I'm looking at the BEast standings and see that MU, in 11th place, is just one game out of 8th, where 3 teams are tied. Behind MU, Seton Hall (who, we all know, just lost to MU) is 2.5 games back, in 12th place.
Here's my question (without looking at the schedules to see if it is exactly possible): if there was a tie for 8th place among teams that included the 11th team in the standings, and that group was 2 games ahead of the 12th place team, would it be more likely that the committee might go ahead and pick 11 BEast teams for the tournament? (Perhaps more concretely, if the committee was picking today, with MU, in 11th place, but notably closer to 8th than 12th, does that somehow help the argument get 11 teams in the tournament?)
Despite that (hopeful) implication and speculation, I still have a gut feeling that we control our own destiny, that we have opportunities for enough wins that will make selecting us pretty easy. Starting with UConn.
That said, wish I had more confidence than just hope right now. Go Marquette.
Quote from: mug644 on February 20, 2011, 10:53:08 PM
I'm looking at the BEast standings and see that MU, in 11th place, is just one game out of 8th, where 3 teams are tied. Behind MU, Seton Hall (who, we all know, just lost to MU) is 2.5 games back, in 12th place.
Here's my question (without looking at the schedules to see if it is exactly possible): if there was a tie for 8th place among teams that included the 11th team in the standings, and that group was 2 games ahead of the 12th place team, would it be more likely that the committee might go ahead and pick 11 BEast teams for the tournament? (Perhaps more concretely, if the committee was picking today, with MU, in 11th place, but notably closer to 8th than 12th, does that somehow help the argument get 11 teams in the tournament?)
Despite that (hopeful) implication and speculation, I still have a gut feeling that we control our own destiny, that we have opportunities for enough wins that will make selecting us pretty easy. Starting with UConn.
That said, wish I had more confidence than just hope right now. Go Marquette.
History is not on our side.
2007: Villanova, WVU and DePaul tied for 7th place. Only Villanova was selected
2008: Villanova and Syracuse tied for 8th. Only Villanova selected.
2009: WVU and Providence tied for 7th. Only WVU selected.
I will feel pretty good about being tied with Cincinnati, W Virginia and/or Syracuse this year, since we will have beaten them all head-to-head.
Assuming we beat Cincy. If we don't, that probably puts us on the wrong side of the bubble anyway. Unless, of course we win at UConn.
Quote from: BrewCity on February 21, 2011, 10:43:11 AM
I will feel pretty good about being tied with Cincinnati, W Virginia and/or Syracuse this year, since we will have beaten them all head-to-head.
Assuming we beat Cincy. If we don't, that probably puts us on the wrong side of the bubble anyway. Unless, of course we win at UConn.
Even if that tie in the standings were to happen I still see MU on the outside. The other three teams have a non-conference Tournament team win to hang their hats on. Alas, MU does not.
Quote from: The Golden Avalanche on February 21, 2011, 10:54:26 AM
Even if that tie in the standings were to happen I still see MU on the outside. The other three teams have a non-conference Tournament team win to hang their hats on. Alas, MU does not.
Tournament acceptance is not absolute it is relative. What have the school above or below MU on the current brackets done? For example, i happened to look at Dayton's RPI the other day. They have 3 top 100 wins all year, so does Memphis. Both are ahead of us in the RPI, Both have bad losses. We have 3 top 25 wins and no bad losses. Now some years maybe you needed 7 top 25 wins and no bad losses, this is not that year.
Quote from: Marquette84 on February 21, 2011, 10:17:37 AM
History is not on our side.
2007: Villanova, WVU and DePaul tied for 7th place. Only Villanova was selected
2008: Villanova and Syracuse tied for 8th. Only Villanova selected.
2009: WVU and Providence tied for 7th. Only WVU selected.
Tournament acceptance is not absolute it is relative. What have the school above or below MU on the current brackets done? For example, i happened to look at Dayton's RPI the other day. They have 3 top 100 wins all year, so does Memphis. Both are ahead of us in the RPI, Both have bad losses. We have 3 top 25 wins and no bad losses. Now some years maybe you needed 7 top 25 wins and no bad losses, this is not that year.
Apologies for bumping my own thread...
but I can't help but wonder if the clear break between the top 11 teams in the BEast from the lower 5 impacts the possibility of getting 11 teams in the tournament. My guess is yes, assuming the bottom group of that top 11 remain so clustered, that will help the committee justify so many.
I do not think we are in 11th in Conference. With tie breaker formula, somebody reported right now we are in 9th.
Quote from: willie warrior on February 28, 2011, 06:05:59 AM
I do not think we are in 11th in Conference. With tie breaker formula, somebody reported right now we are in 9th.
We weren't in 9th place when I wrote the original post 8 days ago. Still, my question is not MU-specific, but is related to the clear (and growing, it seems) break between the top 11 and the bottom 5. I wonder if that helps the argument that all 11 top BEast teams deserve to get in the NCAA tournament.
Quote from: mug644 on February 28, 2011, 05:30:49 AM
Apologies for bumping my own thread...
but I can't help but wonder if the clear break between the top 11 teams in the BEast from the lower 5 impacts the possibility of getting 11 teams in the tournament. My guess is yes, assuming the bottom group of that top 11 remain so clustered, that will help the committee justify so many.
The committee keeps indicating that it doesn't matter what conference, just the most deserving teams. We'll see i guess.