Bubble Watch
- Thread starter vcl3
- Start date
I don't see Crean surviving this year. He has never went past the sweet sixteen in 9 years at a blueblood.
They might have a shot if they got to the Big 12 championship game
My take on the "top 16" released yesterday is that they are valuing a combination of RPI and good wins, while not punishing as much for bad losses - why WV and Butler are 4-seeds over Wisconsin, Purdue, and Cincinnati (although their loss today would put them down anyway). They also have Florida State higher than I would, but they do have 9 RPI Top-50 wins. The bubble is just so weak this year...if they stay true with RPI, then Tennessee and Rhode Island might have better shots than we think they do. Same with Illinois State. Problem is, they're inconsistent. They could decide to value whether you've won your conference or not. They could decide to suddenly use bad losses to weed teams out. You can't ever predict the committee.
UCLA and Syracuse have gotten in the last two years with seemingly undeserving resumes, based on the "eye test," and they both made the Sweet 16. Wichita State got in the First Four last year even losing in the MVC tourney semis, based on the names Ron Baker and Fred VanVleet. They pulled a first-round upset. I'd peg these types of teams this year as Indiana, Michigan State, and Syracuse again - blue bloods with either good wins over tourney teams (Ind, Syr), or a lot of talent that hasn't put it together yet (MichSt).
It might take a win or two in KC but the bubble is extremely weak this year. St Mary's is really the only mid major that's going to get an at large.
Honest question, is Indiana considered a blueblood anymore? Feel like that they have fallen down a tier.
I can definitely understand that thinking. For instance I don't believe Nebraska is a blueblood football school because they haven't had huge success since the early 2000's. Indiana might be in the same boat as Nebby but in the basketball scene.
In the end I would still consider them to be a blueblood. They still have quite a bit of prestige and being the premier program of the basketball state helps. Doesn't hurt having 5 national titles and 8 FFs too.
15 losses has never received an at large bid before. Even with 2 wins in KC I don't see 18-15 doing it.
Same sort of issue if ISU was to go 9-9 and proceed to immediately lose in KC. The only at large for a 17 win team is Alabama back in 2006 and they only had 2 fewer losses.
You have to find the other teams that will beat out Iowa State in that situation. Maybe there are some, but the selection is not in a vacuum.
Exactly, while it may be true that no team with 15 losses has been an at large. It's also true that no team was left out because they had 15 losses. Same goes for the win column.
Northwestern is going to make it in for the first time ever. Huge win at Wisconsin.
I suspect that if we end up with 15 losses, we likely won't get in. But its certainly not a sure thing. I absolutely cannot stand when people post things like "this is the earliest we've had 7 losses, so we are toast" or other crap.
Yep. Northwestern can only play its way out at this point, and given the remaining schedule, it might require losing at least 4 of its final six games, and one loss would have to be losing at home to Rutgers.
We currently have an RPI which is 54. If we finish the season 1-5 that will likely put us in the high 50's or low 60's. We are not getting into the tourney with an 8-10 conference record unless we win the Big 12 tournament. At 9-9 we have a 60% chance of getting into the tournament if we lose on Thursday of the Big 12 tournament. Any scenario in which we finish 10-8 we are a lock.
I know we have very strong analytic numbers but it appears based upon the unveiling of the Top16 that RPI will continue to play a major factor.
I don't care how soft the bubble is...if you have 15 losses, an RPI in the 50's and a losing conference record it will not matter how great our analytics are. But an 8-10 record at this point is probably less than a 5% possibility. Saturday was a nice win for the Cyclones. I think offensively the sets and ball movement seemed more crisp.
I think Coach Prohm committed to a decision with Young that was absolutely necessary. And personally I thought the substitution patterns and timeouts were much better. Given how inconsistent this team can be I thought the timeout when Oklahoma cut the lead from 20 to14 at the 5:00 mark in the second half was a very smart move.
The team also responded very well out of the timeouts which Prohm called.....perhaps because none o the timeouts were called after made baskets.
Kind of excited for them. No connection or anything but more in a 'Yay for sports' kind of way.
May end up being the team I pay most attention to if ISU doesn't earn a bid.
