Hey y'all. So not making the NIT was kind of a slap in the face. I looked at the teams who did make it, and of the 19 at large bids, I think 6 seeded Indiana State was the last one in. I decided to compare their profile side by side with ours.
Team: Indiana State
D-1 Record: 21-10
RPI: 74
SOS: 146
Non-con SOS: 226
KenPom: 104
vs. RPI Top 50: 0-4
vs. RPI Top 100: 2-7
vs. RPI Top 150 5-9
vs. RPI Sub 150: 16-1
Best Wins: Belmont (RPI 58), Missouri State (RPI 84), @Northern Iowa (RPI 109)
Worst Losses: @Southern Illinois (RPI 207), @Illinois State (RPI 133), Northern Iowa (RPI 109)
Team: Marquette
D-1 Record: 17-15
RPI: 90
SOS: 57
Non-con SOS: 178
KenPom: 62
vs. RPI Top 50: 3-12
vs. RPI Top 100: 5-14
vs. RPI Top 150 8-15
vs. RPI Sub 150: 9-0
Best Wins: George Washington* (RPI 29), Providence (RPI 42), Xavier (RPI 49)
Worst Losses: @Butler (RPI 146), St. John's (RPI 65), @St. John's (RPI 65)
Draw your own conclusions, but I think we got hosed. Our SOS blows theirs out of the water, we played 11 more top 50 teams than they did, we actually have top 50 wins, our top 3 wins are all better than their top win, one of their best wins is against a team that is also one of their worst losses...the list goes on.
As CBB has pointed out, committees love themselves some RPI. Whoever on the NIT committee said that RPI was not used is lying in my opinion.
But these things happen every year. In the end, we shouldn't have put ourselves in a position to be fighting for the last NIT bid. This will go down as a forgettable campaign and what I hope will become known as Buzz's worst season as a coach.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 16, 2014, 10:35:51 PM
Hey y'all. So not making the NIT was kind of a slap in the face. I looked at the teams who did make it, and of the 19 at large bids, I think 6 seeded Indiana State was the last one in. I decided to compare their profile side by side with ours.
Team: Indiana State
D-1 Record: 21-10
RPI: 74
SOS: 146
Non-con SOS: 226
KenPom: 104
vs. RPI Top 50: 0-4
vs. RPI Top 100: 2-7
vs. RPI Top 150 5-9
vs. RPI Sub 150: 16-1
Best Wins: Belmont (RPI 58), Missouri State (RPI 84), @Northern Iowa (RPI 109)
Worst Losses: @Southern Illinois (RPI 207), @Illinois State (RPI 133), Northern Iowa (RPI 109)
Team: Marquette
D-1 Record: 17-15
RPI: 90
SOS: 57
Non-con SOS: 178
KenPom: 62
vs. RPI Top 50: 3-12
vs. RPI Top 100: 5-14
vs. RPI Top 150 8-15
vs. RPI Sub 150: 9-0
Best Wins: George Washington* (RPI 29), Providence (RPI 42), Xavier (RPI 49)
Worst Losses: @Butler (RPI 146), St. John's (RPI 65), @St. John's (RPI 65)
Draw your own conclusions, but I think we got hosed. Our SOS blows theirs out of the water, we played 11 more top 50 teams than they did, we actually have top 50 wins, our top 3 wins are all better than their top win, one of their best wins is against a team that is also one of their worst losses...the list goes on.
As CBB has pointed out, committees love themselves some RPI. Whoever on the NIT committee said that RPI was not used is lying in my opinion.
But these things happen every year. In the end, we shouldn't have put ourselves in a position to be fighting for the last NIT bid. This will go down as a forgettable campaign and what I hope will become known as Buzz's worst season as a coach.
Let it go, Aggie. Wormer dropped the Big One.
I think you sum it up best with your last sentence - there is no sense in missing a losing man's tournament. We can rightly complain about the way this season unfolded and was run, and we deserve everything that comes with such a pitiful output.
Quote from: keefe on March 16, 2014, 10:37:41 PM
Let it go, Aggie. Wormer dropped the Big One.
Ah yes, Dean Vernon Wormer
(http://dubsism.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/dean-wormer.jpg)
Silver lining of ISU being in the NIT instead of Marquette - I work at Indiana State, and they are actually very excited about being in the NIT. At least I get to be part of some of the excitement for March!
What sticks out...R P I
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 16, 2014, 11:08:04 PM
What sticks out...R P I
It does. But I can't believe that a +16 RPI advantage make up for the -89 SOS disadvantage. In addition to the quality wins, bad losses, etc.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 16, 2014, 11:22:25 PM
It does. But I can't believe that a +16 RPI advantage make up for the -89 SOS disadvantage. In addition to the quality wins, bad losses, etc.
To repeat the CBB theme of the day; believe it, if it's the NCAA, it'll be decided by RPI.
Quote from: LittleMurs on March 16, 2014, 10:42:39 PM
Ah yes, Dean Vernon Wormer
(http://dubsism.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/dean-wormer.jpg)
Bluto: "Hey! What's this lyin' around sh1t?"
Stork: "What the hell we supposed to do, ya moron?"
D-Day: "War's over, man. Wormer dropped the Big One."
Bluto: "What? Over? Did you say 'over'? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the... Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-u9sPPOaeQpI/Uw_LmGE7ZtI/AAAAAAAACo0/pwyus2f5XFc/s400/Bluto.jpg)
(http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.943624.1318375783!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/gallery_1200/gal-animal-douglas-kenney-jpg.jpg)
Quote from: goldeneagles09 on March 16, 2014, 10:58:23 PM
Silver lining of ISU being in the NIT instead of Marquette - I work at Indiana State, and they are actually very excited about being in the NIT. At least I get to be part of some of the excitement for March!
Let the schools like ISU who are excited for the opportunity have it. Better than being 17-15 and feeling entitled to it because of our name.
I hope it doesn't go down as forgettable to Buzz. It needs to be a constant reminder of what happens when game time talent doesn't get the court time in favor of practice time hard workers.
Quote from: slingkong on March 17, 2014, 12:36:48 PM
I hope it doesn't go down as forgettable to Buzz. It needs to be a constant reminder of what happens when game time talent doesn't get the court time in favor of practice time hard workers.
So if the most talented players don't work hard, what do you suggest Buzz do? Keep playing them?
I don't know if this is the case, but I'm honestly curious.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 17, 2014, 12:46:16 PM
So if the most talented players don't work hard, what do you suggest Buzz do? Keep playing them?
I don't know if this is the case, but I'm honestly curious.
As you said, you don't know that the most talented players aren't working hard...yet...even if they aren't working quite as hard...but are outperforming the other guys in games...you have to award them more playing time.
Buzz was on record saying Dawson is a great kid, comes from good family, has the right approach/attitude...comes in, works hard, does what he is asked...so in his case don't see work ethic being the issue.
Buzz has also said he has a hard time trusting freshman...as do many coaches...yet....you have to let go of that distrust/insecurity, if your vet is failing miserably at the position(s) ahead of more talented underclassmen..
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 17, 2014, 12:46:16 PM
So if the most talented players don't work hard, what do you suggest Buzz do? Keep playing them?
I don't know if this is the case, but I'm honestly curious.
Yes, if it means more wins. I know that's a real issue for a lot of folks here but it's my view. There are obvious exceptions - off-court trouble being the biggie. For example, we don't know what Mayo did prior to the UW game but, assuming it was an off-court issue, I have no problem with that suspension (not that my opinion matters). If it was a whole-game suspension for being late to practice, I think that's going too far. I think a half would have been fine.
Quote from: slingkong on March 18, 2014, 09:39:19 AM
Yes, if it means more wins. I know that's a real issue for a lot of folks here but it's my view. There are obvious exceptions - off-court trouble being the biggie. For example, we don't know what Mayo did prior to the UW game but, assuming it was an off-court issue, I have no problem with that suspension (not that my opinion matters). If it was a whole-game suspension for being late to practice, I think that's going too far. I think a half would have been fine.
If he does that, what motivation does any player ever have to work harder? Whats to keep them from saying "screw you Buzz, you won't bench me because you need me"? What's to motivate the players who aren't as talented from working hard? Why wouldn't they say "screw you Buzz, you won't play me anyway because others are more naturally talented then I am"?
Playing the talented over the hard working may work in the short term, but unless you are Kentucky, it will never get you to the Final Four. Playing hard working players motivates all players, the talented and the non-talented, to work hard, push themselves, and become the best possible version of themselves.
Again, I don't know if this is what happened with our team this season. Just speculating as to why the less talented may play over the more talented. If it is the reason, then I am fine with this decision. I think it will benefit us in the long run.
However, I do agree that getting back into Buzz's good graces may take a little too long. A whole game suspension does seem excessive for being late for practice.