Bracketology, no Temple

[ritter]

Only UCONN and USF

 

[chuck.r]

There have been a couple of upset runs by conference also-rans that are nightmare scenario's for bubble teams such as Temple. Azzi's San Fran squad in the WCC takes a potential bid away (assuming BYU still gets a bid), as well as St John's run in the Big East. I can only imagine the ripples had Creighton been the victors.

 

[UcMiami]

St John's was already in - not really even on the bubble and thankfully they took care of Creighton.
The one that is a head scratcher to me is Iowa - 8-10 in the big ten with zero good wins and some bad losses and a 60 RPI. There best win is probably against Rutgers with an RPI of 52. They played one good mid major OOC and lost (GW) and on P5 Iowa State (RPI 129) and lost. Much rather see either Temple (big win against USF) or Princeton (RPI 39) get that bid.

 

[TFintheMix]

Only UCONN and USF

Makes more sense. I'm not sure how you justify Temple over a lot of other programs.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Penn's win over Princeton may have burst another bubble. The Quakers beat the Tigers twice this year, by 2 points each time.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

St John's was already in - not really even on the bubble and thankfully they took care of Creighton.
The one that is a head scratcher to me is Iowa - 8-10 in the big ten with zero good wins and some bad losses and a 60 RPI. There best win is probably against Rutgers with an RPI of 52. They played one good mid major OOC and lost (GW) and on P5 Iowa State (RPI 129) and lost. Much rather see either Temple (big win against USF) or Princeton (RPI 39) get that bid.

I can't really see justifying either Iowa or Temple. Unfortunately, lord knows who else, I guess. I liked what Charlie Creme was saying the other day, it may come down to who has "good" wins, something there are not many of this year. Beknighted on the RU board is not expecting an at-large Ivy bid, although he admitted he didn't "study" the situation, and yes, he knows the RPI.

I heard Charlie Creme say 5 from the B1G, but looking at the list, I only see 4 solid candidates. Everyone else has nothing spectacular (that I can see) in their resumes.

 

[Vowelguy]

Not a lot great on anyone's resume.

..... ..... ..... vs ..... Ls vs
..... ... RPI .. RPI 50 .. RPI>100
Iowa .... 60 .... 1-7 ... .. 3
Temple .. 72 .... 2-6 ... .. 3
Purdue .. 64 .... 2-6 ... .. 2
Auburn .. 59 .... 3-9 ... .. 1
Duke .... 47 .... 1-10 .. .. 1
VNova ... 56 .... 4-4* .. .. 5 (*note: 0-1 against RPI 25)

 

[Fairfield Fan]

Not a lot great on anyone's resume.

..... ..... ..... vs ..... Ls vs
..... ... RPI .. RPI 50 .. RPI>100
Iowa .... 60 .... 1-7 ... .. 3
Temple .. 72 .... 2-6 ... .. 3
Purdue .. 64 .... 2-6 ... .. 2
Auburn .. 59 .... 3-9 ... .. 1
Duke .... 47 .... 1-10 .. .. 1
VNova ... 56 .... 4-4* .. .. 5 (*note: 0-1 against RPI 25)

Where's Tennessee on this?

 

[Vowelguy]

Where's Tennessee on this?

Not even close. Their resume is so much better: 7-9 against rpi 50. Including 3 wins away from home against the rpi 25.

 

[EricLA]

Makes more sense. I'm not sure how you justify Temple over a lot of other programs.

Because Temple beat 2 ranked teams this year - USF and Florida. Both of those are excellent wins. On the other hand, they also had some head scratching losses (Quinnipeac and SMU).

 

[Plebe]

What has me totally baffled is how Iowa somehow overtook Temple overnight, even though neither of them played yesterday.

My only guess is that Charlie must be reacting to Temple's dip in the RPI over the past week or so into the lower fringes of the viable range. But still, Temple has 2 top-30 wins over Florida (projected 5 seed) and USF (projected 7 seed), plus a win over Villanova before the injury to Coyer. Iowa's best win is over Indiana (projected 10 seed). Both Temple and Iowa have 3 sub-100 losses.

I also don't understand why Rutgers wouldn't be ahead of Iowa. Rutgers' best win is over Green Bay, a projected 10 seed like Indiana, but Rutgers got that win on a neutral court, whereas Iowa's win over Indiana was at home. Also, Rutgers has no sub-100 losses.

 

[TFintheMix]

What has me totally baffled is how Iowa somehow overtook Temple overnight, even though neither of them played yesterday.

My only guess is that Charlie must be reacting to Temple's dip in the RPI over the past week or so into the lower fringes of the viable range. But still, Temple has 2 top-30 wins over Florida (projected 5 seed) and USF (projected 7 seed), plus a win over Villanova before the injury to Coyer. Iowa's best win is over Indiana (projected 10 seed). Both Temple and Iowa have 3 sub-100 losses.

I also don't understand why Rutgers wouldn't be ahead of Iowa. Rutgers' best win is over Green Bay, a projected 10 seed like Indiana, but Rutgers got that win on a neutral court, whereas Iowa's win over Indiana was at home. Also, Rutgers has no sub-100 losses.

I agree with you on Rutgers not getting more respect for the bracketologist. As for Temple, their good wins were early in the season. Plus they have double digit losses including losses to some mediocre team.

 

[UcMiami]

I agree with you on Rutgers not getting more respect for the bracketologist. As for Temple, their good wins were early in the season. Plus they have double digit losses including losses to some mediocre team.

Temple's win over USF was this past month.

 

[EricLA]

I'm with UCMiami - Temple had a great win over USF recently. But they have 11 losses - and most of their "wounds" are self inflicted. You can't lose to SMU and expect to be taken seriously in the NCAA's.

 

[Vowelguy]

As for Temple, their good wins were early in the season.

The whole season matters. The committee has said this.

 

[Plebe]

I'm with UCMiami - Temple had a great win over USF recently. But they have 11 losses - and most of their "wounds" are self inflicted. You can't lose to SMU and expect to be taken seriously in the NCAA's.

And Iowa has 13 losses, and got swept by Penn State.

 

[EricLA]

And Iowa has 13 losses, and got swept by Penn State.

Yeah, I don't think they should be in there either... or Auburn for that matter.

 

[DriveLH]

I have a placement question. Crème has Sacred Heart winning the NEC and going to South Carolina as a 16 seed, and Alabama State as the SWAC winner going to Storrs. Since Sacred Heart is located in Fairfield, Ct., wouldn't it make more sense to send them to Storrs?

 

[Vowelguy]

I have a placement question. Crème has Sacred Heart winning the NEC and going to South Carolina as a 16 seed, and Alabama State as the SWAC winner going to Storrs. Since Sacred Heart is located in Fairfield, Ct., wouldn't it make more sense to send them to Storrs?

The issue is how firmly the committee sticks to the S-curve. In particular, since UConn will be the overall #1 seed, the team opposite it would be considered the #64 team. So if there's a clear team that fits that bill (say a team that pulled off upsets in the conf tourney), they will get put at #64 regardless of location.

Alabama St is #246 RPI. Sacred Heart is #191. That may be enough.

 

[Plebe]

The issue is how firmly the committee sticks to the S-curve. In particular, since UConn will be the overall #1 seed, the team opposite it would be considered the #64 team. So if there's a clear team that fits that bill (say a team that pulled off upsets in the conf tourney), they will get put at #64 regardless of location.

Alabama St is #246 RPI. Sacred Heart is #191. That may be enough.

If Charlie were going by strict S-curve, wouldn't Bethune-Cookman (#251) be assigned to overall #2 South Carolina instead of Sacred Heart?