#52 in NET (down 1 spot before yesterday's game)

[smootness]

Well yea, bc the committee used the NET to seed.

It's not like the committee seeded independent of the NET, then looked over at the NET and was like, what a coincidence, the evaluation tools we used yielded the same results as the evaluation tools that go into forming the NET.

No, 14 of the teams that actually made the Sweet 16.

Yes, it was a really chalk year, but that's the point. Using the NET seemed to lead to more accurate seeding.

[msstate7]

Dropped to 53 yesterday lol

Let's just keep winning

[basedog]

Dropped to 53 yesterday lol

Let's just keep winning

SC is gonna be a "dog fight", they are very physical and play great defense which may help us inside. This game to me is a toss up!

[confucius say]

Dropped to 53 yesterday lol

Let's just keep winning

I saw ark dropped 4 spots too without playing. I think there are a bunch of teams very close to each other 35-55.

[maroonmania]

SC is gonna be a "dog fight", they are very physical and play great defense which may help us inside. This game to me is a toss up!

I would put every game we play going forward as a toss up. We could beat every team left on the schedule but we are not above losing to any of them either.

[msstate7]

Here's BPI's view of each of our remaining games using our winning %....
South Carolina 77.4%
At aTm 76.2%
Bama 68.9%
At mizzou 57.6%
At South Carolina 48.5%
OM 80.1%

[maroonmania]

Part of the problem with these algorithms is they are strictly numbers with no intelligence to them. For example, we were punished more for the OM loss than we were rewarded for the Arkansas win even though OM is a better team right now than Arkansas is.

[RLM38654]

They're gonna have to go 12-6 to be in comfortably IMO and the 6th loss can't be to ATM.

[smootness]

Part of the problem with these algorithms is they are strictly numbers with no intelligence to them. For example, we were punished more for the OM loss than we were rewarded for the Arkansas win even though OM is a better team right now than Arkansas is.

How would you suggest a system incorporate 'how a team is playing right now' in a way that seems fair and legitimate?

I genuinely struggle to understand why people have an issue with the NCAA Tournament selection process. It is a group of people who are able to consider weird things that won't show up in the numbers but who have a data-driven system to help sort things out in that process. It is pretty much the best possible way to go about this.

[Johnson85]

They're gonna have to go 12-6 to be in comfortably IMO and the 6th loss can't be to ATM.

Will 12-6 be comfotably in?

I know historiaclly that has always gotten a bid, but what are our Q1 wins going to be? Arkansas on the road and Florida on the road? Any others?

Are two Q1 wins enough? Is that basically what a bubble teams resume looks like, or could only having two potentially cause us to miss out even at 12-6?

[msstate7]

Will 12-6 be comfotably in?

What are our Q1 wins going to be? Arkansas on the road and Florida on the road? Any others?

Alabama could be one. South Carolina on road could be one.

[maroonmania]

How would you suggest a system incorporate 'how a team is playing right now' in a way that seems fair and legitimate?

I genuinely struggle to understand why people have an issue with the NCAA Tournament selection process. It is a group of people who are able to consider weird things that won't show up in the numbers but who have a data-driven system to help sort things out in that process. It is pretty much the best possible way to go about this.

There is absolutely a 100% way to do it and that would be that your last 10 games or so are weighted more heavily than those before but that wouldn't fly with teams that want their good wins back in November and December to be given full credit. So we have what we have. I was just pointing out that there was absolutely no shame in losing to OM in Oxford right now (granted it should not have been a blowout) but it is treated like a really bad loss by the NET. Just bad luck on our part I guess. But I can tell you that if KY had been playing in Oxford this past Saturday instead of Lexington, they would have lost as well. Actually how you played in the last 10 regular season games was an actual criteria of the NCAA committee up until a few years ago when determining who got in with the lower seeds.

[Quaoarsking]

If you weight the last 10 higher in the official formula, the SEC (or maybe a scrappy mid-major conference) could set up its schedule for everyone to play conference games in November/December and easier non-conference games in February/March.

[Pipedream]

Alabama could be one. South Carolina on road could be one.

Yeah, if it ended today, our remaining games would be:

Q2 SC at home
Q2 A&M away (just barely q2, could easily be q3 by end of season)
Q2 Bama at home (they're just outside Q1 home game at 36 right now)
Q2 Mizzou away
Q1 SC away
Q3 OM at home (just barely Q3. If they move inside the top 75 this is a quad 2 game and the loss in Oxford becomes Quad 1)

Then the metrics say we are going to be either the 4,5, or 6(small % on 6) in the SECT. That means you'd likely play A&M on Thursday which is a quad 3 game that doesn't help and potentially/probably Florida in the quarterfinals on Friday. That would be a quad 1 opportunity.

I know people say that the committee doesn't put a number or cap on how many teams a league gets, but I'm pretty certain without some crazy happening the last 3 weeks that the SEC is a 5 bid league. I think 3 are secure in UK, Aub, LSU. I think UF is safely in for now but could play their way out. That 5th spot is up for grabs. Right now I think Bama would get it. Arkansas is in a tailspin without I. Joe and it's going to be hard for them to get to 9-9 in league play which is probably what they need to get in. S. Carolina is playing their way into a chance with a solid stretch run, but they're on the outside looking in. If State can take care of their business this week, it sets up a huge game next Tuesday at Bama which will give the winner a huge trump card on selection sunday. I think we need to go 12-6 in conference to feel comfortable. 11-7 means you probably need to beat a good team in the quarterfinals of the SECT to get in.

[RLM38654]

Will 12-6 be comfotably in?

I know historiaclly that has always gotten a bid, but what are our Q1 wins going to be? Arkansas on the road and Florida on the road? Any others?

Are two Q1 wins enough? Is that basically what a bubble teams resume looks like, or could only having two potentially cause us to miss out even at 12-6?

If they go 12-6, I'm thinking 10 seed, could lose the first game of the SEC Tournament, and it doesn't matter what happens in the other conference tournaments. They don't have any great wins, obviously, but they don't have any really bad losses either, like South Carolina for example.

[JPdog]

Lunardi said in his latest bubble article that 11-7 in conference would warrant a very serious consideration from the committee or something along those lines. I personally would be very nervous at 11-7 but I think 12-6 and we?re definitely in

[smootness]

There is absolutely a 100% way to do it and that would be that your last 10 games or so are weighted more heavily than those before but that wouldn't fly with teams that want their good wins back in November and December to be given full credit. So we have what we have. I was just pointing out that there was absolutely no shame in losing to OM in Oxford right now (granted it should not have been a blowout) but it is treated like a really bad loss by the NET. Just bad luck on our part I guess. But I can tell you that if KY had been playing in Oxford this past Saturday instead of Lexington, they would have lost as well. Actually how you played in the last 10 regular season games was an actual criteria of the NCAA committee up until a few years ago when determining who got in with the lower seeds.

But is that fair and legitimate? You may think so, but others may not. Should a game now bear more weight than one a couple months ago? They're all played within the same season. If you're weighting recent games more, why even play the games in November/December?

My point is that any criteria you use will have advantages and disadvantages. Having a data-driven ranking system that rates teams objectively and then putting that in the hands of a subjective committee who will use that but also consider other factors seems like the best way to set it up, yet you constantly hear people whine and complain about how unfair the selection process is. If someone wanted to look at a team's individual season and schedule and value certain games more or less, they are currently free to do that. That's exactly what you're suggesting.

[Pipedream]

Lunardi said in his latest bubble article that 11-7 in conference would warrant a very serious consideration from the committee or something along those lines. I personally would be very nervous at 11-7 but I think 12-6 and we?re definitely in

I had said on here that no 12-6 team had ever been left out (from the SEC). I was wrong on that. There were a few in the first 2 years of the 18 game league schedule. Teams that finish with 11 or 12 conference wins get in at about the same rate (~60%) but it's a small sample size. That number jumps up to 100% at 13-5. That being said, I think the task is pretty clear. We can lose 2 more games, but we'll have to do some work in the SECT. Going 5-1 down the stretch should punch our ticket. 6-0 absolutely punches our ticket, but IDK if we are strong enough to pull that off. I'd say 4-2 if I had to wager. Losses at USC and at Mizz. 3 weeks remaining and it's all up in the air. We moved up to the 4th team out on bracketmatrix. That site is awesome for those that like to track it this time of year.

[gtowndawg]

I had said on here that no 12-6 team had ever been left out (from the SEC). I was wrong on that. There were a few in the first 2 years of the 18 game league schedule. Teams that finish with 11 or 12 conference wins get in at about the same rate (~60%) but it's a small sample size. That number jumps up to 100% at 13-5. That being said, I think the task is pretty clear. We can lose 2 more games, but we'll have to do some work in the SECT. Going 5-1 down the stretch should punch our ticket. 6-0 absolutely punches our ticket, but IDK if we are strong enough to pull that off. I'd say 4-2 if I had to wager. Losses at USC and at Mizz. 3 weeks remaining and it's all up in the air. We moved up to the 4th team out on bracketmatrix. That site is awesome for those that like to track it this time of year.

So if we go 4-2 the rest of the way, where would that put us seed wise in the SEC tourney? Bye or not?

[RLM38654]

So if we go 4-2 the rest of the way, where would that put us seed wise in the SEC tourney? Bye or not?

Probably 4-6th, would get a first round by at 5th and 6th. Double bye at 4th. Kenpom has MSU, Florida and South Carolina projected to be 11-7.