Vote: Does MU Make The NCAA Tourney (post SH loss)?

[Tugg Speedman]

No qualifiers this time.  Just vote up or down

I said yes

[romey]

How can there not be qualifiers?  There are still games left to play?  Maybe the question should be, "If the committee were selecting the field of 68 today, does Marquette make the tournament?"  If that were the question, I'd say "yes."

[PVMagic]

According to Lunardi, MU not one of last 4 in, nor the "last 4 with a bye" (avoiding the play-in games)... that puts at least 8 teams closer to the bubble's edge than MU by his projections.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I voted yes, but only if we beat Providence AND don't get blown out by WVU.  If we lose to PC, our RPI goes into the 80's.  That's a big qualifier.

Also, what happens with the smaller tournaments.


Thank God the last two years the bubble has been velvet soft...thank God we're at 68 teams this year and not 64.

[Lennys Tap]

Thank God the last two years the bubble has been velvet soft...thank God we're at 68 teams this year and not 64.

No need to "thank God" for the soft bubble last year as we were a 6 seed (21-24 on the S curve) and safely in even with a rock hard bubble. But thanks for the passive aggressive, factually flawed dig at the team you "love".

[MUBurrow]

yes - but we had better beat providence. ::enter ominous, vague NCAA life threat::

[bilsu]

I do not believe the Big Easts gets 11 bids.
The top seven are in not matter what.
The winner of the Georgetown/ Villanova game is in and the loser might be out. That is assuming that Villanova beats DePaul, who they had to go to overtime to win in their last win. Villanova beating DePaul does not get them in, because DePaul win is meaningless. Villanova is tanking. Georgetown without Wright is tanking also.Uconn who also is playing poorly (even lost a home game to MU) needs one more victory. MU needs one more and maybe two more.
 

[Tugg Speedman]

The winner of the Georgetown/ Villanova game is in and the loser might be out.  

This week Gtown is #17 and Nova is #19.  They are not falling off the top 25 next week.

Tell me the last time a currently ranked team did not make the tourney?  You do realize 68 teams make the big dance?

How much are you worth because I'll bet you all of it that both are in the tourney next week no matter what happens in NYC next week.

What is wrong with everyone around here?  Is the water bad?

[brewcity77]

I do not believe the Big Easts gets 11 bids.
The top seven are in not matter what.
The winner of the Georgetown/ Villanova game is in and the loser might be out. That is assuming that Villanova beats DePaul, who they had to go to overtime to win in their last win. Villanova beating DePaul does not get them in, because DePaul win is meaningless. Villanova is tanking. Georgetown without Wright is tanking also.Uconn who also is playing poorly (even lost a home game to MU) needs one more victory. MU needs one more and maybe two more.

Villanova still has a 31 RPI, 23 SOS, 6 wins against the top 50, and 2 bad losses. They're a stone cold lock. Georgetown has an 11 RPI, 1 SOS, 8 wins against the top 50, and 0 bad losses. They're also a stone cold lock. UConn has a 24 RPI, 11 SOS, 8 wins against the top 50, and 0 bad losses. Say it with me, stone cold lock.

Compare any of those to the current last four teams of Lunardi's bracket and maybe you'll get some perspective on just how absolute locks these teams are. Michigan State has a 48 RPI, 10 SOS, 3 wins against the top 50, and 1 bad loss. Boston College has a 41 RPI, 18 SOS, 1 win against the top 50, and 1 bad loss. Virginia Tech has a 66 RPI, 88 SOS, 2 wins against the top 50, and 3 bad losses. And Colorado has a 76 RPI, 71 SOS, 5 wins against the top 50, and 3 bad losses. And those are teams projected to make the tournament.

So every Big East team you mentioned has a better RPI, better SOS, more top 50 wins, and fewer bad losses than the last two teams in. And those numbers really aren't even close, with the exception of Villanova's quality wins and bad losses compared to Colorado (though RPI and SOS aren't close). You'd have to be deaf, dumb, and basketball stupid to think that 'Nova, UConn, and Georgetown aren't locks, especially with the Selection Committee's recent policy to weigh games in November just as heavily as games in March.

[Muhoops85]

I voted no and here's why.  It isn't that MU doesn't have a better resume than the University of Southern North Dakota at Hoople, its that the NCAA does not want 11 teams from a single conference in the tournament, thats all.   

[GoMarquette32]

What do you not understandabout the comittee not caring how many come from a certain conference.

[brewcity77]

What do you not understandabout the comittee not caring how many come from a certain conference.

In the past, I've wondered if it did matter when Big East bubble teams that would have been our ninth were denied. But in each of those cases, there were legitimate reasons why the teams didn't make the tournament, significant knocks to their profiles. This year, 10 teams are an absolute lock to get into the tournament. And if we're going to break the record by at least 2 teams, why would breaking the record by 3 really make a difference?

If we are deserving, we'll be in, regardless. Hell, maybe Seton Hall makes a run to the final and the Big East lands 12. It's highly unlikely, but if we were to beat Providence, WVU, and Louisville, there is no way they could keep us out, and that could happen while Seton Hall won the title. 10 is guaranteed. 11 is likely. 12 is possible.

[ChicosBailBonds]

This week Gtown is #17 and Nova is #19.  They are not falling off the top 25 next week.

Tell me the last time a currently ranked team did not make the tourney?  You do realize 68 teams make the big dance?

I agree entirely that Nova and G'Town are going to make it, not sure why Bilsu doesn't think so.

In terms of ranked teams not making it...yup, it's happened.

2004, coached by a legend, Utah State was 24-2 and nationally ranked at 25...they were left out.

UNLV has suffered a similar fate as has Arkansas.

In the old days, it happened more frequently.  1971, poor USC was ranked 2nd in the country and didn't make the tournament because UCLA was ranked #1.  Back then, only the conference champion went and USC lost to UCLA twice that year. 

1973, Maryland finished #3...didn't get in...see above.

[MUBurrow]

What do you not understandabout the comittee not caring how many come from a certain conference.

they allegedly don't care.

[Muhoops85]

they allegedly don't care.

Do you honestly believe that?

[Windyplayer]

I do not believe the Big Easts gets 11 bids.
The top seven are in not matter what.
The winner of the Georgetown/ Villanova game is in and the loser might be out. That is assuming that Villanova beats DePaul, who they had to go to overtime to win in their last win. Villanova beating DePaul does not get them in, because DePaul win is meaningless. Villanova is tanking. Georgetown without Wright is tanking also.Uconn who also is playing poorly (even lost a home game to MU) needs one more victory. MU needs one more and maybe two more.
 

bilsu, again, where do you get your information. Regardless, your analysis is way off base as it was in your last post. 10 teams in the BEast are an ironclad lock. Why can't you grasp that?

[brewcity77]

I agree entirely that Nova and G'Town are going to make it, not sure why Bilsu doesn't think so.

In terms of ranked teams not making it...yup, it's happened.

2004, coached by a legend, Utah State was 24-2 and nationally ranked at 25...they were left out.

UNLV has suffered a similar fate as has Arkansas.

In the old days, it happened more frequently.  1971, poor USC was ranked 2nd in the country and didn't make the tournament because UCLA was ranked #1.  Back then, only the conference champion went and USC lost to UCLA twice that year. 

1973, Maryland finished #3...didn't get in...see above.

I don't think rankings matter at all when it comes to consideration. As far as I know, none of the Selection Committee are voters. As mentioned, ranked teams have received a pass before even after the conference champion rules were changed. And if you look at the seeding, rankings seem to go out the window. How many top-ten small conference teams end up with 4 or 5 seeds, I remember Gonzaga complaining about that in the past. Hell, just look at Marquette last year. Never ranked, but earned a 6-seed.

The rankings are one stat that seems to go completely out the window, as it should. They are based on very little outside of reputation (to start the year) and eye test (to finish it), both things that shouldn't come into play when you're handing out tournament bids.

[willie warrior]

According to Lunardi, MU not one of last 4 in, nor the "last 4 with a bye" (avoiding the play-in games)... that puts at least 8 teams closer to the bubble's edge than MU by his projections.

This means nothing until he updates his brackets. He has missed on these last 4 updates before until he sits down and evaluates all teams. Let's wait to see where he has us/or does not in his updated brackets.

[brewcity77]

This means nothing until he updates his brackets. He has missed on these last 4 updates before until he sits down and evaluates all teams. Let's wait to see where he has us/or does not in his updated brackets.

That was an update from Sunday morning, after our loss.

According to The Bracket Project, which does a composite average of 79 different brackets, there have been 36 bracketologists publishing new brackets on either 3/6 or 3/7. Marquette appears as "in the field" on 33 of those brackets, with an average seed of 10 and a range of 7-12.

Noting the 7, I saw that it came from RPIForecast.com. I checked their site, and while they don't actually seed the brackets, they have us as the top seven seed. I remember last year, most people were expecting us to be in the 8-10 range. Some were even hoping for an 11 so we could get into a 6-11 matchup. Then the SC shocked us all and put us in a 6-11, but as a 6, 2-3 seedlines higher than anyone expected.

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=19325.0

Is it possible that the level of play in the Big East will inflate seeds and end up putting a Marquette team that most of us feel is a 10-12 seed on the 6-7 lines?

[willie warrior]

I like your info, but none of these "experts" make the final selection. I hope we make the dance, but we will need to make BEast semis to make that happen, IMO. I guess I do not have the confidence/data analysis that these bracketologists have. Having said that, we should be able to make the semis, if we play well.

Providence: we crushed a little more than a week ago--no brainer
WVU: we beat earlier in the year, and should beat again.
Loserville: a chance to redeem ourselves from the meltdown should be sufficient motivation, and my guess is Slick Rick definitely does not want to face us again.

[Marquette84]

Villanova still has a 31 RPI, 23 SOS, 6 wins against the top 50, and 2 bad losses. They're a stone cold lock. Georgetown has an 11 RPI, 1 SOS, 8 wins against the top 50, and 0 bad losses. They're also a stone cold lock. UConn has a 24 RPI, 11 SOS, 8 wins against the top 50, and 0 bad losses. Say it with me, stone cold lock.

Compare any of those to the current last four teams of Lunardi's bracket and maybe you'll get some perspective on just how absolute locks these teams are. Michigan State has a 48 RPI, 10 SOS, 3 wins against the top 50, and 1 bad loss. Boston College has a 41 RPI, 18 SOS, 1 win against the top 50, and 1 bad loss. Virginia Tech has a 66 RPI, 88 SOS, 2 wins against the top 50, and 3 bad losses. And Colorado has a 76 RPI, 71 SOS, 5 wins against the top 50, and 3 bad losses. And those are teams projected to make the tournament.

So every Big East team you mentioned has a better RPI, better SOS, more top 50 wins, and fewer bad losses than the last two teams in. And those numbers really aren't even close, with the exception of Villanova's quality wins and bad losses compared to Colorado (though RPI and SOS aren't close). You'd have to be deaf, dumb, and basketball stupid to think that 'Nova, UConn, and Georgetown aren't locks, especially with the Selection Committee's recent policy to weigh games in November just as heavily as games in March.

I think the one thing left out of your analysis is how much of a change these teams went through down the stretch.

At one point this season, Villanova was 16-1.  After that point they went 5-9. 
At one point this season, UConn was 17-2.  Since that point, they've gone 4-7.

The big unknown here is how the committee will give weight to recent performance as compared to earlier in the  season. 

I don't think its "basketball stupid" to suggest those two teams are much different now than they were in mid-January. 

[brewcity77]

I think the one thing left out of your analysis is how much of a change these teams went through down the stretch.

At one point this season, Villanova was 16-1.  After that point they went 5-9. 
At one point this season, UConn was 17-2.  Since that point, they've gone 4-7.

The big unknown here is how the committee will give weight to recent performance as compared to earlier in the  season. 

I don't think its "basketball stupid" to suggest those two teams are much different now than they were in mid-January.

All that may impact their seeding, but it won't make any difference as to their inclusion. There's a reason no one in the country has mentioned Villanova, UConn, or Georgetown as bubble teams, and a reason they are still considered to all be consensus 4-6 seeds. Even if you look at the worst current prognostication for Villanova, a 9-seed, and have them lose to South Florida, a clear bad loss, there's still no way they fall the 14 places they would need to drop out of the tournament, and that's an absolute worst-case scenario.

They are all locks for a reason. They've earned it already, despite their recent poor form. Even if the SC doesn't stick by their statement that they will weigh games from November just as heavily as games from February, those teams are all in the tournament.

[MUBurrow]

Do you honestly believe that?

i legitimately do. i don't think that its necessarily even a conscious desire to lock any conference into a certain number. its just that when deciding between the last couple teams, and its the 11th team from the BEast with 14 losses or the 4th from the SEC, etc, i think its easier to shoo the other team in is all.

[Marquette84]

All that may impact their seeding, but it won't make any difference as to their inclusion. There's a reason no one in the country has mentioned Villanova, UConn, or Georgetown as bubble teams, and a reason they are still considered to all be consensus 4-6 seeds. Even if you look at the worst current prognostication for Villanova, a 9-seed, and have them lose to South Florida, a clear bad loss, there's still no way they fall the 14 places they would need to drop out of the tournament, and that's an absolute worst-case scenario.

They are all locks for a reason. They've earned it already, despite their recent poor form. Even if the SC doesn't stick by their statement that they will weigh games from November just as heavily as games from February, those teams are all in the tournament.

The problem is, the only way that UConn and Villanova will make the tournament is if the committee weighs those games from November and December more heavily than recent performance.

You're not even trying to make the argument that Villanova's 5-9 record in recent games is tournament worthy.  You're saying that the committee will simply ignore the recent lack of performance because they had a good stretch in November and December--and that was good enough to get them in the tournament.

Based on that argument, wouldn't you argue that Minnesota deserves to be a tournament team? Up until the end of January, Minnesota was a lock with a 16-4 record and good wins over West Virginia, Purdue and North Carolina.   

And they have an identical 5-9 record as Villanova over their last 14 games. 

So if the committee gives early season play equal consideration, then Minnesota is also a lock, right?  Right? 

Sorry, but I'm not making that argument.  I think the committee is smart enough to see that when a team starts out strong, but collapses late in the year, the later play may get just a bit more consideration.  As it is already with Minnesota, and may well still happen with Villanova and UConn--especially if those teams lose to USF and DePaul.

[brewcity77]

Based on that argument, wouldn't you argue that Minnesota deserves to be a tournament team? Up until the end of January, Minnesota was a lock with a 16-4 record and good wins over West Virginia, Purdue and North Carolina.   
And they have an identical 5-9 record as Villanova over their last 14 games. 

So if the committee gives early season play equal consideration, then Minnesota is also a lock, right?  Right?

Well, let's look at the same factors I used for the other three:

Minnesota has a 62 RPI, 34 SOS, 3 wins against the top 50, and two bad losses. They have a worse RPI and SOS, fewer top 50 wins, and as many or more bad losses as any of the three Big East teams mentioned. Looking closer, their kenpom rating is 58, which is 32 spots behind UConn, the worst of the three Big East teams, and their Sagarin rating is 55, which is 32 spots behind Villanova, the worst of the three Big East teams.

So with that in mind, no, Minnesota is not a lock. Their profile doesn't even remotely compare to Georgetown, Villanova, or UConn. Just because teams started hot and fell off doesn't make them equal. It's analyzing the numbers that gives a true comparison.