Been thinking about him a lot, as Lunardi was has been getting bashed to hell and back here this year. Last year it was Jerry Palm.
CBS Bracketology…
- Thread starter Blair_45
- Start date
I’d like somebody to explain why Boise State is in over Pitt. They have the same record as Pitt and have literally beaten nobody (lost to Clemson and VT too).
The thing that drives Starkey mad is that how you finish isn't considered at all (according to Palm), but from a logical perspective, it should. Palm suggests there's no correlation to Tournament success. I wonder about that.
Their conference is seen as better for some reason, so their Quad one is 6-6. Despite the fact other than San Diego State (who tbf I do think remains very good), the MWC has lost 11 games in a row in the NCAA tournament.
It’s literally the most far fetched thing that could happen now… but I wonder if an NC St over Pitt ACC championship would put both Pitt and NC St in. Obviously NC St for the AQ, just not sure if that stolen bid would hurt Pitt as opposed to another bubble team. Tough to say since it depends on results from other bubble teams and any other potential bid steals, just a funny scenario to think about.
I already told you PittPoker, Pitt is in, unless we get beat by 30, which is not going to happen. we will be competitive.
I mean, Pitt was 3-4 in last 7 last year then won 2. UConn lost in the BEast wasn't super hot to finish then ripped through it. Didn't VT win the ACCT the year Duke and UNC made the FF as a 4 and 8 seed. Pitt should be in but I'm not sure there's hige correlation either to how you played in your last 10 or so.
Mississippi State is hammering Tennessee, who looks like ass. Don’t need another bid steal from the SEC, which could have two if MSU and A&M win today.
Didn't Pitt finish the regular season and BET 3-3 and then lose in round two as a 1-seed?
NC State 1983 is another example... needed to win the ACCT just to get in and then caught fire. Ha, but I realize this is just cherrypicking. Maybe there is no correlation. Still, we've been a different team for two months, which feels different from simply getting hot at the end.
I must not be used to spending so much time worrying about the bubble but it seems like a lot of bid stealing this year. Too many top teams collapsing. Indiana State is the one, so far, that would bother me most.
Not to speak on correlations but another interesting case was Virginia Tech in 2021-22. They were 10-10 at the end of January starting 2-7 in ACC play, won 9 of their last 11, won 4 straight games in the ACC tourney to take the title over Duke, then went one and done to Texas as an 11 seed.
Don’t get me wrong, it would obviously be an amazing accomplishment for Pitt to win the ACC tourney, but if it was followed by a one and done exit in the NCAA’s (probably as like idk, a 9 seed?) it would be really annoying. Especially with the anti-ACC crowd.
To be fair to Pitt, our last 2 losses were to the eventual national champion and runner-up by a combined 3 points.
And what was UConn's record coming down the stretch that season?
They were 1-4 in their last five and 4-7 in their last 11 in the regular season.
If you want an example from this year from a team we are all familiar with, a month or so ago Virginia was one of the hottest teams in the country. They were on an eight game winning streak and had jumped up into the national rankings. And then they went 1-3 in their next four and 2-4 in their next six.
Teams are really hot right up until the moment that they are not. Other teams are in a slump, right up until the moment that they are not. And there really isn't any way to predict when that moment is. Or even, on some occasions, if it's ever going to come.
That's one way to look at it. Another would be that, heading into the NCAAT, they were 5-0 with wins over the 22nd, 3rd, 11th, and 14th ranked teams in the nation. And then they won a national championship.
That's not being hot heading into the tournament? Seems white hot to me.
And when someone does mention our awful non-conference SOS (and it certainly is awful), you point out the following:
Iowa State, 326 - somehow not hurting them
BYU, 300 - clearly in
Texas Tech, 311 - nothing to see here
Washington State, 302 - PAC12 representing
TCU, 328 - clearly much better than 344
Nebraska, 305 - but come on, Bubble Boy!
Northwestern, 332 - but, much like TCU, snazzy purple uniforms
And that's not even mentioning the teams with non-conference SOSs in the high 200s, like South Carolina, Oklahoma and New Mexico.
It's a perfect example of how they were playing wasn't predictive at all of whether or not they were going to continue playing that way. They weren't playing anywhere close to their best basketball, and then all of the sudden, 11 wins in a row. And every one of them except the first one was against an NCAA tournament team.
They figured it out and turned on a dime. We did a less dramatic version of that in January.
Right. And how, exactly, do you know ahead of time when someone is going to figure it out? Or conversely, is going to lose it?
Similar threads
