So according to Lunardi, Nebraska is out........

[IUfanBorden]

Even at 20-8, 11-4. Cites lack of quality wins. Says it also due to the Big 10 being down. Ok....Fair. Afer all they are 0-5 vs Top 25 teams.

So I am guessing the WCC is "up"? St. Mary's is considered a lock; 6 seed.

Weird.

Nebraska's RPI is 56. SOS is 126. One win over Top 50.
St. Mary;s RPI is 35. SOS is 148. Two wins over Top 50.

Nebraska's best win: Vs Michigan(RPI 37). Won by 20.
St. Mary's best win: Vs Gonzaga(RPI 41). Won by three; then was pasted at home by the Zags.

So St. Mary's is a virtual lock. But Nebraska can't even make the First Four?

Jesus has this become stupid.

2nd-ranked team in the country is a 3-seed.
#1 ranked became #1 after losing at home to an unranked team.
OU has lost 6 straight. Is under .500 in conference play. But is a 4 seed.

LMAO...........

 

[lurkeraspect84]

Even at 20-8, 11-4. Cites lack of quality wins. Says it also due to the Big 10 being down. Ok....Fair. Afer all they are 0-5 vs Top 25 teams.

So I am guessing the WCC is "up"? St. Mary's is considered a lock; 6 seed.

Weird.

Nebraska's RPI is 56. SOS is 126. One win over Top 50.
St. Mary;s RPI is 35. SOS is 148. Two wins over Top 50.

Nebraska's best win: Vs Michigan(RPI 37). Won by 20.
St. Mary's best win: Vs Gonzaga(RPI 41). Won by three; then was pasted at home by the Zags.

So St. Mary's is a virtual lock. But Nebraska can't even make the First Four?

Jesus has this become stupid.

2nd-ranked team in the country is a 3-seed.
#1 ranked became #1 after losing at home to an unranked team.
OU has lost 6 straight. Is under .500 in conference play. But is a 4 seed.

LMAO...........

small note. OU has lost 5 of last 6, but your point remains on how there seems to be no rhyme or reason to the seeding and selection process.

 

[MGC_07]

Even at 20-8, 11-4. Cites lack of quality wins. Says it also due to the Big 10 being down. Ok....Fair. Afer all they are 0-5 vs Top 25 teams.

So I am guessing the WCC is "up"? St. Mary's is considered a lock; 6 seed.

Weird.

Nebraska's RPI is 56. SOS is 126. One win over Top 50.
St. Mary;s RPI is 35. SOS is 148. Two wins over Top 50.

Nebraska's best win: Vs Michigan(RPI 37). Won by 20.
St. Mary's best win: Vs Gonzaga(RPI 41). Won by three; then was pasted at home by the Zags.

So St. Mary's is a virtual lock. But Nebraska can't even make the First Four?

Jesus has this become stupid.

2nd-ranked team in the country is a 3-seed.
#1 ranked became #1 after losing at home to an unranked team.
OU has lost 6 straight. Is under .500 in conference play. But is a 4 seed.

LMAO...........

This. Man..... just this. I hate this new system

 

[IUfanBorden]

This. Man..... just this. I hate this new system

It just makes no sense. I mean if St. Mary's was a 10 seed or something---OK. But a 6? That's virtually a lock. And why? B/c they have ONE more Top 50 win? They play in a terrible, terrible conference.

Yet they are a lock?

C'mon.

 

[JRMSU]

They murdered Michigan by 20 and have a superior record.

I think both of them should be clearly in. Michigan being on the bubble and Nebraska out are both ridiculous.

 

[IUfanBorden]

WCC is rated behind MVC, Sun Belt and the Atlantic 10. Yet Lunardi says NB is out b/c of how down the Big 10 is. Yet St. Mary's is a 6 seed.

WTF?

There is no argument for St. Mary's to be in, IF Nebrasks is not. Just none.

 

[Kevin Bryan]

They murdered Michigan by 20 and have a superior record.

I think both of them should be clearly in. Michigan being on the bubble and Nebraska out are both ridiculous.

They did murder Michigan, that is also their only decent win. They've been beating up on the Big 10 doormats that are nowhere close to .500 in conference play and most of whom have losing records overall (Rutgers(x2), Wisconsin(x2), Illinois, Iowa, Minny).

 

[IUfanBorden]

They did murder Michigan, that is also their only decent win. They've been beating up on the Big 10 doormats that are nowhere close to .500 in conference play and most of whom have losing records overall (Rutgers(x2), Wisconsin(x2), Illinois, Iowa, Minny).

Again, solid and fair argument. But explain to me how St. Mary's is a 6 seed. They have beaten up on the likes of Loyola of Marymount, 2x's(RPI 278), Pepperdine(328), Santa Clara(269) Portland(247) and San Diego (150). Still have games left with Pepperdine, Santa Clara and Portland.
The worst RPI of the teams you mentioned is Rutgers at 206. Everyone else is 180 or better.

Not to mention St. Mary's lost to Wash. State(179). Which would be similar to Nebraska losing to Illinois.

My argument isn't that Nebraska should be in. It's how can St. Mary's be a 6 seed, with their resume, and Nebraska not be in?
It makes no sense. None. Their resume's are very, very close. Yet one is solidly in as 6. But the other is out?

Point is.....How can you punish NB for the Big 10 being down, but make SMU a 6 seed, when they play in a much, much worse conference?

Stupid.

 

[lurkeraspect84]

Again, solid and fair argument. But explain to me how St. Mary's is a 6 seed. They have beaten up on the likes of Loyola of Marymount, 2x's(RPI 278), Pepperdine(328), Santa Clara(269) Portland(247) and San Diego (150). Still have games left with Pepperdine, Santa Clara and Portland.
The worst RPI of the teams you mentioned is Rutgers at 206. Everyone else is 180 or better.

Not to mention St. Mary's lost to Wash. State(179). Which would be similar to Nebraska losing to Illinois.

My argument isn't that Nebraska should be in. It's how can St. Mary's be a 6 seed, with their resume, and Nebraska not be in?
It makes no sense. None. Their resume's are very, very close. Yet one is solidly in as 6. But the other is out?

Point is.....How can you punish NB for the Big 10 being down, but make SMU a 6 seed, when they play in a much, much worse conference?

Stupid.

I agree with you completely. How would you help fix the selection process?

Use an aggregate rankings/composite computer rankings like @JVDBeak'em post every week and extended it out to top 64 teams? Last teams get bumped by conference tournament winners.

 

[Kevin Bryan]

Again, solid and fair argument. But explain to me how St. Mary's is a 6 seed. They have beaten up on the likes of Loyola of Marymount, 2x's(RPI 278), Pepperdine(328), Santa Clara(269) Portland(247) and San Diego (150). Still have games left with Pepperdine, Santa Clara and Portland.
The worst RPI of the teams you mentioned is Rutgers at 206. Everyone else is 180 or better.

Not to mention St. Mary's lost to Wash. State(179). Which would be similar to Nebraska losing to Illinois.

My argument isn't that Nebraska should be in. It's how can St. Mary's be a 6 seed, with their resume, and Nebraska not be in?
It makes no sense. None. Their resume's are very, very close. Yet one is solidly in as 6. But the other is out?

Point is.....How can you punish NB for the Big 10 being down, but make SMU a 6 seed, when they play in a much, much worse conference?

Stupid.

St. Mary's is 10-2 against the top 150 though (4-2 top 100) and Nebraska is 8-8 (3-8 vs top 100). Then again St. Mary's hasn't played anyone in the top 25. lol

 

[IUfanBorden]

I agree with you completely. How would you help fix the selection process?

Use a composite computer rankings like @fluoxetine post every week and extended it out to top 64 teams. Last teams get bumped by conference tournament winners.

I'd start by firing those in charge of selecting teams.....That IMO would be a good start.

Secondly, I'd take a serious look at using KenPom. It tells a whole lot of stories, my friend.

I'd get rid of the RPI. It's meaningless.

I'd weigh tough road losses in the equation a bit more. For example---Give a + for a loss at Purdue. But a (-) for a road loss at Rutgers. I think that should be factored in.

Compare all the teams. There is no way a team like St. Mary's should be a 6 seed, and a team like NB not be in. So don't just compare SMU with other 6 seeds. Compare them to teams like NB.

In other words, compare resumes with a much braoder stroke.

It's a travesty that a team with an 11-4 conference record could be out. But a team that plays in a much, much weaker conference, has one more Top 50 win, has a worse SOS, has beaten 4 teams with an RPI of 250 or wrose---in their conference, is in as a 6 seed.

A 6 seed.

System is broke.

 

[IUfanBorden]

St. Mary's is 10-2 against the top 150 though (4-2 top 100) and Nebraska is 8-8 (3-8 vs top 100).

Again, one more win. Nebraska and St. Mary's are separated by the slimmest of hairs. St. Mary's plays in a much, much worse conference. Big 10 is 5th; WCC is 12th.

It's not an argument that if St. Mary;s is in, then Nebraska has to be. The argument is....IF SMU is a 6 seed, then Nebraska HAS TO BE in. Overall St. Mary's has an edge resume wise. But not THAT big.

If St. Mary's was a projected 10 seed, I could see saying a team like Nebraska shouldn't be in. But a 6 seed? Just no.

 

[Kevin Bryan]

Again, one more win. Nebraska and St. Mary's are separated by the slimmest of hairs. St. Mary's plays in a much, much worse conference. Big 10 is 5th; WCC is 12th.

It's not an argument that if St. Mary;s is in, then Nebraska has to be. The argument is....IF SMU is a 6 seed, then Nebraska HAS TO BE in. Overall St. Mary's has an edge resume wise. But not THAT big.

If St. Mary's was a projected 10 seed, I could see saying a team like Nebraska shouldn't be in. But a 6 seed? Just no.

Saint Mary's also hasn't played any top 25 teams. Lunardi is just reaching anyway. The selection process is changing and I'm sure he really has no clue at this point what factors will be weighed more heavily than others.

 

[lurkeraspect84]

Saint Mary's also hasn't played any top 25 teams. Lunardi is just reaching anyway. The selection process is changing and I'm sure he really has no clue at this point what factors will be weighed more heavily than others.

He said earlier tonight that, although he disagreed with the early NCAA selections, he had to adjust his predictions due to it.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Saint Mary's also hasn't played any top 25 teams. Lunardi is just reaching anyway. The selection process is changing and I'm sure he really has no clue at this point what factors will be weighed more heavily than others.

He said as much, too. That what he was predicting is what he is hearing, feeling the committee will do. Which is what he's always done.....I;ve always felt he was given waaaaaaay to much credit. I mean this omission sticks out like a big ol' elephant.

No way a team such as SMU can be a 6 seed, and a team such as NB could be left out.

Absurd.

 

[lurkeraspect84]

He said as much, too. That what he was predicting is what he is hearing, feeling the committee will do. Which is what he's always done.....I;ve always felt he was given waaaaaaay to much credit. I mean this omission sticks out like a big ol' elephant.

No way a team such as SMU can be a 6 seed, and a team such as NB could be left out.

Absurd.

I read a stat a while back that although he gets credit for predicting a high percentage of teams in the tournament correctly, his seeding is way off.

 

[IUfanBorden]

I read a stat a while back that although he gets credit for predicting a high percentage of teams in the tournament correctly, his seeding is way off.

I wouldn't involve him personally in the seeding. Just use his numbers. His rankings are spot on.
I don't care what formula you use; RPI+BPI+SOS+Conf Power rank+KenPom...Whatever. Use what you wish. None of the numbers you put in are going to spit out St. Mary's as a 6 seed, and Nebraska not in. Now it might compute SMU as a 10 seed,and Nebraska out. And I'd have no argument. Simply because their resumes are close. But when you two teams with similar resumes, and one is safely in as a 6 seed(Top 24) and the other is out? Well that screams the system is broke.

 

[Cornicator]

I'm a Husker basketball fan, and not really worried about Lunardi's comments.

This Husker team is going to win out in the regular season. The committee isn't going to leave out a 4th place Big Ten team with a 23-8 record and 14-4 in the league. The conference is down, but its not the goddamn Sun Belt.

Secondly, and most importantly, this Nebraska team passes the eye test. They have 3 former top 100 transfers and sophomore Isiaih Roby is on the verge of becoming a star with an NBA future. Prior to Christmas, Roby barely even played 10 minutes a game. the team was still working out chemistry issues with new faces.

The committee is still going to factor in some human element. This Husker team isn't just the same team they've had the last few years now feasting on a terrible Big Ten. Its an extremely athletic and talented group that is playing at a top 25 level. What's funny to all us fans is this current team is more athletic, tougher, deeper, and more talented than the Husker team which made the NCAA tourney in 2013-14. That team finished 19-14, albeit in a "stronger big ten."

They are basically 17-4 since Roby began to expand his role. They are 10-1 since inserting him into the starting lineup. And while people want to shit on their absence of Big time wins, consider they handily blasted Minnesota back when the Gophers had a full healthy roster and nobody was getting suspended for rape. The Gophers were a legit top 15 team at that time.

 

[dukedevilz]

Saint Mary's has a much better resume. They have more top 50/100/150 wins than Nebraska, and they're doing it far fewer games (also, look at the winning percentages for those respective tiers). I mean, 10-2 against top 150 versus 9-8? Really? Nebraska is barely above .500 in that category... Also, every metric has Saint Mary's considerably higher than Nebraska.

Saint Mary's
BPI: 18
RPI: 33
KenPom: 17
Jeff Sagarin: 24

vs top 50: 2-1 (66.7%)
vs top 100: 4-2 (66.7%)
vs top 150: 10-2 (83.3%)

Total Losses: 3
Strength of Schedule: 147


Nebraska
BPI: 58
RPI: 53
KenPom: 52
Jeff Sagarin: 57

vs top 50: 1-5 (16.7%)
vs top 100: 3-8 (27.3%)
vs top 150: 9-8 (53.0%)

Losses: 8
Strength of Schedule: 117

 

[tw3301]

All i read in the op is that the big 10 is worse than a mid major conference this year.

 

[USMC Cat]

It seems like it USED to be (5-8 years ago) that big schools would get the benefit of the doubt over smaller schools...

Now it seems like the smaller schools don't really have to do as much as the bigger schools.

 

[USMC Cat]

Saint Mary's has a much better resume. They have more top 50/100/150 wins than Nebraska, and they're doing it far fewer games (also, look at the winning percentages for those respective tiers). I mean, 10-2 against top 150 versus 9-8? Really? Nebraska is barely above .500 in that category... Also, every metric has Saint Mary's considerably higher than Nebraska.

Saint Mary's
BPI: 18
RPI: 33
KenPom: 17
Jeff Sagarin: 24

vs top 50: 2-1 (66.7%)
vs top 100: 4-2 (66.7%)
vs top 150: 10-2 (83.3%)

Total Losses: 3
Strength of Schedule: 147


Nebraska
BPI: 58
RPI: 53
KenPom: 52
Jeff Sagarin: 57

vs top 50: 1-5 (16.7%)
vs top 100: 3-8 (27.3%)
vs top 150: 9-8 (53.0%)

Losses: 8
Strength of Schedule: 117

And? They're both 6-0 vs teams 100-150.

They're 'only 9-8 against top 150 teams' because they're 3-8 against top 100 teams.

 

[lurkeraspect84]

All i read in the op is that the big 10 is worse than a mid major conference this year.

 

[dukedevilz]

And? They're both 6-0 vs teams 100-150.

They're 'only 9-8 against top 150 teams' because they're 3-8 against top 100 teams.

Fair point. A bit redundant. But I think we can agree 4-2 is much more impressive than 3-8.

One more thing to consider, though, is that the NCAA Selection Committee is closely monitoring Quadrant 1 Games. Quadrant 1 games are home games against top 25 teams (RPI), neutral court games against top 50 teams, and road games against top 75 teams.

Quadrant 1 Records
Saint Mary's: 3-0
Nebraska: 0-6

 

[Cornicator]

Fair point. A bit redundant. But I think we can agree 4-2 is much more impressive than 3-8.

One more thing to consider, though, is that the NCAA Selection Committee is closely monitoring Quadrant 1 Games. Quadrant 1 games are home games against top 25 teams (RPI), neutral court games against top 50 teams, and road games against top 75 teams.

Quadrant 1 Records
Saint Mary's: 3-0
Nebraska: 0-6

Nebraska has had exactly 1 chance to play at top 25 RPI team at home: KU, a game they lost by one, on a last second 3.

I would like to see St. Mary's record if they played at Purdue, at Ohio State, @ Michigan State, and at Creighton.

 

[dukedevilz]

Nebraska has had exactly 1 chance to play at top 25 RPI team at home: KU, a game they lost by one, on a last second 3.

I would like to see St. Mary's record if they played at Purdue, at Ohio State, @ Michigan State, and at Creighton.

They won at Gonzaga, who I'd wager is better than Ohio State and Creighton (Zags beat OSU soundly anyway; also, Gonzaga is #7 in KenPom and #8 in BPI)... All I know is Saint Mary's has a better resume than Nebraska. Are they a better team than Nebraska? Maybe, maybe not. I've seen SMC play three times on tv this year, and I would say they actually looked a little better last year. Their defense looks shoddy this year; they can't stay in front of the opposing guards. Maybe SMC and Nebraska can play in the 6/11 game.. Nebraska could beat SMC, no doubt. But their resume still leaves a bit to be desired.

Edit: None of Saint Mary's Quadrant 1 games were at home (road wins against Gonzaga and BYU; neutral court win against New Mexico State).

 

[SpartanJD]

Boy,going 14-4 in a P5 conference and not getting in with the expanded field format now which means the bubble is weak every year...would be surprising.

Sometimes the committee needs to think like a human instead of a robot.

However I think Nebraska will choke down the stretch and play themselves out of a bid.

 

[RockChalkRally]

Boy,going 14-4 in a P5 conference and not getting in with the expanded field format now which means the bubble is weak every year...would be surprising.

Sometimes the committee needs to think like a human instead of a robot.

However I think Nebraska will choke down the stretch and play themselves out of a bid.

Asking the committee to think might be asking way too much. If you add common sense into the committee's equation, they lose their gotdamn minds and they go bat sh*t crazy.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Saint Mary's has a much better resume. They have more top 50/100/150 wins than Nebraska, and they're doing it far fewer games (also, look at the winning percentages for those respective tiers). I mean, 10-2 against top 150 versus 9-8? Really? Nebraska is barely above .500 in that category... Also, every metric has Saint Mary's considerably higher than Nebraska.

Saint Mary's
BPI: 18
RPI: 33
KenPom: 17
Jeff Sagarin: 24

vs top 50: 2-1 (66.7%)
vs top 100: 4-2 (66.7%)
vs top 150: 10-2 (83.3%)

Total Losses: 3
Strength of Schedule: 147


Nebraska
BPI: 58
RPI: 53
KenPom: 52
Jeff Sagarin: 57

vs top 50: 1-5 (16.7%)
vs top 100: 3-8 (27.3%)
vs top 150: 9-8 (53.0%)

Losses: 8
Strength of Schedule: 117

Translation:

St. MAry's has ONE more Top 50 win. One more Top 100 win. And one more Top 150 win. They have also feasted on a terrible conference.

Conference wins:

Pepperdine-------RPI 330
LMU----------RPI 277(2 wins)
Santa Clara-----RPI 269
Portland - RPI 249

Still have games with Portland, Pepperdine and Santa Clara. So that will be three more probable wins over sub 200 teams.

Nebraska has ONE sub 200 conference win(Rutgers).

But somehow NB is being punished b/c the Big 10 is down? WTF is the WCC?

Again, not arguing NB should be in b/c St. Mary's is. Arguing if St/ Mary's is a 6 seed, then NB has to be in. Their resumes aren't that far aprt.

 

[Cornicator]

Meh.. maybe I'm a delusional Husker fan. But Bruce Rasmussen, the NCAA committee chair lives in Omaha. They've had him on local radio. He's seen them play a lot, and he's on the record that this current Nebraska team passes the eye test of a legit NCAA tourney team.

People can shit all over Nebraska's absence of quad 1 wins. They can shit all over the Big Ten as well. But Nebraska in February 2018 is not the same team that was acclimating to a lot of new faces in November and early December 2017. I'm confident suggesting the Husker team from November / early December would likely be around .500 even in the current Big Ten. They aren't cleaning up vs . a shitty conference, they are playing to their potential as a legit NCAA tourney team squad.

Former top 100 player and Miami transfer James Palmer, Jr is going to be named 1st Team All Big Ten. He wasn't really comfortable in his role until holiday time.



5 -Star transfer Issac Copeland was coming off back surgery and barely even a factor for the 1st 6 weeks of the season. He's now one of the smoothest players in the Big Ten, and has been a ridiculous matchup problem for every opponent.



And Sophomore Isiaih Roby, the player with the Highest potential NBA ceiling, barely played 10 minutes a game the first half of the season. he is now producing double doubles and the team is 9-0 with him in the starting lineup.




I actually think Nebraska can win the Big Ten tourney, assuming they can somehow avoid a matchup with Michigan State. IMO, Sparty is the best team in the league and its not really close.

And the win over Michigan was not a fluke for Nebraska. The Huskers are SUBSTANTIALLY more athletic than The Wolverines, and Nebraska defends the three as well as any team in the country. That matchup is a bit of nightmare for Michigan.

I honestly hope Michigan can hold on to the 5th place finish because will beat them easily if they play in New York again. However, it will make their only "good " win look even less impressive... go figure.

 

[MGC_07]

Nova’s loses are a lot worse than MSU’s, and MSU comparable wins ( Purdue and UNC vs. Xavier and Gonzaga). Now they have the same amount of loses. Yet they still will probably be a 1 seed and MSU 3.

Oh yeah, and MSU hasn’t lost in a little over a month. Nova has lost twice in the past 8 days.

 

[Cornicator]

Nova’s loses are a lot worse than MSU’s, and MSU comparable wins ( Purdue and UNC vs. Xavier and Gonzaga). Now they have the same amount of loses. Yet they still will probably be a 1 seed and MSU 3.

Oh yeah, and MSU hasn’t lost in a little over a month. Nova has lost twice in the past 8 days.

Nova has lost some big time players like Phil Booth and Paschall to injury. Both players will be back by tourney time. I think the NCAA is considering their return in the seeding. Nova at FULL Strength is a tremendous team. But.. their roster right now, is not the roster of a #1 seed.

 

[dukedevilz]

Translation:

St. MAry's has ONE more Top 50 win. One more Top 100 win. And one more Top 150 win. They have also feasted on a terrible conference.

You're missing the mark, IMO. Saint Mary's has won the majority of their games against competitive teams; Nebraska has not (winning percentages of 66.7% compared to 27.3% for top 100). While it's true that SMC only has one more top 100 than Nebraska, you also have to consider Nebraska had almost twice as many opportunities. If you apply the same percentages, SMC would be 7-4 against the top 100.

 

[xWVU2010x]

Strength of schedule trumps actual wins. Its always been like that, schedule big boys or dont play with them in March. Its not hard to get a game agaisnt a team with a pulse vs some RPI 200+ school that doesnt actually belong on the same floor.

Its not a perfect system, but atleast it is a pretty well established criteria and it keeps teams from scheduling their way to a bid or to relevance without actually beating anyone.

 

[SpartanJD]

Nova has lost some big time players like Phil Booth and Paschall to injury. Both players will be back by tourney time. I think the NCAA is considering their return in the seeding. Nova at FULL Strength is a tremendous team. But.. their roster right now, is not the roster of a #1 seed.

Then the committee should consider MSUs win vs ND a quadrant one win then. ND had Colson and another starter (forgot his name) who both got injured right after the MSU game for the season and they tanked.

ND was overanked in the top 5 when they played MSU, but without their injuries, they would have hung around int he rankings most of the year.

 

[SpartanJD]

Strength of schedule trumps actual wins. Its always been like that, schedule big boys or dont play with them in March. Its not hard to get a game agaisnt a team with a pulse vs some RPI 200+ school that doesnt actually belong on the same floor.

Its not a perfect system, but atleast it is a pretty well established criteria and it keeps teams from scheduling their way to a bid or to relevance without actually beating anyone.

The problem is the committee views the gap between a team ranked 150 and 250 as the same as a team ranked 50 and 150.

They need to eliminated the numbers once you get that high and rate teams 100-150 on a tier, and then 150-200, and then everything 200 plus.

MSU gets killed for playing multiple teams with RPIs near 300 or above 300. Being really shitty or really really really shitty is not much of a difference.

 

[GE Nole]

The problem is the committee views the gap between a team ranked 150 and 250 as the same as a team ranked 50 and 150.

They need to eliminated the numbers once you get that high and rate teams 100-150 on a tier, and then 150-200, and then everything 200 plus.

MSU gets killed for playing multiple teams with RPIs near 300 or above 300. Being really shitty or really really really shitty is not much of a difference.

Agree completely. It’s not a linear regression.

 

[MGC_07]

Saint Mary’s lost at San Francisco.

 

[Big_Blue79]

I have nothing to add except that the RPI is pure garbage, as is Top 50 RPI wins. It's 2018 and a multi-billion dollar industry is relying on nonsense. We can do better, and I guess go Cornhuskers?

 

[Cornicator]

Then the committee should consider MSUs win vs ND a quadrant one win then. ND had Colson and another starter (forgot his name) who both got injured right after the MSU game for the season and they tanked.

ND was overanked in the top 5 when they played MSU, but without their injuries, they would have hung around int he rankings most of the year.

Check out this Letter from NCAA COMMITTEE CHAIR Bruce Rasmussen to the Omaha World - Herald... It sounds like they are thinking that way about that game:

http://www.omaha.com/sports/blogs/m...cial&utm_source=email&utm_campaign=user-share



Let me give you another example, not as close to home. While Nebraska's non-conference SOS was ranked 287 based simply upon adding up the won-lost records of every non-conference game played, Michigan State's non-conference SOS was rated 266 and Michigan State played Duke, North Carolina and UConn on neutral courts and Notre Dame at home in their non-conference schedule. These are four pretty good games. Much like Nebraska's explanations, UConn is typically a very good game and when Michigan State played Notre Dame they were at full strength. So why are Michigan State's and Nebraska's non-conference SOS's so bad? Because the cumulative W-L records of their non-conference opponents puts them there.

Again, while non-conference SOS is a number referred to by the committee and the public, it is not the non-conference SOS that the committee looks at but the non-conference games with specifics that the committee looks at. Did you challenge yourself in non-conference play (especially based upon what you anticipated the strength of your team to be-and based upon this small factor I would say that Nebraska's non-conference schedule was more challenging to Nebraska than Michigan State's was to Michigan State, even though Michigan State played Duke, North Carolina, UConn and Notre Dame a two-week period). Did you give the committee a picture of whether or not you should be in consideration for an at-large spot or a high seed in the tournament if you did not win your conference tournament?

In Nebraska's case specifically, the committee will also discuss the first Minnesota game where Minnesota was closer to full strength, and the fact that Nebraska played Michigan State, Purdue and Ohio State only on the road. The committee will also discuss the transformation of the Nebraska team from the beginning of the year to the end of the year.