(03-07-2017 04:34 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 04:21 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Do you also put a qualifier by all of our losses since Chad went down? I mean, the qualifier for So Carolina is a bit much for a "fan".

But back on point, we're 2-4 vs the top 50 in Sagarin. (The RPI is a very shallow measurement, as the NCAA has admitted.) As good as anyone in the AAC not named SMU or Cincy. As good as anyone in the non-power leagues outside of the BEast and Gonzaga.

There's an interesting fact I just learned. The only teams outside of the P5 + BEast with more top 50 wins than us are SMU, Cincy, and Gonzaga. Hard to believe - but true.

You talking Sagarin or RPI (which you just poo-poo'ed)?

Sagarin. It's the most comprehensive and you don't have to have a sub to get decent analytics. Still biased, but if you have to pick one.

RPI is weak. You gotta know it.

(03-07-2017 04:21 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 03:30 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 12:58 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(03-06-2017 06:53 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(03-06-2017 06:46 PM)Ttaylor Wrote:  WE WON 19 GAMES THIS YEAR WITH SIX PLAYERS ALL SEASON LONG...WHO IN THE HELL CAN WIN WITH SUCH LIMITATIONS???

Take a look at the schedule. That's why.

That's a line we've all had fun with this year. But it turns out, it's fake news. KenPom has our SOS (98) this year the exact same as last year. Sagarin has this year (90 vs 105) as a tougher schedule. End of the year, the league isn't as weak as we thought. (Which is why we should have 3 teams in without question.)

Our SOS is pretty comparable with everyone in the AAC and the A10. It's not as good as the BEast, but it's better than all other non-power leagues. Point being, our SOS is basically what we can expect in the AAC - give or take a game.

What hurt was the home OOC schedule stunk, and those first 4 games - all part of the Emerald Coast tourney - were major anchors. Add a BEast/Gonzaga type home-home will help perception and move us up a few notches. But we're not getting a SOS in the 20's. At least not until we can build the brand back up. UConn still has brand equity and their SOS is the best in the AAC at 65. Probably the best we can hope for in the current conference alignment.

Here are the 19 wins:

UTRGV 7-20 RPI - 318
MILW 8-23 RPI - 287
SAV 11-16 RPI - 285
McNCE 5-21 RPI - 315
IOWA 17-13 RPI - 73*
JKST 11-16 RPI - 321
UAB 15-14 RPI - 178
OK 11-19 RPI - 152
IW 8-17 RPI - 296
SC 21-8 RPI - 28* (Missing best player)
UCONN 13-15 RPI - 114
TLN (x2) 5-24 RPI - 297
USF (x2) 7-21 RPI - 311
HOU 20-9 RPI - 52*
UCF 20-10 RPI - 74*
ECU 14-16 RPI - 221
TULSA 14-14 RPI 110

*Top 100 RPI win

Do you also put a qualifier by all of our losses since Chad went down? I mean, the qualifier for So Carolina is a bit much for a "fan".

But back on point, we're 2-4 vs the top 50 in Sagarin. (The RPI is a very shallow measurement, as the NCAA has admitted.) As good as anyone in the AAC not named SMU or Cincy. As good as anyone in the non-power leagues outside of the BEast and Gonzaga.

There's an interesting fact I just learned. The only teams outside of the P5 + BEast with more top 50 wins than us are SMU, Cincy, and Gonzaga. Hard to believe - but true.

Did you just compare Chad to Thornwell? lol

Maybe if the Tigers had lost D Lawson........

(03-07-2017 06:24 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 04:29 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 04:21 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  There's an interesting fact I just learned. The only teams outside of the P5 + BEast with more top 50 wins than us are SMU, Cincy, and Gonzaga. Hard to believe - but true.

Chit, in all reality, who does that leave?

It leaves all of us. 200+ schools. Houston, UConn, UCF, Tulsa, Wichita, Dayton, VCU, ETSU, etc. Granted, we should be there with SMU, Cincy and Gonzaga leading the pack of non-power-cons. And 2 wins is no big feat for us. Just an interesting fact compared to the narrative that we have this crazy, bad, weak schedule and performance - when in reality, we're right there with most schools outside the loop. Our SOS is what it is. We just need to do more like SMU and go 4-2 instead of 2-4.

The selection committee talks out of both sides of their mouths...

Top 50-100 RPI wins mean a lot on your resume but if you are a top 50 RPI team you are not necessarily a good enough team to make the tourney...

So they are using good RPI wins as a reason to include lower RPI teams.

(03-07-2017 06:26 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 04:34 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 04:21 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Do you also put a qualifier by all of our losses since Chad went down? I mean, the qualifier for So Carolina is a bit much for a "fan".

But back on point, we're 2-4 vs the top 50 in Sagarin. (The RPI is a very shallow measurement, as the NCAA has admitted.) As good as anyone in the AAC not named SMU or Cincy. As good as anyone in the non-power leagues outside of the BEast and Gonzaga.

There's an interesting fact I just learned. The only teams outside of the P5 + BEast with more top 50 wins than us are SMU, Cincy, and Gonzaga. Hard to believe - but true.

You talking Sagarin or RPI (which you just poo-poo'ed)?

Sagarin. It's the most comprehensive and you don't have to have a sub to get decent analytics. Still biased, but if you have to pick one.

RPI is weak. You gotta know it.

Yeah. I just noticed Temple, UCF, Dayton, and Rhode Island also have two t50 wins.

For these crappy conferences it's just hard to get those games.

(03-07-2017 06:30 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  Did you just compare Chad to Thornwell? lol

Maybe if the Tigers had lost D Lawson........

Just making a point that it's odd for a fan to qualify top 25 wins for his own team - especially since we played most of the year without our starting center.

(03-07-2017 06:45 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 06:26 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 04:34 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 04:21 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Do you also put a qualifier by all of our losses since Chad went down? I mean, the qualifier for So Carolina is a bit much for a "fan".

But back on point, we're 2-4 vs the top 50 in Sagarin. (The RPI is a very shallow measurement, as the NCAA has admitted.) As good as anyone in the AAC not named SMU or Cincy. As good as anyone in the non-power leagues outside of the BEast and Gonzaga.

There's an interesting fact I just learned. The only teams outside of the P5 + BEast with more top 50 wins than us are SMU, Cincy, and Gonzaga. Hard to believe - but true.

You talking Sagarin or RPI (which you just poo-poo'ed)?

Sagarin. It's the most comprehensive and you don't have to have a sub to get decent analytics. Still biased, but if you have to pick one.

RPI is weak. You gotta know it.

Yeah. I just noticed Temple, UCF, Dayton, and Rhode Island also have two t50 wins.

For these crappy conferences it's just hard to get those games.

Yeah, there's a handful of us with 2 wins. But only 3 with more than that. Speaks volumes. Not necessarily about our success. But about the difficulty in scheduling outside of the power leagues, and the overall parity.

What's funny is that even with the deck stacked in their favor, there are only 3 SEC teams and 2 Pac12 teams with more than 3 top 50 wins.

(03-08-2017 11:11 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 06:30 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  Did you just compare Chad to Thornwell? lol

Maybe if the Tigers had lost D Lawson........

Just making a point that it's odd for a fan to qualify top 25 wins for his own team - especially since we played most of the year without our starting center.

I don't think many believe we would've beaten USC with Thornwell playing.

Its' all pure conjecture anyway. Still, think that was the main point.

Technically, it counts sure. It's on the resume.

But in hindsight, no one believes in it as being a real thing.

Like beating the Patriots without Tom Brady.

You mark the W and move on and hope no one ever really looks too deeply at it.

(03-08-2017 11:24 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 11:11 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 06:30 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  Did you just compare Chad to Thornwell? lol

Maybe if the Tigers had lost D Lawson........

Just making a point that it's odd for a fan to qualify top 25 wins for his own team - especially since we played most of the year without our starting center.

I don't think many believe we would've beaten USC with Thornwell playing.

Its' all pure conjecture anyway. Still, think that was the main point.

Technically, it counts sure. It's on the resume.

But in hindsight, no one believes in it as being a real thing.

Like beating the Patriots without Tom Brady.

You mark the W and move on and hope no one ever really looks too deeply at it.

Not so sure about that. It was a 16-point beatdown. Does Thornwell make a 16-point difference over the rest of the rotation? Maybe. But in hindsight, probably the best game we played all year - that or the road game at Houston.

But my point is - since when do fans of a team go out of their way to qualify their team's wins. Your last statement sort of backs this up. So I was calling out the "fan" who keeps throwing it in our face that we won that without Thornwell. Not a very fan-ish move.

(03-08-2017 06:30 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 11:24 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 11:11 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(03-07-2017 06:30 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  Did you just compare Chad to Thornwell? lol

Maybe if the Tigers had lost D Lawson........

Just making a point that it's odd for a fan to qualify top 25 wins for his own team - especially since we played most of the year without our starting center.

I don't think many believe we would've beaten USC with Thornwell playing.

Its' all pure conjecture anyway. Still, think that was the main point.

Technically, it counts sure. It's on the resume.

But in hindsight, no one believes in it as being a real thing.

Like beating the Patriots without Tom Brady.

You mark the W and move on and hope no one ever really looks too deeply at it.

Not so sure about that. It was a 16-point beatdown. Does Thornwell make a 16-point difference over the rest of the rotation? Maybe. But in hindsight, probably the best game we played all year - that or the road game at Houston.

But my point is - since when do fans of a team go out of their way to qualify their team's wins. Your last statement sort of backs this up. So I was calling out the "fan" who keeps throwing it in our face that we won that without Thornwell. Not a very fan-ish move.

I'm not THAT guy that's a different dude. I did bring it up this time though because it's pertinent. But hey keep it going; Pearl's been at Auburn for a decade and Tubby's a proven basketball genius on par with X, Larry Brown, and Red Auerbach; Chad = Thornwell.