into every restaurant in downtown Indy on selection Sunday morning with some Valpo gear on?
Quote from: bbtds on February 08, 2016, 02:02:15 PM
I have a feeling this will go down to the last few hours of trying to decide which 2 of 3 teams will make it on the day the selection committee makes it's hurried and final choices. Should I go into every restaurant in downtown Indy on selection Sunday morning with some Valpo gear on?
I think we're going to make it a moot point, win out, win the conference tourney, hopefully play the best available teams for RPI in the tourney and grab a 6 or 7 seed.
Also in very VERY frustrating events, I ran RPI wizard with wins vs. Oakland and Milwaukee on neutral courts and we're 23rd in RPI, then I dropped UIC from our schedule with those 2 games and we move up to 15th in RPI. That's 2 seed lines and we could be a top 4 seed and be favored to make the sweet 16. UIC's awfulness is just a mindboggling anchor on our RPI.
Quote from: bbtds on February 08, 2016, 02:02:15 PM
I have a feeling this will go down to the last few hours of trying to decide which 2 of 3 teams will make it on the day the selection committee makes it's hurried and final choices. Should I go into every restaurant in downtown Indy on selection Sunday morning with some Valpo gear on?
Probably wont do much good this year as it'll be in New York.
I actually ran by the Conrad a couple times with a Valpo shirt on last year on Selection Sunday. Guess it didn't work.
Quote from: a3uge on February 08, 2016, 02:49:53 PM
Quote from: bbtds on February 08, 2016, 02:02:15 PM
I have a feeling this will go down to the last few hours of trying to decide which 2 of 3 teams will make it on the day the selection committee makes it's hurried and final choices. Should I go into every restaurant in downtown Indy on selection Sunday morning with some Valpo gear on?
Probably wont do much good this year as it'll be in New York.
I actually ran by the Conrad a couple times with a Valpo shirt on last year on Selection Sunday. Guess it didn't work.
Who came up with that brilliant idea? Do the CBS talking heads want to look the Selection Committee members in the eye?
Quote from: wh on February 07, 2016, 11:36:56 PMI can relate to your frustration trying to understand how our projected RPI after the UIC win suddenly became several places lower than before the win. As you noted on 1 of your posts somewhere, it makes no sense. Thankfully, heres a rack-up that does make sense. Note that if we win our last 7 games our expected RPI is 28.1, which is better than where we were before the UIC game.
Final Record/Expected RPI/Probability
25-4 28.1 35.30%
24-5 36.9 41.68%
23-6 48.1 18.49%
The Warren Nolan predicted RPI with a 24-5 record still places us at 41 vs the rpiforcast number of 36.9. Is the 4.1 difference a product of who they both think we might lose to? If not that then what?
Some of this forecasted RPI decline becomes understandable upon my rethinking. Both Belmont and Indiana St lost to teams they should have beaten with their RPIs declining significantly. Then because of their RPI decline more losses are then predicted which feeds back to a future RPI decline for VU as well.
I don't know what happened to Indiana St at Bradley. Maybe some players were sick or suspended or hurt but the RPI forecasting machine does not care. Nothing is one off so the fact that you played poorly or well in your last game is used as part of the prediction process for all of your upcoming games. Maybe out of habit coach Wardle needed to land a few punches against us and this was the only way he could do it.
Quote from: justducky on February 08, 2016, 06:50:47 PMThe Warren Nolan predicted RPI with a 24-5 record still places us at 41 vs the rpiforcast number of 36.9. Is the 4.1 difference a product of who they both think we might lose to? If not that then what?
At this point it doesn't matter _who_ we lose to (except to the extent that our conference tournament games are undetermined), only how many losses we pick up (or don't! knock on wood).
I love Warren Nolan's site, but I don't know how he does his predictions. His predicted RPI's late in the non-conference, and maybe early in the conference, season looked pretty unlikely. He was still predicting us with a _very_ high RPI (like top 20) even when it was completely clear (at least to the extent that I trust RPI Forecast; where I have somewhat greater knowledge and faith) that our conference schedule was going to drag us down. It seemed like his calculations were either just wrong, or that he was assuming very optimistic future results from our non-conference opponents.
Quote from: agibson on February 08, 2016, 09:02:49 PM
Quote from: justducky on February 08, 2016, 06:50:47 PMThe Warren Nolan predicted RPI with a 24-5 record still places us at 41 vs the rpiforcast number of 36.9. Is the 4.1 difference a product of who they both think we might lose to? If not that then what?
At this point it doesn't matter _who_ we lose to (except to the extent that our conference tournament games are undetermined), only how many losses we pick up (or don't! knock on wood).
Yes and no. A home loss will have a bigger negative impact on RPI than a road loss due to the weighting difference.
Quote from: wh on February 08, 2016, 09:41:48 PMYes and no. A home loss will have a bigger negative impact on RPI than a road loss due to the weighting difference.
Argh! Duly corrected.
Nolan's RPI uses his own prediction formula, while RPI forecast uses Sagarin's predictor (with thousands of rest-of-season simulations averaged together).
Quote from: a3uge on February 08, 2016, 10:29:09 PM
Nolan's RPI uses his own prediction formula, while RPI forecast uses Sagarin's predictor (with thousands of rest-of-season simulations averaged together).
For RPI forecast at least that's just the input, the initial weighting of teams.
There's presumably a number of other choices made in the model before you get to the end result. WN's results have smelled funny, as I mentioned, or at least sharply different from RPI Forecast.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
"Valparaiso is among the nation's best mid-major teams, starring one of the best players (forward Alec Peters) in any league anywhere. Chattanooga is 22-3 with a win at -- this is where we dramatically shift our glasses up and down our face a la Matt Foley -- does that say Dayton? Odin's beard! A warm Bubble Watch welcome goes out to both."
"Valparaiso [20-4 (10-1), RPI: 49, SOS: 188] If Chattanooga is on, we might as well throw Valpo in the mix too. The Crusaders are similarly superior to their mid-major league (10-1 in the Horizon). They have a similar RPI number, a far more favorable nonconference schedule, one more top-100 win, and the same number of sub-150 losses. Where Chattanooga got a genuinely marquee victory at Dayton, however, Bryce Drew's team had to settle for a W at Oregon State. Nice, sure, but it's no Dayton. Or, for that matter, Oregon. (The Ducks held on for a 73-67 win back on Nov. 22.) The Crusaders spent much of November and December intermittently banged up. Now healthy, they play the stingiest per-possession defense in the country, while star forward Alec Peters is basically Iowa's Jarrod Uthoff without the blocked shots. That may, in the end, be Valpo's trump card: They're just really good. Better than their resume hints, anyway."
They act like Chattanooga's win at Dayton happened yesterday (and like Dayton is God's gift to basketball). A strange business. But nice to see Valpo "formally" on the list.
Here are 2 Fox Sports Articles that have quite the elaborate section about us and NCAA situation after this weekend and the road ahead:
We are at the end on this one:
http://www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-wisconsin-butler-lsu-ucla-xavier-michigan-cal-alabama-021516 (http://www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-wisconsin-butler-lsu-ucla-xavier-michigan-cal-alabama-021516)
We are #9 on this one:
http://www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/ncaa-tournament-committee-selection-sunday-process-bubble-teams-021616 (http://www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/ncaa-tournament-committee-selection-sunday-process-bubble-teams-021616)
Also, I did not see anyone mention this, but late last week the NCAA held some media members for a mock NCAA selection committee workshop in Indy. They went through the motions of what all goes into the process of selecting teams, seeding teams, etc. For the exercise, they actually pretended that Valpo lost to Oakland in the Horizon League Tournament to fuel the mid-major vs. major debate. Needless to say Valpo was among the first 4 teams out and Oakland was a #15 seed against Maryland. (Note: This was before the Wright State loss.)
Here are some articles on it each with the Final Bracket:
http://nypost.com/2016/02/12/mock-ncaa-bracket-takeaways-seton-hall-on-edge-big-12-power/ (http://nypost.com/2016/02/12/mock-ncaa-bracket-takeaways-seton-hall-on-edge-big-12-power/)
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/csu/mens-basketball/2016/02/13/mountain-one-bid-league-ncaa-mock-selection/80336276/ (http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/csu/mens-basketball/2016/02/13/mountain-one-bid-league-ncaa-mock-selection/80336276/)
You can't really blame Donlon for not trying to help us after just beating us.
Wright State head coach Billy Donlon was fired up at the post-game press conference. He gave one of the most spirited defenses of an opponent's NCAA tournament worthiness that I've ever heard.
"Valpo's an at-large team – I don't care what anybody says," Donlon said, nearly shouting. "If this team played in the ACC they would finish in the top half and get an at-large. People pick whatever metrics they want. Let me tell you – that team will wins games in the NCAA tournament. They're every bit as good as the Butler teams (that went to the Final Four out of the Horizon League). They're right there."
This is part of the unfairness of being a mid-major team on the bubble. The scales are weighted against you. You have to get good wins to prove your worth, but you have only a handful of chances at those good wins in non-conference play.
"It's pick-a-metric in the NCAA tournament," Donlon said. "It's the haves versus the so-called have-nots." It'll be an absolute travesty, whatever happens, if these guys don't make the NCAA tournament."
I'm sure plenty of coaches of bubble teams feel the same way about their own squad.
And now there are four weeks left. So state your cases, bubble teams. It's time to prove your worth.
I agree with Fox Sports writer. Put up or shut up about the NCAA tournament. It's time for Valpo to stop making mistakes and win an NCAA tournament bid!
To create debate, several mid-major teams leading their conferences at the moment didn't receive automatic bids, and became part of at-large consideration: Monmouth was debated in the MAAC (with Siena winning it), Valparaiso in the Horizon League (Oakland) and Chattanooga in the Southern Conference (Mercer). Also, Columbia was credited with winning the Ivy League, not Yale, the leader at the moment; St. Bonaventure won the Atlantic 10; UConn won the American; and San Diego State won the Mountain West.
The most debate, predictably, revolved around the final bubble teams, pitting mid-majors against power-conference teams. Valparaiso, the best defensive team in the country according to KenPom.com, was left out. So were Chattanooga and William & Mary, who also were considered. But there was a strong sentiment to include Valparaiso over the likes of Butler, Michigan, Wisconsin and Temple. Losing to good teams only goes so far. We're talking about you, Michigan, which has only two top-100 wins. Time to pile up some victories.
It seems to me that if it is this difficult to pick a worthy field of 68 teams then the NCAA should expand the field by another 8 teams and have another location, besides Dayton, that hosts four "1st round/play-in" games.
This has nothing to do with the ESPN Bubble Watch and everything to do my own observations. These observations include the morning of Feb 25 Sag, Pomeroy and Warren Nolan with attention to OOC SOS and OOC road games.
The Bracket Matrix first 4 out are Alabama, Gonzaga, St Bonaventure and Vanderbilt. Next 5 out are George Washington, LSU, Florida St, Creighton, and Washington.
My blanket assumption is that Valpo and each of these above listed teams wins all of their remaining regular season games in which they are favored or near equally favored to win. My second assumption is that each team wins one conference tournament game before losing its second (a loss to Oakland).
If this played out as assumed then I would feel totally "grab your gun" insulted to be placed behind Florida St, Creighton or Washington. I would feel angrily insulted to be behind LSU and slightly less so for Vanderbilt. I would feel totally neck and neck with both Gonzaga and George Washington. The remaining 2 of St Bonaventure and Alabama might be given my nod if I were on the committee.
Valpo is back on the Bubble Watch this week:
Valparaiso [26-5 (16-2), RPI: 42, SOS: 186] Let's throw the Crusaders back on here, if only because there's a chance that their road win at Oregon State -- which, hey, is a top-30 RPI victory! -- will start to look even better before Selection Sunday. Meanwhile, Bryce Drew's team did finish the regular season with a 16-2 record against the Horizon League, the same tally Wichita State racked up in the Missouri Valley Conference. No one here is arguing that Valpo is actually better than the Shockers, and the Horizon is at least a notch behind the Valley in terms of overall league strength. But the same principle applies: This is a really good team that was banged up in nonconference play and -- in the Watch's humble opinion -- probably deserves to be in the tournament at the end of the day. We'll see.
It's not any consolation, but none of the other mid-majors (aside from Wichita State obviously) in their consideration for an at-large have both a lower RPI and SOS than Valpo. Arkansas-Little Rock's RPI is 38, and with their weak conference, I'm pretty sure two decent HL tournament wins would propel us above them (not that RPI is the only indicator of course).
Quote from: jloose128 on March 01, 2016, 01:58:27 PM
Valpo is back on the Bubble Watch this week:
Valparaiso [26-5 (16-2), RPI: 42, SOS: 186] Let's throw the Crusaders back on here, if only because there's a chance that their road win at Oregon State -- which, hey, is a top-30 RPI victory! -- will start to look even better before Selection Sunday. Meanwhile, Bryce Drew's team did finish the regular season with a 16-2 record against the Horizon League, the same tally Wichita State racked up in the Missouri Valley Conference. No one here is arguing that Valpo is actually better than the Shockers, and the Horizon is at least a notch behind the Valley in terms of overall league strength. But the same principle applies: This is a really good team that was banged up in nonconference play and -- in the Watch's humble opinion -- probably deserves to be in the tournament at the end of the day. We'll see.
It's not any consolation, but none of the other mid-majors (aside from Wichita State obviously) in their consideration for an at-large have both a lower RPI and SOS than Valpo. Arkansas-Little Rock's RPI is 38, and with their weak conference, I'm pretty sure two decent HL tournament wins would propel us above them (not that RPI is the only indicator of course).
2 more wins and it won't matter, we will get the Horizon auto bid.
Taking the pessimistic view (just for the moment and for discussion sake only), IF we were to lose in the HLT, which loss would be more devastating to any post season stuff: semi or final?
Quote from: VULB#62 on March 01, 2016, 03:38:02 PM
Taking the pessimistic view (just for the moment and for discussion sake only), IF we were to lose in the HLT, which loss would be more devastating to any post season stuff: semi or final?
Semi loss, no question. From an RPI standpoint and also from a talking head standpoint: "Valpo couldn't even make it to the weak Horizon league title game".
Yep, both those points say it all.
Doug Gottlieb said Valpo should be in as at-large. Also said he saw the Pacer last night during the Baylor game.
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 02, 2016, 10:10:42 AMAlso said he saw the Pacer last night during the Baylor game.
I'm told they ran something similar earlier this season. But, this, at half time, seems like pretty much the real deal.
[tweet]704846243130908672[/tweet]
Someone asked Gottlieb about dangerous midmajors. He replied, "St Marys, UT Chat, South Dakota State,SFA,ULAR, Yale all pretty good."
I asked, where is Valpo?
Gottieb replied, "Someone asks about Mid majors that are good, stating Valpo, Wichita is broken record stuff, hope you understand." :thumbsup:
Baylor ran a potentially even more impressive full court last second play against Kansas. Threw it to the corner, Gathers was the only guy who could catch it (and did), then turned and threw in the three pointer. Of course there was a large degree of luck considering Gathers had never attempted a three in his career. To add to it, Gathers ran off the court after the shot and right over a very large gentleman on the sidelines.
As far as an at-large, the loss that would keep Valpo from winning the conference title would be the same 'bad enough' loss to keep them out of the tournament as an at large. One too many losses this season.
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 02, 2016, 10:10:42 AM
Doug Gottlieb said Valpo should be in as at-large. Also said he saw the Pacer last night during the Baylor game.
Was watching the game and saw they play. Immediately said to the guy next to me "Pacer"! The pass was received closer to the top of the key and then to a guy in the corner. Still, a thing of beauty...
[tweet]705063726051926016[/tweet]
Nice!
Quote from: vu72 on March 02, 2016, 10:27:52 AM
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 02, 2016, 10:10:42 AM
Doug Gottlieb said Valpo should be in as at-large. Also said he saw the Pacer last night during the Baylor game.
Was watching the game and saw they play. Immediately said to the guy next to me "Pacer"! The pass was received closer to the top of the key and then to a guy in the corner. Still, a thing of beauty...
I think it showed how difficult it is to throw that inbounds pass to the other end of the court and hit the receiver in a good position. I still admire Jaime Sykes for doing a great job on that inbounds pass in '98.
No surprise, but we were still in the ESPN bubble watch Friday morning update, with basically the same blurb. Banged up in non-conf a bit like Wichita State, same conf record, not that they're saying we're Wichita State (who will test bubble watch's theory that they're a lock).
Valparaiso is also among this year's one-hit wonders. Unlike Wichita State and San Diego State, the Crusaders can't usually count on its league to help them out. Valpo made a trip to the Pacific Northwest this year to play the Oregon schools and put a scare into the Ducks before winning at Oregon State.
The fact that the league isn't good otherwise puts a lot of pressure on the Crusaders because every loss is damaging. They won the league, but lost twice to Wright State. That, along with losses to Ball State and Belmont outside the league means an at-large bid is unlikely.
Again, the HL is only hurting us.
Still a glimmer......
Latest USAToday Bracket. GB is a 15 facing Michigan State in St. Louis. Among others, Gonzaga beat St. Mary's for the WCC title and is a 10. Iona a 13. Butler a 9. Monmouth is an at-large playing in against Tulsa for an 11.
"Others considered for at-large bids (in order): Valparaiso, Hofstra, Michigan, Ohio State, Alabama, Washington, Houston, George Washington"
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/09/ncaa-tournament-bracketology-march-madness-gonzaga-saint-marys-bubble/81521756/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/09/ncaa-tournament-bracketology-march-madness-gonzaga-saint-marys-bubble/81521756/)
With Gonzaga winning the WCC, that takes another at-large away, as some were predicting Gonzaga to not be an at-large this year.
We need Michigan, Houston, South Carolina, and a few others to lose their first conference tournament games.
That USAToday article said that St. Mary's does not have much of a chance for an at-large due to their very weak OCSOS.
Pitt beating Syracuse today is helpful. :)
I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think we have a 1 in 100 chance of receiving an at-large. We spent our 1st life losing at Ball State, our 2nd losing to what ultimately became a very beatable Belmont team, our 3rd at home to WSU, and our 4th and final life losing to GB in Detroit. And, lest we forget, we also play in a crap conference where RPi killers abound. When's the last time a 20th ranked conference got 2 bids? Ever?
Quote from: wh on March 09, 2016, 02:38:22 PM
I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think we have a 1 in 100 chance of receiving an at-large. We spent our 1st life losing at Ball State, our 2nd losing to what ultimately became a very beatable Belmont team, our 3rd at home to WSU, and our 4th and final life losing to GB in Detroit. And, lest we forget, we also play in a crap conference where RPi killers abound. When's the last time a 20th ranked conference got 2 bids? Ever?
Not quite 20th, but in 2008 the 15th ranked WCC got 3 teams in the tourney, Gonzaga, Saint Mary's and San Diego.
I think what helps us out some, at least based on eye test, is the fact that Green Bay won the tourney, not Wright State. If it was Wright State we would have lost our only two games against the eventual champion.
Quote from: wh on March 09, 2016, 02:38:22 PM
I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think we have a 1 in 100 chance of receiving an at-large. We spent our 1st life losing at Ball State, our 2nd losing to what ultimately became a very beatable Belmont team, our 3rd at home to WSU, and our 4th and final life losing to GB in Detroit. And, lest we forget, we also play in a crap conference where RPi killers abound. When's the last time a 20th ranked conference got 2 bids? Ever?
Hope Hope Hope } Sometimes the raw numbers overwhelm prejudice { Hope Hope Hope
Quote from: wh on March 09, 2016, 02:38:22 PM
we also play in a crap conference where RPi killers abound. When's the last time a 20th ranked conference got 2 bids? Ever?
I think wh has indicated the real problem. Looking back at past years, the Horizon League ranked fairly well. According to Sagarin, the HL was a top-ten conference in the 2010-2011 season. In later years, the HL still held a respectable 12th place, but last year and this year the ranking has fallen to 18th, two spots below the Summit League, from which we were supposed to be moving up with a switch to the HL.
Instead of spending time, energy, and money screwing with a popular and successful tournament format, the resources would have been better employed addressing the deteriorating stature of the league by directing certain teams to schedule more wisely and insisting upon accountability, especially with four teams ranked between 258 and 331 and making up 8 of Valpo's required schedule games (more than 25% of the year's entire schedule). Placing an 18th-ranked conference tournament in an 18,000 seat arena, with maybe 2,000 actually attending the championship game (not counting rented high school bands) by reasonable reports and shared videos on twitter, only brought more attention to the sad state of the conference.
Quote from: wh on March 09, 2016, 02:38:22 PM
I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think we have a 1 in 100 chance of receiving an at-large. We spent our 1st life losing at Ball State, our 2nd losing to what ultimately became a very beatable Belmont team, our 3rd at home to WSU, and our 4th and final life losing to GB in Detroit. And, lest we forget, we also play in a crap conference where RPi killers abound. When's the last time a 20th ranked conference got 2 bids? Ever?
Only when a true top 25 team loses the automatic bid. Not sure it ever really happened in, but this is only scenario.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Now that the other Crusaders (Holy Cross) will be in a play in game, can the committee really leave the other Crusaders (Valpo) out of the NCAAs? It could be Crusader night in Dayton!
Reasons to take Valpo over Monmouth
1. Common opponent. We beat Iona by 25 (again) and Monmouth lost to them twice.
2. Valpo RPI = 52 Monmouth RPI = 54
3. Kenpom Valpo = 38 Monmouth 65
4. Non-Conference SOS Valpo 52 and Monmouth 93
Reasons to take Valpo over Wichita St.
1. Wichita St. 4-7 against top 100 Valpo 4-2
2. Wichita St. 1-3 against top 50 Valpo 1-1
3. Wichita 10-7 on road Valpo 12-5.
Is it because we have brown and gold as our school colors?
Well, to make chances worse for the Saders, USC destroyed UCLA by 24 tonight, very much assuring them of an NCAA bid.
Quote from: usc4valpo on March 09, 2016, 10:16:01 PM
Well, to make chances worse for the Saders, USC destroyed UCLA by 24 tonight, very much assuring them of an NCAA bid.
Was hoping UCLA would wake up from their funk. Ouch
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Alford may be an Indiana HS legend and all that, but as a major college coach he sucks. IU was fortunate not to hire him.
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 09, 2016, 09:35:25 PM
Reasons to take Valpo over Monmouth
1. Common opponent. We beat Iona by 25 (again) and Monmouth lost to them twice.
2. Valpo RPI = 52 Monmouth RPI = 54
3. Kenpom Valpo = 38 Monmouth 65
4. Non-Conference SOS Valpo 52 and Monmouth 93
Reasons to take Valpo over Wichita St.
1. Wichita St. 4-7 against top 100 Valpo 4-2
2. Wichita St. 1-3 against top 50 Valpo 1-1
3. Wichita 10-7 on road Valpo 12-5.
Is it because we have brown and gold as our school colors?
Can't WSU can make a similar case about how injuries affected their W/L record?
Odds are low, really really low.
1. Cincinnati has to win their conference tournament beating Uconn and Temple.
2. Oregon State wins 2 games and then loses the third by 40 points. (not sure on this one, but beating USC hurts them and Monmouth and we own the "tie-breaker" with Oregon State if push comes to shove.
3. Michigan winning no more than 1 game in Big Ten tournament.
4. Florida winning no more than 1 game in SEC tourney.
5. Pitt gets destroyed in next game (after beating Syracuse 3 times)
6. George Washington winning no more than 1 game in A10 tourney.
7. Rhode Island wins 3 games in A10 tourney. (Umass, Bonnies, VCU)
8. Somehow Belmont stays in the top 100 in the RPI after all tournaments are said and done.
9. Houston has to beat Tulsa (preferably Memphis)
10. No crazy teams like Houston or Georgia or LSU winning their conference tournament.
11. Notre Dame loses right away, further hurting one of Monmouth's big wins.
These will help(teams involving last 4 byes,last 4 in,first four out,etc.):
3/10 Games
Need Florida to lose to Arkansas
Need Michigan to lost to Northwestern
Need GW to lose to St. Louis
3/11 Games
Need UConn to lose to Cincy
Need Tulsa to lose to Memphis
I think that if all the stars align it will come down to St. Mary's/Monmouth/Wichita/Valpo for one of the last spots
Quote from: wh on March 09, 2016, 11:27:08 PMQuote from: oklahomamick on March 09, 2016, 09:35:25 PMReasons to take Valpo over Monmouth 1. Common opponent. We beat Iona by 25 (again) and Monmouth lost to them twice. 2. Valpo RPI = 52 Monmouth RPI = 54 3. Kenpom Valpo = 38 Monmouth 65 4. Non-Conference SOS Valpo 52 and Monmouth 93 Reasons to take Valpo over Wichita St. 1. Wichita St. 4-7 against top 100 Valpo 4-2 2. Wichita St. 1-3 against top 50 Valpo 1-1 3. Wichita 10-7 on road Valpo 12-5. Is it because we have brown and gold as our school colors?
Can't WSU can make a similar case about how injuries affected their W/L record?
But my reasons didn't say anything about injuries. Just records.
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 10, 2016, 07:59:58 AM
Quote from: wh on March 09, 2016, 11:27:08 PMQuote from: oklahomamick on March 09, 2016, 09:35:25 PMReasons to take Valpo over Monmouth 1. Common opponent. We beat Iona by 25 (again) and Monmouth lost to them twice. 2. Valpo RPI = 52 Monmouth RPI = 54 3. Kenpom Valpo = 38 Monmouth 65 4. Non-Conference SOS Valpo 52 and Monmouth 93 Reasons to take Valpo over Wichita St. 1. Wichita St. 4-7 against top 100 Valpo 4-2 2. Wichita St. 1-3 against top 50 Valpo 1-1 3. Wichita 10-7 on road Valpo 12-5. Is it because we have brown and gold as our school colors?
Can't WSU can make a similar case about how injuries affected their W/L record?
But my reasons didn't say anything about injuries. Just records.
Sorry, I didn't mean to sound like I was taking issue with your point, which I agree with.
Quote from: valpocleveland on March 10, 2016, 06:43:29 AM3/10 GamesNeed Florida to lose to ArkansasNeed Michigan to lost to NorthwesternNeed GW to lose to St. Louis
Would be nice if North Carolina blew out Pittsburgh by 20 or more. Butler beating Providence by 10 or so might help as well. Tennessee beating Vandy might put Vandy down the line a bit as well.
Quote from: wh on March 09, 2016, 11:27:08 PMCan't WSU can make a similar case about how injuries affected their W/L record?
Absolutely.
Just watched a Lunardi interview. He shows us in the 1st 4 out. St. Mary's is the last 1 in.
I wonder if the SI article will help out on Selection Sunday. In the sense that it has raised national awareness about Valpo.
Its not gonna hurt us, that's for sure. I also think that our performance against Maryland in last year's dance will also be on the committee's radar screen.
http://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2016/3/11/11199642/bracketology-ncaa-tournament-college-basketball-vanderbilt-saint-marys-oregon-state (http://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2016/3/11/11199642/bracketology-ncaa-tournament-college-basketball-vanderbilt-saint-marys-oregon-state)
24-6; 16-2 Horizon; RPI: 52; SOS: 164; Non-conf. SOS: 53; KenPom: 36
Valpo entered this season as an overwhelming favorite in the Horizon League, which hampered Bryce Drew's ability to build his Crusaders a truly at-large worthy schedule. Therefore, Valparaiso enters this final weekend with a 1-1 mark against the Top 50 (a win at Oregon State and a six-point loss at Oregon two nights earlier) and a 3-1 record over teams sitting between 51st and 100th. The Crusaders wins in that group came over a conference tourney champ (Iona) and a pair of conference regular season champs (IPFW and Belmont, which split a home-and-home with Valpo).
Like Monmouth, Valparaiso did well away from home, going 12-4 in true road games. However, their lone neutral-court game, the Horizon semifinal loss to Green Bay, is the loss that has them in this very spot.
This profile resembles Iona's 2012 effort that got the Gaels into the First Four after they had trouble getting games. Perhaps history will repeat itself four years later.
The first 4 should be for situations like these. A team that deserves to be in the tourney but had a bad game at the worst time possible. Is there a chance at an at-large. Yes, it would probably be a play-in game, which I'd be fine with. I give Valpo somewhere around a 30-40% chance at an at-large bid which would most likely be a play-in if Valpo got in.
Quote from: classof2014 on March 11, 2016, 10:38:24 AMI give Valpo somewhere around a 30-40% chance at an at-large bid which would most likely be a play-in if Valpo got in.
At Joe Louis I was thinking maybe 1 chance in 4. Today I'm feeling more like 1 in 10.
The NY Times ran a piece on the mid-major bubble: basically Wichita State, Monmouth, and Valpo.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/11/sports/ncaabasketball/monmouth-and-other-midmajor-champions-find-themselves-on-the-ncaa-bubble.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/11/sports/ncaabasketball/monmouth-and-other-midmajor-champions-find-themselves-on-the-ncaa-bubble.html)
Interesting to see how the consensus seems to be about like they describe: Wichita State more or less definitely in, Monmouth with a decent chance, Valpo with less of a chance.
Makes me wonder what the "story" is, if it's as simple as:
-)Wichita State avoiding bad losses, with a star injury story to tell, and with gaudy computer numbers.
-)Monmouth with some name wins and a bench full of hijinks that got the national spotlight, and somehow less discussion of their bad losses.
-)Valpo with a strong overall record, relatively lacking in name wins (because their reputation made scheduling impossible - but that's less often included as part of the story), and with just enough "bad" losses, and sufficiently tarnished computer numbers to keep them on the outside looking in.
Don't know that we can change the narrative. But, "scheduling was particularly impossible for us" and "injuries to key, if not star, players" seem like legitimate pieces of the narrative, but maybe too nuanced, too little too late.
I'd love to be surprised.
But, do we know the NIT schedule? Tuesday at the ARC?
I think the NCAA would love to find a way to slip both Monmouth and VU in. I am just not sure that our compiled final numbers (still coming in) will allow either team to make it. Losses by RI and Oregon St certainly do not help.
Right now Sagarin has us at 51 with a schedule ranked 163. Monmouth is ranked 81 with a schedule ranked 172.
Quote from: justducky on March 11, 2016, 11:02:28 AMLosses by RI and Oregon St certainly do not help.
Rhode Island's been a bit disappointing, for sure.
I'd say Oregon State has done their part - beating Arizona State, losing to Cal, is consistent with the down-the-stretch, improved, Oregon State team.They've helped us out. Of course, beating Cal, maybe winding up ranked in the top 25 (not that their's a literal ballot before selection), would have helped us out even more.
Quote from: vu72 on March 11, 2016, 11:40:05 AM
Right now Sagarin has us at 51 with a schedule ranked 163. Monmouth is ranked 81 with a schedule ranked 172.
KenPom has us 36, Monmouth 67. Somehow Wichita State's computer numbers get brought up more than ours... Admittedly #11 is pretty shiny. And I'd have loved Valpo to hang on to the #1 defensive efficiency number that Wichita State now holds. Of course, if that happened, we'd probably only be talking about seeding, and not an at-large prayer.
Michigan just hit a buzzer beater to beat Indiana, they may steal a spot now...
you don't think they'd send Ohio State to Dayton... do you?????
Does UConn defeating Cincinnati in 4OTs help knock Cincy off the bubble?
According to the XM College Sports guys... it hurts us... as it pushes UConn INTO the bracket ... off of the line they have Valpo, the Next 4 in...it takes away one open space that we might have taken.
Cincinnati was already a lock
Yeah I don't think that loss knocks Cincy out, since they are on the 9 line for Lunardi. What it does is helps someone who is on the same line as us (First Four Out)
We need Tulsa and Michigan to lose ASAP.... Vandy losing helps...
Lunardi: ON THE BUBBLE... reported early this morning...
Last Four Byes
Saint Joseph's - Beat GW this afternoon
USC - Lost to Utah last night
Oregon State - Lost to Cal last night
St. Bonaventure - plays Davidson tonight at 8pm CT
Last Four In
Pittsburgh - Lost to UNC last night
Monmouth - DONE
Vanderbilt - Lost to Tennessee yesterday
Saint Mary's - DONE
First Four Out
Syracuse- Lost to Pitt on Wednesday
Connecticut - Won Today, gets Temple in the American championship game 2pm tomorrow
Tulsa - Playing Memphis tonight
Valparaiso
Next Out
Florida - Lost to TA&M this afternoon
Michigan- Beat Top Seed Indiana - Move them up, they get Purdue at noon tomorrow
Ohio State - Tipping off against Michigan State at 5:30 CT
George Washington - Lost to St Joe's 86-80 this afternoon
We would be a great feelgood choice, and we certainly deserve a shot, but I suspect that the committee would find Monmouth's ooc performance superior. Rankings based on both teams' respective below-par conference games add nothing of value to the committee's analysis. I don't think either of us will get in. There are too many other teams with better resumes.
With Rhode Island losing, Uconn winning, and Michigan winning. We are screwed. I still think either Monmouth or Us will get in to appease the mid-majors, but no way in hell do they have both. They will pick one or the other. Problem is, Monmouth's wins are flashier. So, I think we are out.
While Monmouth has a pair of "flashier" wins, their loses are a lot worse then ours.
Only one of our loses was to a team with less than 20 wins. That one is Ball State who would have easily had 20 if they didn't fall flat on their face at the end of the season.
I know someone said in another post that head-to-heads don't matter, but I can't possibly think that when anyone on the committee is down to a couple of teams to put on their selections, they won't notice if the teams played each other or not...
The selection committee doesn't act rationally or consistently. They'll take a team that finished 4-11 vs the top 100 RPI, where all 4 wins came at home. And then they'll take a team whose best OOC win was UC Irvine at home. Really makes no sense, so trying to explain or predict it is a lost cause.
Hey, where are you guys? MD went down. Others are falling. Should I even watch the selection show? Is there a bunch of Valpo BB players and coaches meeting somewhere to watch it in the hopes that an at-large bid lands in NW Indiana? You BB experts can't desert us neofites now :o
Busy watching the bubble get bigger with San Diego State losing... Not much went right for Valpo after the regular season ended.
NO......................... !!!! Don't say that. Hope. We need hope. Where is the hope?
Quote from: VULB#62 on March 12, 2016, 07:48:45 PM
NO......................... !!!! Don't say that. Hope. We need hope. Where is the hope?
I won't be holding my breath. But crazier additions have been made.
Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk
Quote from: a3uge on March 12, 2016, 07:56:11 PMI won't be holding my breath. But crazier additions have been made.
Feels like a snowball's chance, at least. I'll certainly be watching the show, if I'm home. But also planning to watch the NIT show later.
If there's any public gathering, I've not heard about it. I imagine the team is gathering, but maybe just in the basketball wing or at Bryce's house or something.
Lunardi still has us first-four out, implying an NIT 1 seed. John Templon (nycbuckets.com) still likes us for a 2 seed, against IPFW (but I'm not sure how serious he is about the bracketing). Lunardi's got Green Bay a 15 against... Michigan State! It'll sting is San Diego State really is an 11, and even more if South Dakota State really is a 12 (likely?), and wins a game.
Templon also has almost half of the CIT bids already taken, including Ball State.
Siena to the CBI.
Bracketmatrix has Green Bay pretty solidly at the 15, but as the best of the 15's with a handful of 14's and even a 13.
And we're relatively unchanged, still hanging around as the 4th, 5th, 6th, or 7th (basically a tie) among those almost but not quite in the at-large pool. On 10 of 97 brackets in this iteration (Monmouth's on 39, good for second-to-last out).
Quote from: agibson on March 12, 2016, 08:26:53 PM
Quote from: a3uge on March 12, 2016, 07:56:11 PMI won't be holding my breath. But crazier additions have been made.
Feels like a snowball's chance, at least. I'll certainly be watching the show, if I'm home. But also planning to watch the NIT show later.
If there's any public gathering, I've not heard about it. I imagine the team is gathering, but maybe just in the basketball wing or at Bryce's house or something.
Lunardi still has us first-four out, implying an NIT 1 seed. John Templon (nycbuckets.com) still likes us for a 2 seed, against IPFW (but I'm not sure how serious he is about the bracketing). Lunardi's got Green Bay a 15 against... Michigan State! It'll sting is San Diego State really is an 11, and even more if South Dakota State really is a 12 (likely?), and wins a game.
Templon also has almost half of the CIT bids already taken, including Ball State.
Siena to the CBI.
Bracketmatrix has Green Bay pretty solidly at the 15, but as the best of the 15's with a handful of 14's and even a 13.
And we're relatively unchanged, still hanging around as the 4th, 5th, 6th, or 7th (basically a tie) among those almost but not quite in the at-large pool. On 10 of 97 brackets in this iteration (Monmouth's on 39, good for second-to-last out).
After getting shafted with a 14 playing Michigan State and then a 13 with a 50 RPI playing another underseeded team, it would hurt to see a team that finished 4th in the weakest ever Horizon with a +100 RPI get as good of a seed as those regular season champion teams.
We would kill Monmouth, which is why this will sting even more if they get in, and we don't
I agree tx - I will say this, the mid-majors this year have never been weaker - not one mid-major team is in the top 25.
Truly sad that the HL doesn't send its best team. Unhappy that Valpo is better than several teams in the NCAA (AQ or at-large) Miserable knowing that this Valpo team had a good chance of making a run and knocking some good teams out (Oregon trip demonstrated that - don't forget that was with some injuries and shortly after an East Coast road trip). Devastated if we win our first NIT game and then can't host a big10 school.
I'm sorry but if Valpo gets an NIT wins round 1, gets into round 2 and doesn't play at home because of some dumb high school basketball tournament than I hope guys like Alec leave. If Valpo basketball doesn't come before high school basketball then Valpo doesn't deserve one of the premier mid-major programs in the country. All though I trust that if this did happen the high school games would get rescheduled, basketball is the premier sport and an opportunity to play another game in the ARC, potentially against a school from the B1G doesn't happen often. Last time we had a school from a true power conference in the ARC was 2010 against Purdue.
Hopefully all this talk is all for not because Valpo get an at-large. Still holding out hope for that but I know it's unlikely but I've seen crazier things happen.
Start feeling devastated. The goal for the NIT is to strictly make money by all means possible. The Big 10 team will host if there is money to be made.
class of 2014...then you hope guys like Alec leave? You have got to be kidding! Clear your head first, let the frustrations subside, then make a level headed comment.
-
Over on the NIT string this is being discussed as well. We are talking a 4 hour block on the weekend My suggestion was to simple cut that block out of the grade school tournament (I believe we are precluded from hosting HS BB tournaments due to NCAA restrictions) and have the kids attend the NIT game. If the grade tournament people feel they can't do that use any one of the numerous gyms in town for those 4 hours.
Quote from: usc4valpo on March 13, 2016, 11:31:27 AM
Start feeling devastated. The goal for the NIT is to strictly make money by all means possible. The Big 10 team will host if there is money to be made.
Robert Morris hosted Kentucky in the Nerlens Noel injury year, and they were an 8 seed. It happens.
Quote from: valpotx on March 13, 2016, 12:18:26 AM
We would kill Monmouth, which is why this will sting even more if they get in, and we don't
There are a bunch of teams we SHOULD have killed and one of them was Green Bay on a neutral court. But of course that didn't happen. I wouldn't say we can beat any of these good teams like Monmouth when we can't even beat Green Bay in a semi-final tournament game. If we can beat Monmouth with the healthy players then we should have beaten Green Bay too.
We have about a 1% chance of getting in, but it is not impossible. I remember reading something along the lines that this team didn't even host a watch party. Didn't think they had a chance. Were not a name brand team yet.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/2670/year/2011/vcu-rams (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/schedule/_/id/2670/year/2011/vcu-rams)
Is there any logical reason why this year's Valpo team would get an at-large bid when last year's Belmont team did not? Or would that be totally illogical? I don't remember the intimate details of Belmont's 14-15 season, but it included like a 26 game winning streak and a loss at the buzzer in the OVC finals, right? With those scant details, sounds more worthy than 15-16 Valpo.
Still, I sorta get the feeling that this year's Valpo team drew more national attention and interest from the types who might be on the selection committee. An, "I want to see what these guys would do", that wasn't there with Belmont last year. Maybe I'm making that up ... a biased perspective based on proximity.
Quote from: VULB#62 on March 13, 2016, 12:10:13 PMWe are talking a 4 hour block on the weekend My suggestion was to simple cut that block out of the grade school tournament
I bet we're talking about more than for hours. Both teams, at least the visitors, need practice time on the main ARC court as well. For all I knowbthe bleacher/stand/broadcast configuration would need to change as well.
I would hope that arrangements can be made, but I respect that the logistics may be intimidating.
As per the Oren article today, it's reasonably common for post-season teams to have facilities problems and have to give up a home game.
Quote from: rink on March 13, 2016, 02:46:16 PM
Is there any logical reason why this year's Valpo team would get an at-large bid when last year's Belmont team did not? Or would that be totally illogical? I don't remember the intimate details of Belmont's 14-15 season, but it included like a 26 game winning streak and a loss at the buzzer in the OVC finals, right? With those scant details, sounds more worthy than 15-16 Valpo.
Still, I sorta get the feeling that this year's Valpo team drew more national attention and interest from the types who might be on the selection committee. An, "I want to see what these guys would do", that wasn't there with Belmont last year. Maybe I'm making that up ... a biased perspective based on proximity.
Obviously so memorable that people mistake Murray State for Belmont...
Seth Davis - My last 5 in: St. Bon, MIch, Syracuse, Wich St, SDSu. My first 5 out: South Carolina, Valpo, Vandy, Monmouth, Tulsa.
We are just a couple spots away....
Sadly have to agree. Valpo isn't getting in. I mean there's always the chance but nothing went right for us. Maybe Bryce sold his soul to the devil but that's about the only way we get in.
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 13, 2016, 03:51:11 PM
Seth Davis - My last 5 in: St. Bon, MIch, Syracuse, Wich St, SDSu. My first 5 out: South Carolina, Valpo, Vandy, Monmouth, Tulsa.
We are just a couple sports away....
A couple of spots away, even according to one of Valpo's biggest supporters.
When you look at Valpo's RPI respective of CBS site and Jerry Palm and do the team by team comparison, we have better credentials than Syracuse, Michigan, Monmouth and St. Mary's. As well as Wichita State. Now Cuse and WSU will point at Bieheim and Van Fleet being out. To me either argument doesn't hold weight relative to Valpo as we had key guys out most of the season starting the new year. Only St. Bonaventure and SanDiego State had better resumes than the Crusaders. I'm not holding my breath they get in but they stack up with and have better numbers than a lot of the bubble teams. Plus we had a great loss (by 6 at Oregon at a #1 Seed). We'll see....
Quote from: a3uge on March 13, 2016, 03:42:18 PM
Quote from: rink on March 13, 2016, 02:46:16 PM
Is there any logical reason why this year's Valpo team would get an at-large bid when last year's Belmont team did not? Or would that be totally illogical? I don't remember the intimate details of Belmont's 14-15 season, but it included like a 26 game winning streak and a loss at the buzzer in the OVC finals, right? With those scant details, sounds more worthy than 15-16 Valpo.
Still, I sorta get the feeling that this year's Valpo team drew more national attention and interest from the types who might be on the selection committee. An, "I want to see what these guys would do", that wasn't there with Belmont last year. Maybe I'm making that up ... a biased perspective based on proximity.
Obviously so memorable that people mistake Murray State for Belmont...
Ha, indeed, I meant Murray St. No logic for 15-16 Valpo to get in when 14-15 Murray St was left out, right? (I remember being shocked when the Racers were snubbed last year.)
Oregon is a #1
Quote from: rink on March 13, 2016, 04:45:34 PM
Quote from: a3uge on March 13, 2016, 03:42:18 PM
Quote from: rink on March 13, 2016, 02:46:16 PM
Is there any logical reason why this year's Valpo team would get an at-large bid when last year's Belmont team did not? Or would that be totally illogical? I don't remember the intimate details of Belmont's 14-15 season, but it included like a 26 game winning streak and a loss at the buzzer in the OVC finals, right? With those scant details, sounds more worthy than 15-16 Valpo.
Still, I sorta get the feeling that this year's Valpo team drew more national attention and interest from the types who might be on the selection committee. An, "I want to see what these guys would do", that wasn't there with Belmont last year. Maybe I'm making that up ... a biased perspective based on proximity.
Obviously so memorable that people mistake Murray State for Belmont...
Ha, indeed, I meant Murray St. No logic for 15-16 Valpo to get in when 14-15 Murray St was left out, right? (I remember being shocked when the Racers were snubbed last year.)
Murray State didn't really have an at-large resume - just a really long win streak. You need a strong OOC schedule and a couple really good wins to get in. I don't think Murray State had a signature win - Valpo has 1 vs Oregon State, but lack a strong 2.
Summit League tournament champs, South Dakota St. gets a #12 seed.
Wichita State with one of the play-ins. Against Vanderbilt. Not looking good for Valpo.
Unexpectedly low seed, I think, for the Shockers.
again, this has not been a great year for mid major teams.
They had no signature wins as well other than Utah, which I would argue Oregon State may have been better. Plus, would Wichita St. or any other bubble teams go into Eugene and lose to a #1 seed by 6 and a game that was competitive throughout. There has to be some consideration given to a mid-major that tries to schedule over their head to improve RPI and SOS and competes. It's really not fair as no highly thought of Mid-Major is going to get a home and home or even a 2 away, one home from schools from major conferences.
CBS sure knows how to drag this out and get that commercial $$$. I remember when this was an hour long at best.
Quote from: ValpoDad89 on March 13, 2016, 05:02:06 PMThey had no signature wins as well other than Utah, which I would argue Oregon State may have been better.
It all seemed to be about gaudy computer numbers, avoiding bad losses, and a good record in a decent MVC. Apparently not as impressive as pundits had assumed. (Baylor a 5... could have been real.)
A moment of excitement to hear "the Crusaders of" ... and then the crushing "Holy Cross."
Oregon State #7. GB gets a 14 :o. Some love for the HL
The Pac 12 is getting some love tonight.
Does Valpo's 1-1 record against the Pac 12s 1 and 7 seed get some love too? About as likely as a full court completion to AP for a layup w 2 seconds left.
"The Shot" was 18 years ago today.
Maybe March 13th will be kind to us again?
cripe - playing in the Horizon and facing Oregon and Oregon St. very early in the season does not help
Full Bracket leaked on Twitter
Per the leaked bracket:
[tweet]709142533364916225[/tweet]
I'm not 100% following on the interwebs, but was the bracket actually posted to ncaa.com? Or only on twitter? When I check their "official" location now, I only see the partial bracket.
It's correct so far.
No "first four out" leaked, it seems. But Monmouth and St. Mary's out makes it look like an NIT 2 at best for Valpo... and a chance at a 3? A 3 could pull a big conference team in the first round, perhaps.
No NCAA bid means no good reason to play hookie from work
Little Rock a 12 against Purdue - that would have been a good one too.
Tulsa and Michigan in on the bubble. Awfully weak bubble teams.
Syracuse??? Commentors said the Orange flat out don't deserve it.
Well, I'm depressed...The best team Valpo has ever had and no NCAA tournament.
It's a cruel world for mid-majors.
Can't believe Syracuse and Tulsa. And no mid-majors.
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 13, 2016, 05:57:38 PMAnd no mid-majors.
It was looking bad as soon as they put Wichita State in a play-in...
Our expectations for this year were too high. We tailed off second semester for a variety of reasons. Ultimately, we didn't get it done.
Would be nice to schedule a couple more away games at power conference schools. Beating a Syracuse would illustrate how well we match up against the power conference teams to which we are compared on days like today. The excuse of "...but those teams fear us and won't play us" doesn't fly any longer. These are just challenges to overcome. Plenty of other Valpoesque schools are able to do so -- e.g., Monmouth. Come on AD and crew!
As I said a week ago, "LeCrone just spun everything in an interview, saying he was pleased with everything, including the upset of Valpo, because that shows the strength of the league. I hope he feels that way when the Horizon League's only NCAA representative receives a 14 seed." I look forward to his comments explaining now how much the "neutral" court format added, why the HL as a one-bid team because of the poor scheduling and low RPI teams managed to place its 4th place team in the NCAA tourney, and in what way this displays the strength of the conference.
Is that the official "first four not in?"
St. Bonaventure, South Carolina, Monmouth, Valparaiso?
Valpo a #1 NIT seed?
Close, but no cigar... Wow.
Head of selection committee invited to talk about Wichita State vs. Valparaiso (and Monmouth?). Only talks about Wichita State.
Does talk about Monmouth. Right there in the final discussion. Three RPI 200+ losses that was the difference.
Sorry you guys aren't going to be in the tournament, I'm not the only one on the Butler Board that feels you guys got hosed.
Valpo finished 4-2 against teams in the NCAA, including two true road wins and a 25-point win over Iona
So basically the only chance a Horizon League team now has to make the dance is to win the conference tournament which despite wishful thinking this year turned out to be the reality. So maybe we need to treat the season like not worrying about out of conference wins or rpi but how does it prepare us for the conference tournament. How would we treat scheduling differently? How would Bryce coach differently? I think we suffered in ot against Green Bay because we didn't have a true point guard once Carter fouled out. Would Joeseph or Williams have gotten more playing time during the season if we didn't care about winning any particular game or running up a big winning record that ultimately made no difference as to getting to the dance?
By they way I just listened to the committee chair try to justify some of their selections. It made me want to barf. The selection is so rigged in favor of the big conferences that it is a joke. So maybe we should stop trying to pretend that we will ever have chance at an at large and concentrate on preparing to give ourselves the best chance of winning the conference tournament.
USCg2012 posted on the green bay board the following;
Is it wrong of me to be happy the all mighty Valpo didn't get in? Yeah it would of been better for the conference but o well. If you can't ATLEAST get to you own conference championship game after receiving a double bye. You don't deserve it.
>:( >:( >:( >:(
What I thought was hilarious was he quoted RPI when it backed up his case and "advanced metrics" when it did the same. Those two can disagree, sometimes strongly. Really feel for Monmouth and St. Bony as well. Also Kudos to Paul tweeting what I was thinking. Boeheim suspension can't be treated same as player injury.
Quote from: atkins on March 13, 2016, 06:01:50 PMThe excuse of "...but those teams fear us and won't play us" doesn't fly any longer. These are just challenges to overcome. Plenty of other Valpoesque schools are able to do so -- e.g., Monmouth. Come on AD and crew!
For a team like Valpo, when stacked, there really might be no recourse. Maybe there's a chance Valpo could work harder at getting into a quality in-season tournament? I'm not sure how those decisions are made.
But, it sounds like Valpo literally asked everybody in the top 25. Maybe not everybody in every power conference I guess... But, ultimately, what leverage would Valpo have if the big guys didn't want to play?
It's been said that teams like Monmouth (or Milwaukee, etc.) manage in years where they're not expected to be receiving votes in national polls, etc.
@ImJustEB5 (Erik Buggs) is going on a bit of a tear on twitter. Seems like he's about to say that Valpo should get out of the Horizon.
Or maybe it's just a #MotorCityMadness rant.
[tweet]709163764600475648[/tweet]
I don't think this helps Valpo in keeping Bryce any given year. HL is a one bid league and leaves no room for error or a bad game.
Quote from: agibson on March 13, 2016, 06:46:58 PM
@ImJustEB5 (Erik Buggs) is going on a bit of a tear on twitter. Seems like he's about to say that Valpo should get out of the Horizon.
Ah, there it is
[tweet]709170027107393541[/tweet]
Quote from: agibson on March 13, 2016, 07:47:26 PM
Quote from: agibson on March 13, 2016, 06:46:58 PM
@ImJustEB5 (Erik Buggs) is going on a bit of a tear on twitter. Seems like he's about to say that Valpo should get out of the Horizon.
Ah, there it is
[tweet]709170027107393541[/tweet]
Not like we have a lot of options once the MVC passed us over.
Feel a bit better knowing that winning at home vs Wright State, on the road vs Ball State, and the semifinal game vs UWGB likely didn't matter. Or UIC being an RPI killer didn't matter. Really, the only way Valpo was getting an at-large would have been a victory at Oregon or if Valpo was in the Big 10.
So, Tulsa was the last team in. :crazy:
Yes and a heads up, the news outlets down here are already talking conspiracy. Joe Castiglione (Oklahoma AD and head of the selection committee) is good friends with Derrick Gragg (Tulsa AD). Castiglione even gave Gragg his first job when Gragg was25 years old. TU did not have a watch party as everyone was shocked and didn't think Castiglione could pull it off.
Quote from: a3uge on March 13, 2016, 08:03:06 PM
Feel a bit better knowing that winning at home vs Wright State, on the road vs Ball State, and the semifinal game vs UWGB likely didn't matter. Or UIC being an RPI killer didn't matter. Really, the only way Valpo was getting an at-large would have been a victory at Oregon or if Valpo was in the Big 10.
Very much disagree. This is disingenuous, helps-one-sleep-at-night talk. If we win at Ball St, win at home against Wright St, and lose the conference tourney final, we are an at large bid. If my math is right, that's a 29-4 team whose losses are at Oregon, at Belmont, at a decent-ish conference opponent, and on neutral ground against a decent-ish conference opponent. (Hell, even one of those hiccups is probably okay.)
If we're all honest with ourselves, we knew this was the resume we needed to be an at-large this season. There's just not enough juice left in victories against Horizon teams, OR St (road), RI (road), Belmont (home), and Iona (home) with bad losses against Ball St, two regular season Horizon losses, and an 0-1 Horizon tournament record.
An at-large would have been a nice surprise gift today, but we didn't take care of the business that any non-biased outsider would have required for an at-large. Plain and simple. Didn't get it done this season. No one else to blame.
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 13, 2016, 09:07:32 PM
Yes and a heads up, the news outlets down here are already talking conspiracy. Joe Castiglione (Oklahoma AD and head of the selection committee) is good friends with Derrick Gragg (Tulsa AD). Castiglione even gave Gragg his first job when Gragg was25 years old. TU did not have a watch party as everyone was shocked and didn't think Castiglione could pull it off.
Interesting. Heard talk on the radio afterwards about how Tulsa didn't deserve the bid. Vegas odds say 14 (!) *excluded* teams would be favored over Tulsa, from what I heard. Feel bad for Monmouth.
Quote from: rink on March 13, 2016, 09:14:13 PM
Quote from: a3uge on March 13, 2016, 08:03:06 PM
Feel a bit better knowing that winning at home vs Wright State, on the road vs Ball State, and the semifinal game vs UWGB likely didn't matter. Or UIC being an RPI killer didn't matter. Really, the only way Valpo was getting an at-large would have been a victory at Oregon or if Valpo was in the Big 10.
Very much disagree. This is disingenuous, helps-one-sleep-at-night talk. If we win at Ball St, win at home against Wright St, and lose the conference tourney final, we are an at large bid. If my math is right, that's a 29-4 team whose losses are at Oregon, at Belmont, at a decent-ish conference opponent, and on neutral ground against a decent-ish conference opponent. (Hell, even one of those hiccups is probably okay.)
If we're all honest with ourselves, we knew this was the resume we needed to be an at-large this season. There's just not enough juice left in victories against Horizon teams, OR St (road), RI (road), Belmont (home), and Iona (home) with bad losses against Ball St, two regular season Horizon losses, and an 0-1 Horizon tournament record.
An at-large would have been a nice surprise gift today, but we didn't take care of the business that any non-biased outsider would have required for an at-large. Plain and simple. Didn't get it done this season. No one else to blame.
I meant just one of those scenarios. Even with two less losses, the committee was hell bent on not letting any mid majors in. Syracuse has an RPI of 72 and wasn't even in the last 4 in. That team getting in tells me the selection doesn't have much to do with resumes and season achievements.
BS that Michigan, Syracuse and Tulsa, Tulsa? Got in ahead of Valpo. The reality is no major wants to play a Valpo as it will hurt more than help. I disagree as Oregon's win against the Crusaders gave them another Top 50 win. Probably didn't need it but didn't hurt just like it didn't hurt Oregon St. losing to us at home. We were 4-2 against tourney teams.
As far as Valpo trying to schedule games against bigger teams, they'll do their best but again, the stigma for those teams losing to us hurts them more from their perspective. I applaud Valpo in scheduling the Oregon trip, playing decent teams in state, Ball State and Indiana State and doing a home and home with Belmont. They did their best to put them in a situation to get an at large if they didn't win conference or better seed if they did. A great season was not rewarded as the the selection committee proves again they'd rather have more teams, even those that finish 7th in thier conference than a mid- major trying to position themselves in a position to get a bid. Sad.
I think if the committee rewarded the Valpo's and Monmouths with bids, it would force some of these Teams to play us more often during the Non con season as it would benefit them as well as Valpo. Personally I don't think any team that finishes in the bottom half of their conference deserves a bid. I'd rather see some fresh teams in there than usual suspects that lose in the first round. Needless to say I'm rooting against Tulsa, Michigan and Syracuse to lose to prove the powers that be wrong.
And Boeheim's suspension shouldn't even be considered as he was SUSPENDED FOR A REASON. Hence a suspension. A suspension for infractions or other rationale should be thrown out when considering a team. Injury to key players, I still have issue with but not as much as a coach he broke rules. Again BS.
I was listening to ESPN radio and they had the NCAA committee chairman on. The host mentioned that there were 59 "expert brackets" and none of them had Tulsa in the field. ??? I'll just say that the chairman wasn't effective at explaining the case for Tulsa's inclusion.
Michigan finished 4-12 vs the top 100. This maybe the worst resume to ever get an at-large bid. They won 4 road games all year. It's really an embarrassment.
Michigan, Syracuse, Tulsa, and Vanderbilt were all pretty similar. All got bids for winning a fraction of their games vs top opponents in a handful of opportunities. The criteria for inclusion makes it virtually impossible for a mid major to get in.
USAToday's 5 biggest snubs. Some nice quotes from Bryce.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/13/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-snubbed-selection-sunday-mid-major-monmouth/81736400/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/13/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-snubbed-selection-sunday-mid-major-monmouth/81736400/)
Quote from: chef on March 13, 2016, 11:27:37 PM
Michigan finished 4-12 vs the top 100. This maybe the worst resume to ever get an at-large bid. They won 4 road games all year. It's really an embarrassment.
This goes to what Bilas and others have said over the years - the power conference teams have a chance to better their resume during the conference tournament season, the mid-majors like Valpo only have a chance to lose
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think this is the link to the USA article about Mid-Majors being Snubbed http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/13/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-snubbed-selection-sunday-mid-major-monmouth/81736400/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/13/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-snubbed-selection-sunday-mid-major-monmouth/81736400/)
And so is life...
Many of the best mid-majors don't have a chance this year at making some noise. It's disappointing; especially that mediocre to sub-par power conference teams make it in because they won a game or two in their conference tournament. Perhaps the NCAA should just do away with the conference tournament. It puts an unfair weight on the season. For the first 30 games you are by far the best team in your respectable conference; maybe even one of the best mid-majors in the country. You have a bad outing coupled with having a team drill everything from outside and you lose. Your season is over because of one game.
The selection committee is without a doubt biased. It's all about the money. Who will bring in more money Michigan and Syracuse or Valpo and Monmouth. Valpo and Monmouth are without a doubt more deserving but Michigan and Syracuse will fatten the wallets a bit more.
Quote from: classof2014 on March 14, 2016, 08:28:22 AM
And so is life...
Many of the best mid-majors don't have a chance this year at making some noise. It's disappointing; especially that mediocre to sub-par power conference teams make it in because they won a game or two in their conference tournament. Perhaps the NCAA should just do away with the conference tournament. It puts an unfair weight on the season. For the first 30 games you are by far the best team in your respectable conference; maybe even one of the best mid-majors in the country. You have a bad outing coupled with having a team drill everything from outside and you lose. Your season is over because of one game.
The selection committee is without a doubt biased. It's all about the money. Who will bring in more money Michigan and Syracuse or Valpo and Monmouth. Valpo and Monmouth are without a doubt more deserving but Michigan and Syracuse will fatten the wallets a bit more.
The NCAA allows mid major conferences to select their representative however they want. Perhaps a good solution would be for smaller conferences to reward their top seed with home court... OH WAIT
Quote from: FWalum on March 14, 2016, 08:17:54 AM
I think this is the link to the USA article about Mid-Majors being Snubbed http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/13/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-snubbed-selection-sunday-mid-major-monmouth/81736400/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/13/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-snubbed-selection-sunday-mid-major-monmouth/81736400/)
Thanks. I fixed my post link. Those things happen when fat fingers meet iPad touch screens.
John Calipari, love him or hate him, had a great post-selection quote: In criticizing their seed, the Kentucky coach complained that the selection committee functioned using a "moving target" of criteria each year, ranging from factors like road wins, RPI, top 50 wins.
This is an accurate link this time :-[:
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/03/john-calipari-alaska-bush-people-kentucky-march-madness (http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/03/john-calipari-alaska-bush-people-kentucky-march-madness)
He has a great point. The selection process is:
(a) held behind closed doors --> no transparency,
(b) without locked-down baseline qualifying criteria (beyond winners of conference tournaments) to ensure minimal compliance --> subject to whims and politics
(c) different every year --> basketball programs have to schedule years in advance while the committee arbitrarily changes things on an annual basis
(d) subject to totally subjective (and many times flawed) views/interpretations of concrete things like SOS, Road Wins, RPI, top 50 wins, etc., etc. --> data which, by their nature, should be used objectively.
If the committee had used Matt's "Be the Selection Committee" blind comparison, once past the AQs, the outcome would have been fair(er) and (IMO just as important) documentable and justifiable. Immediately after the final selection was made, Castiglione was stammering to poorly justify some of the mind boggling decisions. If a blind process was in place, mid-majors (and Power 5 for that matter) could schedule opponents with those solid criteria in mind. Power 5 schools are not as affected, but for mid-majors, they can't do that now because 2016 selection reasons may not carry any weight in 2017.
If I were the NCAA, I'd change the selection process to the following:
1 - Establish the baseline selection pool via conference qualifying criteria (tournament or season champ per conference rules)
2 - Compile a list of remaining at-large qualifiers using a set of firm, objective, statical data from vetted sources (RPI, KenPom, Gagarin, etc. etc.) to create an at-large pool. Then, from that pool select the remaining XX-number of at-larges using a blind analysis to complete the field.
3 - At this point, and only at this point, the committee should be permitted to do the seeding from the eligible pool on a more subjective basis that would enhance competitive match-ups, leverage geography, etc.
At least the debate of who should be in vs. who got jobbed, would be mitigated to a large extent. Of course, guys like Calipari will still bitch over what seed they got, but pretty much everyone would feel that the best 68 were chosen and programs could set up their schedules to meet a consistent set of standards.
We've heard how the power conference teams refuse to play mid majors. Some light needs to be shed on those refusals. Bryce (and other coaches in a similar situation) should log every call, email, conversation, etc regarding these games and then release them to the media. Show the world what's really going on.
Would it work? Probably not. But it's not as though we're getting to play these teams now anyways. And of course, any coach that would do this would probably be blacklisted. So it goes I suppose...
This is just like major conference football...they call the shots and the little guys get screwed - period. The NCAA plants a kiss where they need to and let the little guys watch. It is time to go back to the old Division 2 tourney and let the smaller schools have their own National tourney. The NCAA will never change..money call the shots. Just look at the top Division with football, extra $$ for scholarships, etc. The smaller schools will never be able to compete. It is time for the smaller schools to get some backbone and grab the bull by the horns, and that includes getting rid of LaCrone... if you can catch up with him running after money. Let's move on!
We've heard so much about the double bind of, on the one hand, being told we need to schedule a stronger OOC schedule and, on the other, being turned down by 95% of those we call due to the perception of a low upside/high downside of playing strong mid-majors.
Is there anything preventing the Athletic Department from publishing a list of every school they contacted, along with dates and any details of proposals? At the very least, if would be cathartic (in a Giving the Finger kind of way) to have that info available. At most, it might sway some people who don't understand just how much the decks are stacked.
There would, of course, be some social downsides (schools might be wary of negotiating with a team who openly publicizes things). But is there anything actually barring this from happening? What if mid-majors banded together and all committed to doing this? If the system isn't going to be transparent, let's bring our own sunlight. If the system bends its own rules and traditions to perpetuate the closed party that is the Power 5, let's consider bending things ourselves.
Quote from: VULB#62 on March 14, 2016, 09:55:15 AM
If I were the NCAA, I'd change the selection process to the following:
1 - Establish the baseline selection pool via conference qualifying criteria (tournament or season champ per conference rules)
2 - Compile a list of remaining at-large qualifiers using a set of firm, objective, statical data from vetted sources (RPI, KenPom, Gagarin, etc. etc.) to create an at-large pool. Then, from that pool select the remaining XX-number of at-larges using a blind analysis to complete the field.
3 - At this point, and only at this point, the committee should be permitted to do the seeding from the eligible pool on a more subjective basis that would enhance competitive match-ups, leverage geography, etc.
I neglectted to qualify my statement. Please add: "... and if I had the best interests of all member schools and if I were fair minded and if I was dedicated to doing the right thing." Sorry about that omission. ;)
I'm looking at the Massey averages of all the ranking systems and I just don't get Tulsa, Temple, Michigan and Syracuse over Valpo, St. Mary's and San Diego St.
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
Quote from: covufan on March 14, 2016, 11:13:51 AMI'm looking at the Massey averages of all the ranking systems and I just don't get Tulsa, Temple, Michigan and Syracuse over Valpo, St. Mary's and San Diego St.
In the Massey Composite San Diego St #40, Valpo #39, and especially #28 St Mary's stand out like soar thumbs.
I was totally convinced that St Mary's would be in with only 5 losses and I consider them to be a more difficult team for us to beat than the Zags. With their 1 true OOC road game and weak OOC/SOS they appeared to try gaming the RPI just like the big boys do but to no avail. It would be interesting to hear what they are saying on their board.
Quote from: mj on March 14, 2016, 10:06:01 AM
We've heard how the power conference teams refuse to play mid majors. Some light needs to be shed on those refusals. Bryce (and other coaches in a similar situation) should log every call, email, conversation, etc regarding these games and then release them to the media. Show the world what's really going on.
Would it work? Probably not. But it's not as though we're getting to play these teams now anyways. And of course, any coach that would do this would probably be blacklisted. So it goes I suppose...
They've come closer to that this year than any in my memory. I've not listened to the Bryce radio spots last week, but Paul Oren's been trumpeting the fact, for sure.
Quote from: FWalum on March 14, 2016, 08:17:54 AM
I think this is the link to the USA article about Mid-Majors being Snubbed http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/13/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-snubbed-selection-sunday-mid-major-monmouth/81736400/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/13/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-snubbed-selection-sunday-mid-major-monmouth/81736400/)
Interesting to see Bryce's proposal there
Quote
How about we put the best mid-majors in the NCAA tournament. Put us in a play-in game in Dayton against a power school. Just give us a chance."
Maybe something like this is legitimate. Some kind of way to recognize the difficulties that mid-majors have in scheduling the kinds of top-50 games that the committee so relishes. (Or find some way for top mids to get one more of those on their regular season schedule... oh, wait.) Some kind of way to more adequately balance home vs. road vs. neutral opportunities.
Heck, it would be insulting, but I bet we'd have been willing to take a mid-on-mid play-in, even in order to get to the 11 seed play-in against a "power" conference team. Add a mid-specific play-in opportunity to the existing bracket. (OK - maybe the schedule's impossible; but maybe a mid-major eligibility advantage to one of the other last at-large seeds, maybe making four of the at-larges play-ins.)
The Michigan/Tulsa play in game should have been Valpo, with winner playing the team that won't schedule Valpo (ND).
Quote from: VULB#62 on March 14, 2016, 09:55:15 AMHe has a great point. The selection process is:
(a) held behind closed doors --> no transparency,
(b) without locked-down baseline qualifying criteria (beyond winners of conference tournaments) to ensure minimal compliance --> subject to whims and politics
(c) different every year --> basketball programs have to schedule years in advance while the committee arbitrarily changes things on an annual basis
(d) subject to totally subjective (and many times flawed) views/interpretations of concrete things like SOS, Road Wins, RPI, top 50 wins, etc., etc. --> data which, by their nature, should be used objectively.
The critique here seems to be, in large part, that the criteria aren't quantitative enough. I'm not sure how I feel about that.
Would it be fairer (or better?) to take the top-30 or so teams in the RPI? The KenPom? The Sagarin? Maybe leave a few teams for a human committee to select, maybe not.
The football world seems to have experimented with this, and thought better of it.
It seems reasonable to keep humans with some kind of an active role in the process. To help establish the criteria. To apply the eye test. To consider special circumstances. But, ask women and minorities how that's gone for them in the workplace - it's going to have its challenges, its tendencies toward bias.
Do the mids, or the "other 25" conferences as Whelliston used to call the, have enough say in the process? They're represented on the committee, but is their perspective respected? I guess noone's going to argue that we should implement affirmative action for mids because it's harder for them to recruit. But, are we doing the best job we can do of selecting the best teams for at-large bids, those with the best chance of winning games in the NCAA tournament?
The guidelines given to the selection committee are public, and clear. But they're (deliberately, surely) vague. "Pick the best teams", that sort of thing. I don't suspect that there are active conspiracies involved, but it's entirely possible for a system, even made up of fair-minded individuals, to result in systemic biases.
It's not an easy problem to solve.
Quote from: bsmith21 on March 14, 2016, 12:31:48 AMMake it to the national title after some descent years in the tourney and an undefeated horizon season. I quite frankly dont know why we didnt think of it sooner. Afterwards they got a preseason tournament Duke and Louisville.
I really do wonder about these pre-season and in-season tournaments. Are there still good ones, where you can get cracks at good power conference teams, preferably on a neutral court? How do you get into them? What's Valpo missing?
The Oregon/Oregon State trip was a great start, for sure. But it seems like we need another, and ideally neutral.
Wow. _One_ bracket of the blizzard included at bracketmatrix.com (144 for their final snapshot) included Tulsa.
Going through the last teams included, and who beat them out on bracketmatrix:
Michigan included less often than St. Bonaventure, the most "snubbed" by bracketmatrix "number of ballots listed" standards. Temple included less often than St. Mary's and San Diego State too. Syracuse included less often than Monmouth (Monmouth maybe overrated because of PR; but Syracuse does make it seem an awful lot like an old boys' club). Vanderbilt included less often than South Carolina.
And Florida, Valpo, and two others included more often than Tulsa. Akron showed up as often as Tulsa.
Valpo did comparatively well, in NIT seeding, by bracketmatrix standards (very imperfect standards, admittedly). This simple analysis would have made us a middling two seed.
What was the site that collected analytics, as well as (better?) expert rankings?
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 13, 2016, 07:21:20 PM
I don't think this helps Valpo in keeping Bryce any given year. HL is a one bid league and leaves no room for error or a bad game.
Here's a really good match (private, tons of bucks, high academic standards) -- Stanford just opened up. Dawkins was fired today.
Quote from: VULB#62 on March 14, 2016, 05:46:52 PM
Quote from: oklahomamick on March 13, 2016, 07:21:20 PM
I don't think this helps Valpo in keeping Bryce any given year. HL is a one bid league and leaves no room for error or a bad game.
Here's a really good match (private, tons of bucks, high academic standards) -- Stanford just opened up. Dawkins was fired today.
Stanford gets a two-for-one if assistant coach Matt Lottich (a Stanford star) joins Bryce. :(
This is scary stuff and an ideal opportunity. After what happened this year and the challenges of being a mid-major, I wonder if Bryce has had enough with the Horizon league.
The NCAA screws over the big schools too, and no school got more punishment for the crime than USC and the Reggie Bush situation.
2016 D-I Coaching Carousel:
Stanford
Tulane
TCU
James Madison
Denver
Central Florida
Rutgers
UTSA
U of San Francisco
Drexel
Santa Clara
..... so far........
Maybe this stuff belongs in a separate thread... which I'll try not to read!
Another good article explaining why mid majors are essentially not eligible for at large bids:
http://basketballpredictions.blogspot.com/2016/03/how-well-did-computers-predict-field.html?m=1
Quote from: a3uge on March 14, 2016, 09:34:38 PM
Another good article explaining why mid majors are essentially not eligible for at large bids:
http://basketballpredictions.blogspot.com/2016/03/how-well-did-computers-predict-field.html?m=1 (http://basketballpredictions.blogspot.com/2016/03/how-well-did-computers-predict-field.html?m=1)
This sounds pretty spot on. The committee needs a way to account for different numbers of top-50 and sub-200 games played (actually, maybe he under-emphasize this point). And properly accounting for home vs. road. Power conferences never play sub-200 on the road. Small conference teams never play top-50 at home.
Quote from: agibson on March 14, 2016, 09:57:22 PM
Quote from: a3uge on March 14, 2016, 09:34:38 PM
Another good article explaining why mid majors are essentially not eligible for at large bids:
http://basketballpredictions.blogspot.com/2016/03/how-well-did-computers-predict-field.html?m=1 (http://basketballpredictions.blogspot.com/2016/03/how-well-did-computers-predict-field.html?m=1)
This sounds pretty spot on. The committee needs a way to account for different numbers of top-50 and sub-200 games played (actually, maybe he under-emphasize this point). And properly accounting for home vs. road. Power conferences never play sub-200 on the road. Small conference teams never play top-50 at home.
They need to stop gating "top 50" and "top 100" altogether because it implies the #1 team is equal to the #50 team - in Tulsa's case, their UConn win from early in the season became top 50 after they LOST.
Quote from: a3uge on March 14, 2016, 09:34:38 PM
Another good article explaining why mid majors are essentially not eligible for at large bids:
http://basketballpredictions.blogspot.com/2016/03/how-well-did-computers-predict-field.html?m=1
In an effort to wrap up my bubble watch thinking I came back to reread this. Like most of you I trust quantifiable numbers more than subjective observational thinking even when both can sometimes lead to incorrect analysis. By both approaches the deck has still been stacked and the system gamed. The selection committee needs a whole new approach for the good of the game.
I think our home loss to Wright St was by far the most damaging but had that been a win I suspect we still would not have made it. Thoughts?
Quote from: justducky on March 24, 2016, 10:25:45 AMI think our home loss to Wright St was by far the most damaging but had that been a win I suspect we still would not have made it. Thoughts?
I would agree that the WSU loss at home was the most damaging. If we win that game and the Ball State game, I believe we would have been in.
Quote from: covufan on March 24, 2016, 01:00:54 PM
Quote from: justducky on March 24, 2016, 10:25:45 AMI think our home loss to Wright St was by far the most damaging but had that been a win I suspect we still would not have made it. Thoughts?
I would agree that the WSU loss at home was the most damaging. If we win that game and the Ball State game, I believe we would have been in.
But, think about this. What if we'd won the Oregon game, but everything else remained the same (and let's say that Oregon made up for it with another game)?
Quote from: Valpower on March 24, 2016, 03:11:36 PMBut, think about this. What if we'd won the Oregon game, but everything else remained the same?
Change Oregon to a win, leave their record diminished, and everything else the same, there's a good chance Valpo's in. Maybe Oregon drops a seed. Maybe not.
Oregon would have dropped a seed and no more as they won the Pac 12. As far as us, we would have one of the best road wins in the history of mid Majors, would've increased our RPI at least 5-10 spots and we would've been in easy. WGB in the tourney and that loss, in perspective, kept us from the tourney. There was no way Wright St. would've beat us, as shorthanded as we were, 3 times...no way.
Quote from: ValpoDad89 on March 25, 2016, 12:16:42 AM
Oregon would have dropped a seed and no more as they won the Pac 12. As far as us, we would have one of the best road wins in the history of mid Majors, would've increased our RPI at least 5-10 spots and we would've been in easy. WGB in the tourney and that loss, in perspective, kept us from the tourney. There was no way Wright St. would've beat us, as shorthanded as we were, 3 times...no way.
Now think that if Oregon drops a seed then Michigan State gets to be a #1 seed. If Mich St is a #1 seed they don't lose to Middle Tennessee Nowhere. Maybe Izzo should think again about taking graduate transfers from places such as Valpo, Cleve St, etc. Bad Karma----it's all bad karma for the Spartans.
Hey, RPIologists,
With Oakland's loss in the Vegas 16/8 last night, what are the projected VU final RPIs with.....
(A) a win over GW
(B) a loss to GW
Also will the results of the Final 4 come into play with our final RPI?