Big 12 thread

[della]

“I don't think you should look to only one stat and ignore the rest, though.”

Apparently someone changed her philosophy in the last 45 minutes. 😆

Remember when Wichita St went 30-0 and got the overall 1 seed, then lost in the 2nd round? Piling up wins vs nobodies means nothing.

I'm just countering you going on about KU's Quad 1 wins. Houston won a higher percentage of Quad 1 games than KU did.

You need to realize that you are arguing that a 7 loss KU should be the overall 1 seed. You also need to realize your last game was your worst showing.

 

[ExitFlagger]

I'm just countering you going on about KU's Quad 1 wins. Houston won a higher percentage of Quad 1 games than KU did.

You need to realize that you are arguing that a 7 loss KU should be the overall 1 seed. You also need to realize your last game was your worst showing.

Actually, I’m not. I said that I’m fine with them not getting it. But there’s no reason to give it to Houston.

Houston has played one team that is even close to Texas’s level and lost at home. They have 1 win vs the AP top 25. KU has 8. KU’s worst loss is on the road vs a team that will be a 5 seed. Houston lost at home to a team that doesn’t sniff the top 100. Houston hasn’t proven squat. On top of it, their best player might be limited.

 

[della]

Actually, I’m not. I said that I’m fine with them not getting it. But there’s no reason to give it to Houston.

Good cause I hate whiny Blue Bloods. KU is my favorite BB team and Self is my favorite BB coach. I like the fact y'all played a solid noncon schedule.

 

[Turinturumbar]

Houston doesn't have bad loses.

They play in a shit conference. Every loss is a bad loss. But yeah, when you don’t play anybody you aren’t gonna have many bad losses.

Anyway, a double digit loss to Memphis is as bad as any loss.

 

[Turinturumbar]

I'm just countering you going on about KU's Quad 1 wins. Houston won a higher percentage of Quad 1 games than KU did.

You need to realize that you are arguing that a 7 loss KU should be the overall 1 seed. You also need to realize your last game was your worst showing.

There are quad 1 games then there are quad 1 games. One team played a lot of Q1 games against teams that were borderline Q1. The other team played a bunch against top end Q1 teams.

It’s like saying one team won a higher % of games against top 40 teams, but not considering that most of those teams were borderline top 40 while the other team played a lot of teams that were top 10. Both are technically top 40, but KU played far more top end teams than Houston. But they all count as Quad 1 don’t they? The simple reality is if Houston had to play at Baylor, Texas, KState, ISU, TCU, etc, Houston would have a LOT more than 3 losses. Would they have 7? Not sure. So I’m not exactly arguing that they aren’t better than KU. Just that the argument of them having a higher % Q1 record isn’t a solid argument.

I won’t be picking Houston in the tourney, I’ll say that much. They aren’t battle tested. If Gonzaga has taught us one thing, it’s that lack of conference competition hurts a team in the tourney.

I think this year it’s a crapshoot. Take the top 10 teams and throw their names in a bucket and your guess is as good as mine as to whose comes out on top.

 

[KisteK]

My favorite is when they lump Q1 & 2

.. bruh, there's a reason they're separate

 

[Bert Higginbotha]

My favorite is when they lump Q1 & 2

.. bruh, there's a reason they're separate

The NCAA selection committee uses metrics that are only plain stupid in my opinion and are subject to politics out the ass.

We need to get good statisticians and programmers together and work out the proper metrics to determine the proper ranking of teams and their probability of winning based on as many metrics as is practical to consider.

You build a model with all Division 1 teams in it, where they play and all the scores. You build in the foul disparity for each contest, where the refs come from, what injuries each team had at that time and other necessary metrics. It would be a big data base but we have guys on our board that given a few weeks could build it. It would even be easy with some bright people who do not even follow the sport if they got nonbiased input from lovers of the sport. Tell the NCAA to shut up.

A system like this would even out the disparities between Houston beating Memphis at Memphis versus Kansas beating Kentucky at Lexington. The idea that Houston has had as rough a road to get to the NCAA as Kansas is just pure bullshit. I don’t root for Kansas but to equate Houston’s schedule to Kansas’ schedule is nonsensical. A good system would eliminate crap like that.

Get the politics out. The computer would spit out the top 68 teams and you could even program it to choose the sites for each team for the best neutral site versus fans butts in the seats. Get the politics out! Kentucky’s regional, if they get there, is in New York. Duke’s regional, if they get there, is in New York. Why should Kentucky have to go to New York instead of Louisville? New York is Duke home court in that there are more Duke fans in New York than in Durham.

Post Script:

The Quad system is purely laughable. Geeze does beating a top 75 team on the road mean something? Who dreamed that crap up to start with?

 

[ExitFlagger]

I’ll just drop this here. Because **** hawkit, that’s why.

 

[toonces11]

I think a cool basketball conference would be

Iowa
Iowa St
Kansas
Kansas St
Mizzou
Illinois
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Indiana
Purdue

Looks like a super competitive race for 2nd place. Lots of good gyms.

 

[Necessary Roughness]

Being reported on some insider sites that Grant McCasland of UNT is a done deal to Texas Tech. He was the main candidate right out of the gate and looks like be was the right man for the job. His team is still playing in the NIT, so nothing will be official until after they are done for the season.

 

[KisteK]

 

[Bert Higginbotha]

View embedded media

At the least they made the elite eight.

Kentucky has not been there in forever.