Last 10 games of the season for Pitt from Bart Torvik

[Vader_Storm]

There very well may be that correlation. Sorry, that doesn’t do anything for me to say the 1st 10 games of the season shouldn’t count as much. Only place where I’d consider it is if you’re comparing 2 teams that you consider pretty much equal in all other criteria.

Similar to the CFB playoff debate. I’m definitely not in the ‘best 4 teams’ camp, have always been in the ‘4 most deserving based on their full body of work’ camp.

Well, Florida State lost by about 70 points in their bowl game. That didnt work out so well after their body of work that said they were a playoff team, but everyone knew when their QB got hurt they would of got annihilated by Alabama. In turn, they got annihilated by the SEC #2 Georgia instead. The football committee got that right.

 

[UPitt '89]

Well, Florida State lost by about 70 points in their bowl game. That didnt work out so well after their body of work that said they were a playoff team, but everyone knew when their QB got hurt they would of got annihilated by Alabama. In turn, they got annihilated by the SEC #2 Georgia instead. The football committee for that right.

They literally had 24 players opt out of the bowl game.... including 13 starters.

 

[Vader_Storm]

They literally had 24 players opt out of the bowl game.... including 13 starters.

It wouldnt have mattered.

 

[UPitt '89]

It wouldnt have mattered.

That's a ridiculous take.

You think they still lose by 60 without having 13/22 starters opting out?


You know how ridiculously dumb of a take that is?

 

[Vader_Storm]

That's a ridiculous take.

You think they still lose by 60 without having 13/22 starters opting out?


You know how ridiculously dumb of a take that is?

I dont really like football and I barely watch it.

But yes, I think a Saban led team would of blown Florida State's doors right off without FSU's starting QB.

 

[joeydavid]

By the way Joe.

Uconn finished 9th in the Big East regular season. And they got a 3 seed in the national tournament. Obviously, blatantly obviously, the committee took into consideration heavily how they finished the season.

Last 10 games used to be thing for the committee.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Based on that... NC State got three Q1 wins and a Q2 win over the past 4 days. Should they be something like a 7-seed?

No... they're going to be an 11, or even a 12.

2011 UConn was 9-9 in the regular season and 9th-seed in the BE Tourney.
2024 NCSU was 9-11 in the regular season and 10th-seed in the ACC Tourney.

Both won 5 games in 5 days, with two of the wins coming against Top 10 teams (in both rankings and NET).

I say... based on 2011 UConn... that NCSU should be no less than a 6 or 7 seed.

That doesn't make any sense. Had UConn lost their first Big East tournament game in 2011 they were still going to make the tournament, and be something like maybe a seven seed. Their winning all those games in the tournament moved them up, but they were already in.

On the other hand, NC State was not only not in the tournament before the ACC tournament started, they weren't in the tournament before last night. They probably did move up 20 or 25 spots on their theoretical seed list, but the difference is that UConn moved up from something like 26 to something like 10, whereas NC State moved up from something like 90 to something like 60. And if you are 60th on the list, you aren't anywhere close to getting in. NC State actually moved up way more places, but they started from much further down the list.

 

[UPitt '89]

I dont really like football and I barely watch it.

But yes, I think a Saban led team would of blown Florida State's doors right off without FSU's starting QB.

Your first sentence explains why your take is so ridiculous.

Let me put it in terms you can understand:

If you remove 4 of Pitt's 7.5-man rotation in basketball this year .... would Pitt beat *ANY* team in the ACC, even Louisville? Hell, would Pitt beat Robert Morris?

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I seriously dont know why you are not including the Big East Tournament here, that IS part of the last 10 games of their season before the NCAA Tournament. Cherry pick as you like.

It is hilarious that apparently stating their record in their last ten regular season games is cherry picking, but stating their record in their last ten games including the Big East tournament is not.

You get that last ten games, or first ten games, or only conference tournament games, or anything like that, is actually the definition of cherry picking games, don't you? In fact when the NCAA says that all games count the same, what they are saying is that, unlike you, they will not be cherry picking games to suit someone's agenda.

 

[Vader_Storm]

Your first sentence explains why your take is so ridiculous.

Let me put it in terms you can understand:

If you remove 4 of Pitt's 7.5-man rotation in basketball this year .... would Pitt beat *ANY* team in the ACC, even Louisville? Hell, would Pitt beat Robert Morris?

Thats part of the equation.

You are going to watch Kansas get punished today in seeding because their roster is all busted up.

And FSU got left out of the playoff because of their QB. The committe didn't think FSU was a contender without their QB.

I dont make the rules. In both cases, the body of work means nothing, because the roster is different come playoff time.

 

[UPitt '89]

That doesn't make any sense. Had UConn lost their first Big East tournament game in 2011 they were still going to make the tournament, and be something like maybe a seven seed. Their winning all those games in the tournament moved them up, but they were already in.

On the other hand, NC State was not only not in the tournament before the ACC tournament started, they weren't in the tournament before last night. They probably did move up 20 or 25 spots on their theoretical seed list, but the difference is that UConn moved up from something like 26 to something like 10, whereas NC State moved up from something like 90 to something like 60. And if you are 60th on the list, you aren't anywhere close to getting in. NC State actually moved up way more places, but they started from much further down the list.

Your first sentence is false.

I remember that year clearly. Bracketologists had UConn as a bubble team. If they had lost their first game against 16-seed DePaul (1-17 in BE, 7-23 overall) on Tuesday - they would have definitely been OUT of the tournament.

 

[Vader_Storm]

It is hilarious that apparently stating their record in their last ten regular season games is cherry picking, but stating their record in their last ten games including the Big East tournament is not.

You get that last ten games, or first ten games, or only conference tournament games, or anything like that, is actually the definition of cherry picking games, don't you? In fact when the NCAA says that all games count the same, what they are saying is that, unlike you, they will not be cherry picking games to suit someone's agenda.

Under old NCAA tournament seeding, the last 10 games include conference tournaments.

You knew what I meant.

 

[Fsgolfdr]

The NBA, NHL, or other pro sports are not overhauling half their roster every year because of the portal era. That is the entire problem with this. And on top if it, teams like Duke and Kentucky for example or others getting highly ranked freshmen get penalized because they continue to recruit the best 18 year olds in the country and they are going up against 25 year old 6 yr seniors because of this covid nonsense.


Put the old rules back into place. All transfers need to sit a year, which is the way it should be. And the covid extra year garbage needs to be over. It is long, long overdue.

I’d amend that rule to exclude first and second yr players . Give them 1 free transfer , sometimes things aren’t as promised .

Plus no Covid yr 18 yr olds shouldn’t have to compete against 24 yr old guys who’ve had 5 yrs of college ball .

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Your first sentence is false.

I remember that year clearly. Bracketologists had UConn as a bubble team. If they had lost their first game against 16-seed DePaul (1-17 in BE, 7-23 overall) on Tuesday - they would have definitely been OUT of the tournament.

There is no way that UConn was getting left out that year. No way.

If you want to argue that if they lost to DePaul in a game that they were probably a 20 point favorite in that they were going to be towards the bottom of the at larges then yeah, sure, OK. But that doesn't change the fact that NC State moved up way more lines on the theoretical seed list than UConn did. Because UConn started at a much higher place, and it's a lot easier to move up ten spots when you are 100 as opposed to 30.

 

[UPitt '89]

There is no way that UConn was getting left out that year. No way.

If you want to argue that if they lost to DePaul in a game that they were probably a 20 point favorite in that they were going to be towards the bottom of the at larges then yeah, sure, OK. But that doesn't change the fact that NC State moved up way more lines on the theoretical seed list than UConn did. Because UConn started at a much higher place, and it's a lot easier to move up ten spots when you are 100 as opposed to 30.

Which is why I said NCSU should be up to a 7-seed (not a 3-seed like UConn was).... because of the level of gain on their resume.

They got 3 quad-1 wins in 3 days, and a quad-2 before that.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

And to show that they weren't getting left out, you are suggesting that a theoretical 22-10 UConn was getting left out, in a year that actual 21-11 Villanova got a nine seed (and lost to UConn the only time they played) and actual 20-14 Marquette got an 11 seed (and split two games with UConn).

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Which is why I said NCSU should be up to a 7-seed (not a 3-seed like UConn was).... because of the level of gain on their resume.

They got 3 quad-1 wins in 3 days, and a quad-2 before that.

Yeah, but they weren't starting at 30 on the list, they were starting at 90 or 100. If they get an 11 seed, which is where Loonardi has them, that means that they moved up something like 50 lines on the theoretical seed list over the five days. UConn didn't move up anywhere close to that many. It wasn't even theoretically possible for UConn to move up that many.

If you prefer, look at it this way. UConn moved up from a seven, or an eight, or something in that range, to a three. NC State moved up from a 23 or a 24 to an 11.

 

[UPitt '89]

And to show that they weren't getting left out, you are suggesting that a theoretical 22-10 UConn was getting left out, in a year that actual 21-11 Villanova got a nine seed (and lost to UConn the only time they played) and actual 20-14 Marquette got an 11 seed (and split two games with UConn).

A. UConn would have been 21-10, not 22-10. (They were 21-9 in the regular season).
B. Their RPI and resume at the time was not great.
C. Almost all of the bracketologists were saying a loss to DePaul would be catastrophic.
D. Marquette was generally regarded as the "last team in" ... and only got there by beating 20th-ranked WVU in the second round of the BET.
E. DePaul was one of the worst teams in D1.

UConn would've been right on the cut line if they somehow lost to DePaul. Moot point because they didn't.

In any case.... rising up to a 3-seed for them is about the equivalent of NCSU rising up to a 7-seed (or at least an 8-seed) now. NCSU's ACC tournament was just as impressive as UConn's 2011 BET.

 

[UPitt '89]

Thats part of the equation.

You are going to watch Kansas get punished today in seeding because their roster is all busted up.

And FSU got left out of the playoff because of their QB. The committe didn't think FSU was a contender without their QB.

I dont make the rules. In both cases, the body of work means nothing, because the roster is different come playoff time.

Your claim was that Georgia blowing out Florida State's 2nd/3rd string is proof that the committee "got it right".

No, it isn't. That's not even close to a data point in favor of that argument.


You can argue the committee got it right.... but the Georgia/FSU bowl game result is not a valid point to back that up.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

In any case.... rising up to a 3-seed for them is about the equivalent of NCSU rising up to a 7-seed (or at least an 8-seed) now. NCSU's ACC tournament was just as impressive as UConn's 2011 BET.

No, it isn't. Even if you think that UConn then was a 10 and moved up to a three, that means moving up seven seed lines. Somewhere around 28 places on the seed list. NC State was, if anyone made up seeding that deep, somewhere around 90 on the seed list. Which translates into a 23 seed. If they moved up seven seed lines and 28 places on the list that gets them to a 16 seed and somewhere around 60 on the list.

Which, if you were making a list of all teams, not just the ones who make the tournament, is right around where NC State would be. There are obviously teams that will not make the tournament who would be seeded higher than NC State if everyone made the field. Us included.

 

[UPitt '89]

No, it isn't. Even if you think that UConn then was a 10 and moved up to a three, that means moving up seven seed lines. Somewhere around 28 places on the seed list. NC State was, if anyone made up seeding that deep, somewhere around 90 on the seed list. Which translates into a 23 seed. If they moved up seven seed lines and 28 places on the list that gets them to a 16 seed and somewhere around 60 on the list.

Which, if you were making a list of all teams, not just the ones who make the tournament, is right around where NC State would be. There are obviously teams that will not make the tournament who would be seeded higher than NC State if everyone made the field. Us included.

NCSU is going to be a 10, 11, or 12 seed.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

NCSU is going to be a 10, 11, or 12 seed.

Yeah, right where they deserve to be. They are going to be the first of the conference champions that fit in behind the at large teams. Because they are worse than the at large teams, and they are worse than several bubble teams that aren't going to make it. Like us, for example.

 

[Voice of Danno]

There kind of is an exhibition season in college basketball. You are allowed to play two public exhibitions, or one public exhibition and one closed door exhibition, or two closed door exhibitions. For example, we played a public exhibition against UPJ and a closed door one against Georgetown.

My God we even scheduled horribly for the exhibition game. Georgetown another 200+ NET team. Sorry too easy

 

[PittPoker]

Does any of that change the fact that down the stretch of the regular season they were 5-6?

Do you think that adding probably what would be four Q1 wins in today's lingo in the last four days of the season might have had something to do with them getting a three seed, or do you think they were going to get a three seed anyway?

Shouldn't the committee take into account that Jaland Lowe was hurt the first 2 months of the season? We became a completely different team when he was healthy and inserted into the starting lineup.

 

[412boyz81]

We're in the tournament no doubt!

 

[UPitt '89]

We're in the tournament no doubt!

er... lots of doubt

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Shouldn't the committee take into account that Jaland Lowe was hurt the first 2 months of the season? We became a completely different team when he was healthy and inserted into the starting lineup.

Jaland Lowe missed exactly zero games with his injury. There is no way that the NCAA is ever going to give someone "credit" for that, because teams have players playing at less than 100% all the time.

If Jaland Lowe hadn't played at all in the first ten games or something like that then yeah, they'd take that into account. But "hey, we had a guy playing at 80% and then 90% for a while"? No, that isn't going to matter.