Bracketology 2024

[VeloClone]

When they address my opinion instead of their straw man, sure, I agree.

It all started when you said that it exceeded your expectations and everything beyond that point was gravy. Even if you said, as you clarified later, that FOR YOU everything else was gravy, it isn't out of line for a poster to disagree indicating that they don't think FOR THEM (which they didn't need to say, it is assumed just as it was in your post) everything else is gravy. That is what message boards are for - expressing and discussing opinions. A disagreement on that point isn't cause for getting pissy. If you can't handle others having different opinions or disagreeing with your opinions, don't post them.

There was no straw man in the original disagreement.

 

[VeloClone]

The NCAA needs to look at Auburn and Bama and figure out why the NET formula is reacting to their resume in such a favorable way. At some point those Q1 results have to matter. The difference between a Q1 win and Q2 win is pretty significant but these two teams seem to be getting rewarded significantly for a bunch of soft Q2 wins. If this is the primary tool the NCAA is going to use they HAVE to fix it.


View attachment 125090

I think they are also getting rewarded for a bunch of Q1 losses as well.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

Yeah, and I have made this same post in about a half dozen threads this year. It must not be forgotten.

The better metric to look at is SOR. ISU sits at 5.

Honestly, if you are going to look at the non con you HAVE to consider things that aren't necessarily in your control. 1.) Holiday tournament field strength can be pretty unpredictable. 2.) Annual games (Iowa) 3.) Conference driven games (DePaul). None of that is in Iowa States control. Also, looking at non con games in Q3 and Q4 buckets is really dumb. Those are all bad teams that you are going to play at home and the results should be really similar. Circling and railing on Iowa States Q4 games is really dumb when in reality they would have beaten Q3 teams in a similar fashion.

I just think in the new world of NIL and the portal teams are going to look a lot different in November than they will in March. They need to ditch the old line of thinking IMO.

 

[Cyclonepride]

I think it is safe to say at this point that we are locked into a 2 or 3 seed (I suppose with an outside chance of winning the Big 12 tournament and stealing a 1 if other things fall right for us). I don't think there's any way we drop below 3 now. The resume is just too strong.

 

[chuckd4735]

Lol, I'm not mad. And it has nothing to do with Duke. I guess I just looked at the sites and tried to match them up with schools in the area that made the most sense.

Obviously the committee doesn't use logic and common sense and instead relies on mileage so I learned something new today.

Tennesse to Charlotte I guess.

So KU should go to Wichita over KCMO?

 

[clone52]

Isn't it enough that the Nitty Gritty sheets the Committee uses has both non-con NET and RPI SOS and then the overall NET and RPI? The non-con is baked into both the non-con numbers and the overall numbers while the conference is only in the overall. So the non-con result is given twice as much weight.

So because it's visible they committee gives it more weight? There are a crap ton of things on the nitty gritty. Why do you think non-con SOS is given so much weight? Last year there was no evidence of that.

 

[1UNI2ISU]

Honestly, if you are going to look at the non con you HAVE to consider things that aren't necessarily in your control. 1.) Holiday tournament field strength can be pretty unpredictable. 2.) Annual games (Iowa) 3.) Conference driven games (DePaul). None of that is in Iowa States control. Also, looking at non con games in Q3 and Q4 buckets is really dumb. Those are all bad teams that you are going to play at home and the results should be really similar. Circling and railing on Iowa States Q4 games is really dumb when in reality they would have beaten Q3 teams in a similar fashion.

I just think in the new world of NIL and the portal teams are going to look a lot different in November than they will in March. They need to ditch the old line of thinking IMO.

Why are we punishing teams that keep their rosters together and are ready to go Day 1?

 

[clone52]

The NCAA needs to look at Auburn and Bama and figure out why the NET formula is reacting to their resume in such a favorable way. At some point those Q1 results have to matter. The difference between a Q1 win and Q2 win is pretty significant but these two teams seem to be getting rewarded significantly for a bunch of soft Q2 wins. If this is the primary tool the NCAA is going to use they HAVE to fix it.


View attachment 125090

There are plenty of examples of the seed line being way different than the net rankings. It's a nice sorting tool but the committee has shown it moves teams up and down when it makes sense.

 

[NoCreativity]

So KU should go to Wichita over KCMO?

Lol, Lawrence is pretty much the west suburbs of Kansas City. Charlotte is 3 hours and 50 minutes from their campus in another state that's ACC country that couldn't care less about SEC basketball.

That's a horrible comparison.

 

[chuckd4735]

Lol, Lawrence is pretty much the west suburbs of Kansas City. Charlotte is 3 hours and 50 minutes from their campus in another state that's ACC country that couldn't care less about SEC basketball.

That's a horrible comparison.

Your argument is State over distance, not mine.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

I think they are also getting rewarded for a bunch of Q1 losses as well.

100% they are. That's why I said at some point the results should matter. Yes, you should be "rewarded" for playing a tough team but when the NET result is a bunch of losses that shouldn't matter.

 

[jcf817]

It all started when you said that it exceeded your expectations and everything beyond that point was gravy. Even if you said, as you clarified later, that FOR YOU everything else was gravy, it isn't out of line for a poster to disagree indicating that they don't think FOR THEM (which they didn't need to say, it is assumed just as it was in your post) everything else is gravy. That is what message boards are for - expressing and discussing opinions. A disagreement on that point isn't cause for getting pissy. If you can't handle others having different opinions or disagreeing with your opinions, don't post them.

There was no straw man in the original disagreement.

I RE-clarified later. My original comment started, "AFAIC,...". No assumption necessary. I have no issue being disagreed with (okay, fine...sometimes a little bit of an issue), but having my comments misquoted and misrepresented, like you did here, is not something I easily back down from.

Have a good day.

 

[CoachHines3]

I RE-clarified later. My original comment started, "AFAIC,...". No assumption necessary. I have no issue being disagreed with (okay, fine...sometimes a little bit of an issue), but having my comments misquoted and misrepresented, like you did here, is not something I easily back down from.

Have a good day.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

So because it's visible they committee gives it more weight? There are a crap ton of things on the nitty gritty. Why do you think non-con SOS is given so much weight? Last year there was no evidence of that.

The Non Con SOS has been a talking point for the committee for years.

 

[Cyclonepride]

Why are we punishing teams that keep their rosters together and are ready to go Day 1?

Not really punishing teams, but what do you think is more important? Being great on day 1, or being great through the last half of the season where everyone is playing their hardest games?

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

Why are we punishing teams that keep their rosters together and are ready to go Day 1?

Those teams are going to be few and far between. The landscape has completely changed, they need to adapt to it. Also, nobody is saying punish those teams but I just don't think you can circle a game or two in November and use that for justification. The conference slate HAS to carry just as much weight as a non con game.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

There are plenty of examples of the seed line being way different than the net rankings. It's a nice sorting tool but the committee has shown it moves teams up and down when it makes sense.

It's also shown that they use NET inconsistently for different teams. That's the problem. Dial in the tool and that fixes a lot of it.

 

[VeloClone]

100% they are. That's why I said at some point the results should matter. Yes, you should be "rewarded" for playing a tough team but when the NET result is a bunch of losses that shouldn't matter.

 

[Daserop]

Top Big 12 teams should be seeding the following.

1 Seed: Houston (even if they lose this weekend)
2 Seed: ISU & Baylor
3 Seed: Kansas
4 Seed: BYU

 

[wcamnclone]

So who has bought tickets for Omaha?