Printable View
Yes their RPI is 49 but they?ve ended the season horribly. Add in a losing conference record. OK and A&M basically show that the entire season isn?t taken into account and if you are a preseason tournament team and you play a difficult schedule you?ll make tournament, if you can finish about .500 on season.
Because they're primarily looking at "Quadrant 1" wins. Oklahoma had 6 of those this year.
They're defining Quadrant 1 as: Home 1-30; Neutral vs. 1-50; Away vs. 1-75.
This was the primary factor allegedly this year, not rpi. It is completely ridiculous.
Oklahoma is in the tournament because of Trey Young. Period.
This was part of my point. The ncaa just adjusts the criteria each year to justify the teams that get in. Yes, a large group are locks but they need some rules or criteria set in stone for picking teams so they have to stop moving the goal posts whenever they deem necessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy dawg
First, they said publicly beforehand this year that they were no longer looking at your last 10 games or most recent play...that the whole year counted the same. Second, when you say 'preseason' do you mean OOC? Because Oklahoma was not thought to be a great team coming into this year, but they certainly played like it until mid-January. That's why they're in the Tournament, not because of any preseason ranking. That has nothing to do with it.
Another failed experiment I suppose...
They were in.. lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Bulldog1
We didn't get screwed outta a bid. USC got screwed outta a bid. We are a 4 seed in the NIT which means we had a whole bunch of NIT teams ahead of us. That's how bad our OOC schedule was. The one we went 12-1 in.
Yea dude. Preseason is OOC. So you are saying they throw out 10 games of the season. Why didn?t they throw our 10 of our early games when evaluating our season?Quote:
Originally Posted by smootness
Your defense of the committee and their antics is tiring. And we now see how much mighty OK deserved to be in the field.
Just play mediocre 100-200 rated teams instead of 200+ teams and our RPI would have been fine.
They made the tournament but lost today. I guess justice is served. Let's see how Sexton and the rest of Alabama does tonight
On a side note, one of my Bama buddies told me Sexton has a 4.0 GPA. He's a business major, but 4.0 is impressive regardless of major.
No. Not for a business major.Quote:
Originally Posted by RocketDawg
I was trying to be generous. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Barkman Turner Overdrive
Why are you the only poster that doesn't understand that we put ourselves in a gigantic hole before the SEC started by having a SOS of 340th in the country? We had to make up serious ground unlike teams like Oklahoma and Texas A&M who were 3 seeds when conference play started. They both lost ground and we made up ground but 9-9 wasn't good enough for us to dig outta the whole we put ourselves in.Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeDawg
We made their ass quit.*Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeDawg
Your RPI rank doesn't matter as much as how you performed against certain RPI teams now. You can play 200+ teams. You can even afford to lose to some. You have to play some good ones though and you need to win them.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgs
This is what matters:
Home wins vs. 1-30 RPI teams; Neutral-site wins vs. 1-50 RPI; Away wins vs. 1-75 RPI.
Add those up and that's your primary indicator of who's getting in and what their seed is. Your actual RPI number is secondary now.
When the committee changes criteria, you have to change. We're lucky that our conference is going to help us now so we won't have to schedule a bunch of tough games ooc, but we need to schedule a few. The rest can be garbage games, doesn't matter anymore.
When did I ever say they throw out 10 games? They obviously factored that in...which is why Oklahoma barely made the Tournament. Had they tossed those out, they would have been a top 2 seed.Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeDawg
They were a 10 seed who barely got in...and they lost to a 7 seed. In overtime. And that proves they should have never been in?
We never had a shot at the Tournament with our resume. I don't know why you can't see that. Oklahoma had a better resume than we did. The only thing tiring is your incessant arguing that somehow we should have been in or that the committee was somehow biased against us.
Oklahoma is the 1st team since the Tourney expanded in 1980's to get a bid after going 2-8 in their last 10 games of the season.
We didnt deserve a bid because we didnt get to 10 SEC wins. I dont fault the weak OOC as we were trying to find ourselves and needed it. But you got to win the game on the road vs Vandy, or the one vs Mizzou, or on the road vs LSU. Or on the road vs OM.
10 SEC wins we deserved to be in
11 SEC wins and we would have gotten a bid.
Next year we will schedule better with a veteran team.
Because the committee said they aren't factoring that in anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
In NO WAY should November games count more than you’re February games. That is why aTm doesn’t deserve a bid.Quote:
Originally Posted by smootness
and the frustration is that next season it probably returns to their factoring process. There is stable list the committee goes byQuote:
Originally Posted by smootness
They don't count more. They do, however, count the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldog1
They shouldnt count quite as much. No team is the same in Feb as it was in November. Its something that punishes young teams for early losses or weak schedules as they try to find themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldog1
I don't know what they'll do next year. I just know they said ahead of time what they were going to do this year. And they stuck by that. They've also said they don't look at conference record. They look at the individual teams you beat and lost to in conference, but they don't just say, 'This is a good conference, and this team won X games in that conference, so they will be in.'Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Well, you’ve got a team in aTm that, in November, was a top 5 team. But they had some injuries, and their PG quit, and other things happened. They are not the same team as they were in November.
And by the way, this Quadrant crap needs to go somewhere else. They need to find a certain criteria and set it for every year.
And they weren't seeded like a top 5 team.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldog1
Why are you the only poster who doesn?t understand using some else?s logic and argument about the committee throwing out a teams last 14 games, by suggesting they throw out our first 14 games. If portions of the season truly don?t matter in getting selected, why didn?t they throw out our OOC and look at our record in the best conference in the nation?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
My argument is not whether or not we got screwed or not. Tonight into gnout the teams that made it, made it with tailored arguments from the ncaa committee. I?m pointing out the hypocrisy and lack of consistency. Look at the other big 11 teams in toUrney.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
They don't throw out anyone's games. Oklahoma and aTm got punished for poor play at the end. They weren't mortally wounded for it though unlike us for our OOC schedule. You're setting the bar for stubborn right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeDawg
They don't throw out the last games. They just don't weight them more than any other games. It's not that hard to figure out.Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeDawg