ESPN bubble watch
- Thread starter pittfan1313
- Start date
Right now, I think UVa is 1 of the very last in. NCST and VT are out.
58. UVa 14-6, 2-2, 4-3, 4-1, 4-0
61. VT 14-8, 2-5, 3-2, 8-0
63. ND 13-8, 1-4, 1-3, 4-1, 7-0
66. Syr 13-9, 3-4, 2-5, 2-0, 6-0
69. NCST 14-8, 2-3, 3-3, 3-2, 6-0
75. Pitt 14-8, 2-5, 2-1, 5-1, 5-1
I think 1 of these teams gets in. Possibly 2.
58. UVa 14-6, 2-2, 4-3, 4-1, 4-0
61. VT 14-8, 2-5, 3-2, 8-0
63. ND 13-8, 1-4, 1-3, 4-1, 7-0
66. Syr 13-9, 3-4, 2-5, 2-0, 6-0
69. NCST 14-8, 2-3, 3-3, 3-2, 6-0
75. Pitt 14-8, 2-5, 2-1, 5-1, 5-1
I think 1 of these teams gets in. Possibly 2.
Pitt’s NET should go up a decent amount if they win in South Bend on Wednesday night. As I pointed out in another thread winning the next 3 against ND GT and Clemson and getting to 17-8 overall and 8-6 in the ACC they will jump into the bubble conversation. I agree that for now NC State VT and Syracuse should all be out. All 3 should be ahead of Pitt as well but not by all that much. Pitt will have a chance to change that if they can win these upcoming games they have the next 2 weeks or so.
Pitt listed on the bubble as a part of Jerry Palm's bubble teams
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
The NET (#75) is bad compared to the top bubble teams. And that quad 4 loss to Nicholls, yikes. But hey, baby steps.
Pitt
NET: 75
RPI: 65
Q1: 2-5
Q2: 2-1
Q3: 5-1
Q4: 5-1
SOS: 52
Non-con SOS: 188
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/
The NET (#75) is bad compared to the top bubble teams. And that quad 4 loss to Nicholls, yikes. But hey, baby steps.
Pitt
NET: 75
RPI: 65
Q1: 2-5
Q2: 2-1
Q3: 5-1
Q4: 5-1
SOS: 52
Non-con SOS: 188
Just think 24 months ago -- we were all enduring season 2 of the Kevin Stallings nightmare....Who would have thought we would be entertaining NCAA Tournament talk.....2/24/2018 is the 2 year anniversary of our 7 point half against Virginia.
The Nicholls loss looks bad on paper. Remember I said they were a good team? Well, they are 8-3 and 2nd in the Southland. They have a chance to win their league and make the NCAAT though it would take an upset of SFA. No, I didnt mean they were a Top 25 team or a Top 50 team. In relative terms, they are good. One of the better mid-majors IMO. SMF knows basketball.
The Non-conference SOS of 188 is among the worst of any of the bubble teams listed. I was shocked that Virginia Tech's was 324. That includes games against Michigan State and Dayton.
VT was picked 14th, returned only 4 players, 0 starters, and lost an entire recruiting class. They scheduled just to get a couple wins.
I have to give SMF a like here. I for one appreciate the confidence he exhibits, rather amusing at times but honestly, it’s cool!
His topics he comes up with do what he wants them to do...provoke thought on the board. Something that is both entertaining and thought provoking...what a concept!
Keep it rolling SMF, I got ya!
And I gave you a like. So that's like me indirectly giving SMF a like without being held responsible for it.
This is my first official "like" on this board. Made me laugh out loud. Some poster (Gary?) was upset I didn't "like" his post which he had my back on but I, up to that point, had a strict "no like" policy but I am rethinking that whole thing. SMF can adapt with the times.
Don't let it go to your head. I may have given you an indirect like, but I may have indirectly called DT sexy in another thread.
I've got to be more careful.
It already did. I am feeling so much confidence, I may start posting hypothetical conference realignment stuff like its 2010.
This is more of your revisionist BS. You didn't say Nicholls was good for a Southland team, you said that Nicholls would finish in the top half of the ACC. Which is just as stupid today as the day that you originally posted it. If Nicholls were in the ACC they'd not only be the worst team in the conference, they'd be the worst team by a large margin.
If you were going to tout a Southland team you could have at least picked the one that might actually be better than a couple ACC teams.
And by the way, since Palm has us on his bubble list does that mean we now qualify for one of the magical 10-12 spots in the NIT that go to teams that someone somewhere at some time has on the NCAA bubble? Sure would seem like it.
Every bubble team has "bad losses" or they wouldn't be on the bubble. I think wins is the key. Rutgers and the noles look good to have. Would really like to have had the Louisville game.
Yes I am aware. I was just surprised their NC SOS was THAT low considering the games they played in Maui. I guess the other 10 games were Alabama State and the like.
I didn't say they'd finish in the top half of the ACC. I think I said they'd finish higher than several ACC teams and I still believe that. And have you seen the ACC? Nicholls could mess around and go 6-14 or 7-13 in this league. Heck, BC may go .500.
You most certainly did.
I can see why you'd want everyone to forget that now, but unfortunately for you some people can remember things from a couple months ago.
I mean not you, apparently, but some other people.
It's February. How late does it have to be?
Before you pick a date, keep in mind that a week or two before the tournament there absolutely are NOT 10-12 teams that won't make the tournament that still have a realistic chance to make it. So on what magical date are their 10-12 teams on the outside looking in that still have a realistic chance to get in?
Link it then.
I do think Nicholls would be right there in "the glob" as Mark Packer calls it. I mean they did win at Pitt and the team leading their league won at Duke. Do you think Wake, BC, and GT would roll into Nicholls and get Ws?
I think Wake, BC and GT are all clearly better than Nicholls. So does pretty much everyone else that knows college basketball. Does that mean that if they all played a bunch of games that Nicholls might not win one or two? Of course they could. Upsets happen all the time. But rest assured that if Nicholls were playing, say, Wake tomorrow night on a neutral court that Wake would be favored. Do you really not know that to be true?
Not by any reasonable metric, no, they aren't.
Pomeroy: Wake 105, Nicholls 188
Sagarin: Wake 104, Nicholls 210
NET: Wake 107, Nicholls 193
Team Rankings: Wake 103, Nicholls 198
Do you need me to go on? Because I can if you want.
Only in your wild imagination is Nicholls better than Wake.
Actually Nicholls is probably the 3rd best team in the Southland, not the 2nd.
Without looking up I’m pretty sure most rankings would have both Stephen F. Austin and Sam Houston St above them.
So now you’re saying that the 3rd best team in the Southland would win 6 or 7 games in the ACC. That’s really dumb.
Without looking up I’m pretty sure most rankings would have both Stephen F. Austin and Sam Houston St above them.
So now you’re saying that the 3rd best team in the Southland would win 6 or 7 games in the ACC. That’s really dumb.
Is there a metric that shows how Nicholls would do in a road game against a team tied for 6th in the ACC?
What about if they played the first place team in the SEC? What would that metric show? Would it show they would only be down 6 with under 5 left?
How would they do against the first place team from the Big Ten per the metrics or the 2nd place team from the Atlantic 10?
Every metric I posted above, literally every single one, takes all of that into account. It's as if 20+ games into the season you think that one or two results are more important than the other 20.
But then again you are basing your thoughts on how good Nicholls is based off the one game that you saw them play all season. And even though you have such superior basketball knowledge it has still not dawned on you that you saw probably the best game Nicholls has played all season, on a night that we may have played our worst game of the season, and they still barely beat us.
People in Vegas love sports fans as "knowledgeable" as you. It's why they build so many expensive buildings to operate out of.
Here's what you fail to understand. Nicholls's numbers are low because their record isnt that good because they lost to all those teams plus NC A&T which is in 1st place in the MEAC. Also, they dont have any "good wins" besides Pitt but that's because they didn't have the at-bats. They lost to 4 very high level NCAAT teams at their place plus Rhody who is a bubble team. All of the games were very close except WVU. Had they played GT, BC, Wake, Clemson, etc, they'd win some of those especially at their place.
This is where basketball knowledge is key. You look at stats to justify everything and in many cases, that works. But in this specific case, it doesnt for the reasons I mentioned. Nicholls hasnt played a schedule to allow their metrics to look good. Too many games vs high level teams on the road and crappy Southland teams with no in between.
Had they played a schedule similar to say, Duquesne, their NET would probably be somewhere around ours I'd say.
But you haven't shown any basketball knowledge. Unless you consider basketball knowledge pointing out a bunch of games Nicholls lost and saying "SEE! They're good!"
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
The latest on Pitt's priorities from the 2024 roster
- Latest: Salempanther2015