58 rpi, 25 sos, 18-13, 6th in big east get us in?

[auburnmarquette]

I admit I am out of my area of expertise, but looking at Seton Hall's schedule it's likely they lose at least 2, meaning a 3-1 record for Marquette leaves us 6th in the big east and we don't need to play opening night.

Playing with rpi forecast if we do that and beat Creighton in the 3 v 6 game and then lose to Xavier, that leaves us 19-13 with and rpi of 48 and strength of schedule of 16. I think everyone would agree that (a 4-2 finish) gets us in.

My question is what if we go 3-1 and get 6th place, couldn't we get in even with a loss to creighton or whoever is 3rd in the 3v6 game in the big east? With that 3-2 finish mu would be 18-13 with an rpi of 58 and strength of schedule of 25th. At that point leaving mu out would mean either opting for a Seton Hall team we swept and finished ahead of, or only taking 5 big east teams from a conference that is basically tied for 2nd with the acc at www.kenpom.com.

I know we all want to run the table, but my unscientific gut is we get in at 18-13 and finishing ahead of seton hall.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

The answer to your question is yes

[brewcity77]

I believe it does. The only real worry is if the Selection Committee changes to the Quadrant system ends up hurting or helping us. One thing that really stood out in the initial 16-team reveal was the inclusion of Oklahoma. People seemed baffled, but what stands out most about their resume is they have a number of big wins. If the SC values Q1 wins, especially blockbuster wins, over old metrics, it could hurt us. That might get a team like NC State, which in other years would be hurt by their bad losses, in over Marquette because of marquee wins.

It will be interesting. I still believe 9-9 in league play without any Q3 losses (which is guaranteed provided we beat DePaul and finish seeded 6th or better) should get us in. But it's possible the Oklahoma inclusion indicates a curveball coming from the SC that will minimize the impact of bad losses and maximize the impact of high quality wins.

[Eye]

I think MU would get in in this scenario JP, but would be in a PIG in Dayton.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

I believe it does. The only real worry is if the Selection Committee changes to the Quadrant system ends up hurting or helping us. One thing that really stood out in the initial 16-team reveal was the inclusion of Oklahoma. People seemed baffled, but what stands out most about their resume is they have a number of big wins. If the SC values Q1 wins, especially blockbuster wins, over old metrics, it could hurt us. That might get a team like NC State, which in other years would be hurt by their bad losses, in over Marquette because of marquee wins.

It will be interesting. I still believe 9-9 in league play without any Q3 losses (which is guaranteed provided we beat DePaul and finish seeded 6th or better) should get us in. But it's possible the Oklahoma inclusion indicates a curveball coming from the SC that will minimize the impact of bad losses and maximize the impact of high quality wins.

I think its more than just Oklahoma's inclusion.  Michigan State a 3 seed, when they were ranked #1 and #2 in the polls.  This is due to a lack of Q1 wins.  UNC a 3 seed despite 7 losses due to number of Q1 wins.  Gonzaga no where to be seen in top 16 due to a questionable loss to SDSU and a lack of Q1 wins.  No St. Mary's (before the San Fran loss) or URI.  Lack of Q1 wins. 

I think the committee made it quite clear that Q1 wins and SOS were the top criteria. 

[4everwarriors]

Da answer, my friend, is blowin' in da wind, aina?

[Jockey]

No.

[barfolomew]

If the SC values Q1 wins, especially blockbuster wins, over old metrics, it could hurt us. That might get a team like NC State, which in other years would be hurt by their bad losses, in over Marquette because of marquee wins.

Which is why we REALLY want Providence to beast SH tomorrow night -- that should be enough to push our home win against them into Q1.

[brewcity77]

I think the committee made it quite clear that Q1 wins and SOS were the top criteria.

That's one of my biggest worries. If Seton Hall and Creighton (assuming a Senior Day win) fall out of the top-30 RPI, that leaves us with just 3 Quadrant 1 wins and none against top-30 teams. We'd have a strong Q2 profile and no bad losses, but that doesn't seem nearly as important.

Any other year, there's no doubt 9-9 gets us in. This year, 9-9 should get us in because I would expect it will put us in 6th in the league as well, which means no chance for a bad loss at MSG (unless we got a Q1 win first and then played DePaul or Georgetown off an upset).

10-8 would still lock us in, so just winning out is the best thing we can do, though I suppose that goes without saying.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

That's one of my biggest worries. If Seton Hall and Creighton (assuming a Senior Day win) fall out of the top-30 RPI, that leaves us with just 3 Quadrant 1 wins and none against top-30 teams. We'd have a strong Q2 profile and no bad losses, but that doesn't seem nearly as important.

Any other year, there's no doubt 9-9 gets us in. This year, 9-9 should get us in because I would expect it will put us in 6th in the league as well, which means no chance for a bad loss at MSG (unless we got a Q1 win first and then played DePaul or Georgetown off an upset).

10-8 would still lock us in, so just winning out is the best thing we can do, though I suppose that goes without saying.

Seton Hall would have to go 1-3 to drop out of the top 30.  Remaining slate: @PC, @SJU, vs. Nova, vs. Butler.

Creighton has to go 3-1 to get in the top 30.  They're currently 36.  Their remaining slate is @ Butler, vs, Nova, vs. Depaul, @ Marquette.  If they lose to Nova, I don't think Creighton is going to be a Q1 game on Senior night if MU wins.  If MU loses, they will likely be a Q1 loss. 

I think its pretty unlikely that we drop below 4 Q1 wins, but Seton Hall taking care of business @PC and @SJU this week would be good news for MU. Creighton beating Nova would be good news as well.

As far as bubble teams go, 4 Q1 wins and no Q3 or Q4 losses is a pretty good combo. 

[barfolomew]

I think its pretty unlikely that we drop below 4 Q1 wins, but Seton Hall taking care of business @PC and @SJU this week would be good news for MU.

Why SH over PC?
According to RPIForecast, SH loses to PC and Nova and they are still Q1, but PC wins over SH, GT, and SJ and that win should become Q1...

[WarriorInNYC]

Why SH over PC?
According to RPIForecast, SH loses to PC and Nova and they are still Q1, but PC wins over SH, GT, and SJ and that win should become Q1...

Because the win over PC was on the road.  A Q1 road win is a team that is 1-75.  We swept SH, so while that road win at SH will always be a Q1 win, they need to stay top 30 for the home win to be a Q1 win.

[barfolomew]

Because the win over PC was on the road.  A Q1 road win is a team that is 1-75.  We swept SH, so while that road win at SH will always be a Q1 win, they need to stay top 30 for the home win to be a Q1 win.

My bad; misread the Team Sheet. 
In my defense, they are not in the friendliest of formats.

[wisblue]

Another thing that we won’t know for sure is how the Committee will value really high quality Q1 wins relative to wins that barely qualify. Unlike last year, MU doesn’t have any wins over top 10 (or top 20) teams, and that could give an edge to other bubble teams that have them.

Especially when it comes down to the last few teams, I suspect that having a really marquee win could stand out, and MU doesn’t have any unless they get it in the BET.

[brewcity77]

Another thing that we won’t know for sure is how the Committee will value really high quality Q1 wins relative to wins that barely qualify.

This is one of my biggest issues with the Quadrant system. As far as quadrants go, beating Virginia on the road is the same as beating Buffalo at home as beating Utah on a neutral as beating Toledo on the road. Nothing against Buffalo or Utah or Toledo, but they aren't Virginia anywhere.

It will be interesting to see how they handle those. Honestly, I strongly recommend any NCAA Selection nuts read this article:

http://www.omaha.com/sports/blogs/mad-chatter-bruce-rasmussen-has-a-thoughtful-message-for-husker/article_e36edfda-1332-11e8-89e6-c341d32c13f9.html

It includes letters from Selection Committee Chairman Bruce Rasmussen, who addresses many ways about how the SC will evaluate a team like Nebraska and their particularly intriguing resume, and how they will analyze individual results (speaking that the Quadrants are a grouping system, but not some kind of magic bullet that equates all Q1 games the same, etc). Really, really good read.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

This is one of my biggest issues with the Quadrant system. As far as quadrants go, beating Virginia on the road is the same as beating Buffalo at home as beating Utah on a neutral as beating Toledo on the road. Nothing against Buffalo or Utah or Toledo, but they aren't Virginia anywhere.

It will be interesting to see how they handle those. Honestly, I strongly recommend any NCAA Selection nuts read this article:

http://www.omaha.com/sports/blogs/mad-chatter-bruce-rasmussen-has-a-thoughtful-message-for-husker/article_e36edfda-1332-11e8-89e6-c341d32c13f9.html

It includes letters from Selection Committee Chairman Bruce Rasmussen, who addresses many ways about how the SC will evaluate a team like Nebraska and their particularly intriguing resume, and how they will analyze individual results (speaking that the Quadrants are a grouping system, but not some kind of magic bullet that equates all Q1 games the same, etc). Really, really good read.

This was a great read.  Thanks for sharing.

My main takeaways were as follows:

-All Q1 wins are not necessarily created equal. 

-Road wins are looked at very favorably.

-Winning the games you're supposed to win is very important. 

-The intent of scheduling in non-con is important.  For example, a road W @ Wisconsin, while not as impressive this year as in years past, will still be viewed in a very favorable light. 

[brewcity77]

This was a great read.  Thanks for sharing.

My main takeaways were as follows:

-All Q1 wins are not necessarily created equal. 

-Road wins are looked at very favorably.

-Winning the games you're supposed to win is very important. 

-The intent of scheduling in non-con is important.  For example, a road W @ Wisconsin, while not as impressive this year as in years past, will still be viewed in a very favorable light.

Agreed on all counts. If that's the case, we are in good shape for three of those four takeaways. We may not have the elite Q1 wins, but we won on the road, we won the games we were supposed to (assuming we win the next three), and our non-con is what they are looking for (7/12 games against quality opposition, 3/5 buy games against decent low-majors).

[MUBigDance]

Don't underestimate the power of the Sheet. I think it will be thee tool for side-byside and the Qs are prominent.

So Some good comments about the Q1 status of teams like NCState, etc. It looks prettier than MU.  But as mentioned if no Q3,Q4 losses, that's easy to see too.

For MU, we're still looking at:
* 10-8 in
* 9-9 and 1 BET win and in.
* 9-9 and loss to Depaul in 7v10 then serious sweat.
* 9-9 and loss to one of the 4 wanna-be's in 6v# then we're ok...some sweat.
* Note...I think 9-9 with a DP or GT away Loss and CR home win just as good as the other way around.

But looking for 4 in a row...10-8 and a chance at the BET...because I am a fan!

[auburnmarquette]

This was all great- I just read and learned - thanks all! Yeah, lunardi pointed out last night that if Oklahoma lost 2 of 3 they would be breaking a couple of decades precedent to even have them in the tournament due to finishing 4 games below .500 in conference play - so that seed is amazing.