Stewart Mandel - yikes
- Thread starter jlb321_rivals110621
- Start date
He is right about one thing. Our "great" record this year came against very weak competition. Miles got lucky. It probably bought him another year.
This team is bigger, longer, stronger, faster, more athletic, deeper, and more skilled than the 4th place Husker team in 2013-14. YOu don't know what the hell you're talking about.
All of which have nothing to do with Miles coaching ability, which is average, at best.
Then in your mind, which part wasn’t he right?
If you watch this team and just think they are lucky to have won the games they won, I don’t know what to tell you. This team hasn’t even tapped all their potential yet.
Miles has been great with lineups, adjustments, and prepping this team this year. It hasn’t been luck, it’s been bad luck that the Big Ten schedules like crap, which put an asterisk on this teams resume.
I'm disputing the "luck" factor. This team is good, and better than the last NCAA tourney team for the Huskers.
Hell, one could argue the Huskers were "unlucky" because Michigan is the only team in the top 5, the Huskers were able to play at home.
Saw part of the ILL game, so the team is capable of playing bad ball. They were riding Palmer on offense pretty hard for most of the run of wins, but yesterday the points were spread around. If they can get into the tourney, they'll need more than one answer offensively to do any damage.
To that national sports guys, Nebraska basketball is supposed to stink. By extension, if they have a really good league record, the league must be down.
To that national sports guys, Nebraska basketball is supposed to stink. By extension, if they have a really good league record, the league must be down.
I think you can argue that this team is better than the 2014 team but recognize they haven’t necessarily demonstrated it to the committee. The 2014 team wasn’t a lock to get selected and was 3-3 against top 25 rpi teams that included national headline wins against #3 RPI Wisconsin and at #12 MSU. The 2014 team had a SOS of 30. Current team is in the 90s.
I’m not sure the committee is going to spend a lot of time breaking down film of how we looked against teams outside the RPI top 50
If the committee utilizes top tier wins as a big factor we are in trouble.
So if we sucked again and everyone beat us that they thought would at the start of the season, would the BIG look stronger? Would they be taking at least 5 teams to the ncaa tournament with both Michigan and Penn St getting in? Hell Penn St. was on the bubble before our game. I think it is laughable that just because we have a solid team this year we then make the BIG look bad. 3 games we should have and could have won = Kansas, Creighton, and Ohio st.
I hope we get in but don’t see us progressing too far. Lots of real nasty teams to play that are far more consistent than we are. It would be a huge step in the right direction though.
They can't have it both ways. PSU, until yesterday, was considered a tough customer that beat OSU twice and took Purdue to the wire...Michigan is a ranked media darling that we beat by 20 already. If we pull off a W against them again, we are in. Well unless the 2 officials who called technical fouls on two of the premier dunks of the year have influence on the selection committee. Sick
Sure... However, Nebraska never got the chance to play a team of Wisconsin's caliber at home during the conference season.
And this Michigan State team is in a completely different stratosphere than the Spartan team of 13-14.
My point though is about refuting the idea that Tim Miles suddenly got "lucky" vs. a weakened Big Ten. This current team is better than the last team that earned a bid to the dance.
Benny Palmer wouldn't even sniff this roster unless he wanted to play charades as a walk on at the end of the bench.
David Rivers was a full time starter in 13-14. He would barely play 7 minutes per game on this current roster.
Shavon Shields was an excellent Big Ten player, but he would be the 6th man on this team.
Walter Pitchford would be a reserve long range specialist for 10 to 15 minutes a game.
Leslee Smith would play LESS than Duby Okeke.
Gallegos would be another reserve used in limited minutes.
Peltz wouldn't even sniff the floor.
Petteway would be the only starter right now.
I'm not arguing about resumes or selection criteria. I'm disputing the idea that Nebraska somehow got lucky to win 13 Big Ten games this season.
PSU RPI was in the 70s - it was a good win but only lowered our RPI by 2. The Illinois loss raised our RPI by 5. I believe despite going 2-1 in our last 3 games our RPI has gotten worse
The 2014 team had an RPI going into the conf tourney of -I think- 41 and was on the bubble. We are sitting at 58 presently.
Last edited:
And yet the B1G has 4 teams rated in the top 17. The media is fawning over the Big 12, who only have 3 teams in the top 21. That doesn't sound as weak as everyone is trying to make it seem.
those are good points but those are Nebraska and big ten problems . I'm not sure the committee is going to hold the fact that the BIG didn't schedule any home games for Nebraska against Purdue, MSU or OSU against the numerous other bubble teams under consideration.
As far as MSU they currently have an RPI of 14 - they had an RPI of 12 in 2014 when Nebraska beat them. They made the elite 8 in 2014.
In the last 2 years no BIG team has even advanced to the elite 8. Every other major conference has had at least one final 4 participant and multiple elite 8 representatives. Of the 6 major conferences the BIG has the worst NCAA tourney winning % over the last 2 tournaments.
I think we are a very good team but don't have the strongest of resumes due to a number of factors. Unless we going pretty deep in the tournament we are going to need a big boost from the eye ball test
You've bought the east cost media's propaganda hook line and sinker. Do you think Creighton wants to play NU right now? No way and then just beat Nova. Good heavens give NU and Miles some credit. 22 wins with a number of top 100 recruits and "he's lucky". Bullsh##. We should be so "lucky" every year. .
Yeah. We were so lucky, that Nebraska won more conference games than apparently 100 unlucky years of teams.
There has to be an eye test for these NCAA tourney selectors. Clearly this team is better than the 2014 team, and it's not even close.
While a great accomplishment for our program, keep in mind that we started playing 18 conference games in 2012 after we joined the Big Ten. The Big 12 didn't change from a 16-game conference schedule to 18-game (double round-robin with 10 teams) until the season after we left. In the Big 8, we played just 14 regular season conference games.
When you play more games, you have more opportunities to win. It's like when college football expanded regular season schedules from 11 to 12 games, then more conference championship games, then a 4-team playoff. All of a sudden, tons of single-season win total records were being set.
RPIs of those last 12 (last 4 in, first 4 out, next 4 out)
USC - 27
Lville - 39
Boise St - 45
Cuse - 46
Wash - 51
UCLA - 54
Texas - 55
Utah - 57
Neb -58
Miss St - 62
Baylor - 63
ND - 68
I would think with an RPI of 27 USC is in -- so you have 11 other schools competing for the 3 remaining slots and we are currently sitting 8th - all very, very close and will likely come down to play in the conf tourneys - I think our RPI would have been ~ 53 if we beat Illinois
certainly not out of it - Lunardi moves us up from 9th based on RPI to 6th
And when we lost multiple very close games last year it was all because our coach was crappy then too and we weren't unlucky.
RPI is over rated when it comes to end of year evaluations of teams. It WAY over states the importance of those early non-conference games where most teams are just starting to figure out how to play together. I know it's the only across conference numerical tool we have, but it is NOT an accurate predictive tool at year end. Do you think the sharps in Vegas really look at RPI when they bet games in February and March?
Last 10 games is no longer a criteria used by the committee.
I agree that NU 'looks' like a tournament team - this is the best NU team since the early to mid 90's. But if the committee applies their selection criteria like they have in the past, NU will need to win at least one game in the B1G tournament to make it.
The lack of quality wins was being offset by the absence of bad losses - until they lost last week to Illinois. That was the one game out of the last 9 they couldn't afford to lose...and they lost it. Their no-show against Central Florida also killed their SOS by setting up games against Marist and Long Beach instead of West Virginia and St. Johns. You're literally better off playing a Division II team (because they don't count against your RPI) than you are playing rummies like Marist and Long Beach (to go along with the rummies like Delaware State & Stetson that were already on the schedule.
I agree that NU 'looks' like a tournament team - this is the best NU team since the early to mid 90's. But if the committee applies their selection criteria like they have in the past, NU will need to win at least one game in the B1G tournament to make it.
The lack of quality wins was being offset by the absence of bad losses - until they lost last week to Illinois. That was the one game out of the last 9 they couldn't afford to lose...and they lost it. Their no-show against Central Florida also killed their SOS by setting up games against Marist and Long Beach instead of West Virginia and St. Johns. You're literally better off playing a Division II team (because they don't count against your RPI) than you are playing rummies like Marist and Long Beach (to go along with the rummies like Delaware State & Stetson that were already on the schedule.
I am pretty sure the “lucky” part comment was in reference to the schedule and the league being down. Which in theory allowed Nebraska to win more games.
The Big Ten is very top heavy in 2017-18. The top 3 teams have lost a combined 8 league games, last year the top 3 lost 16. Last year the bottom 4 teams win 22 league games, this year only 15.
Traditionally good teams like Maryland and Wisconsin are having down years. That hurt perception as well.
The league regular season champ is 16-2. The top 3 teams all finished with a better regular season record than last year’s champ (Purdue 14-4). The 13th place team last year was 6-12, this year the 10th place team is 6-12.
The league was simply more competitive last year. When the teams are more evenly matched the perception is that top to bottom the league is better. Whether or not that is true is up to you.
The Big Ten is very top heavy in 2017-18. The top 3 teams have lost a combined 8 league games, last year the top 3 lost 16. Last year the bottom 4 teams win 22 league games, this year only 15.
Traditionally good teams like Maryland and Wisconsin are having down years. That hurt perception as well.
The league regular season champ is 16-2. The top 3 teams all finished with a better regular season record than last year’s champ (Purdue 14-4). The 13th place team last year was 6-12, this year the 10th place team is 6-12.
The league was simply more competitive last year. When the teams are more evenly matched the perception is that top to bottom the league is better. Whether or not that is true is up to you.
you have no argument from me - but the index was developed by the NCAA committee and is used to various degrees from year to year
i posted in another thread - but linked is a composite of all the various computer ranking models using numerous different methods - and has Nebraska at 55. Clearly there has to be some room for common sense as those composites have PSU at 45.
https://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm
I think we at least need to beat Michigan. Oddly enough we might have been better off having the same record and being the 5 seed which would give us the opportunity for an additional win on the resume because unless we win the tournament we are going to have an additional loss. I would rather be 2-1 in the tourney than 1-1 with a bye.
As i have said the 2014 team entered the BIG tourney on the bubble with an rpi of 41. We are entering with an RPI of 58
more good stats -
Top-50 Finishes are Key
Since the 1999-2000 season, just 70 teams with a top-50 RPI come Selection Sunday have missed the NCAA Tournament. That's just nine percent of all teams in that stretch with a top-50 RPI, or an average of 4.4 teams per season missing. It's also heavily influenced by a weird two-year stretch (2006 and 2007) where 16 top-50 teams missed the Big Dance. You may recognize one of them immediately. In 2007, Syracuse had an RPI of 50 and a SOS of 2, yet were famously left out. Outside of that two-year stretch, the average was just 3.4.
The last top-50 RPI ACC team to miss the NCAA Tournament was all the way back in 2006-07, when Florida State's SOS of 94 stopped them from being selected.
Our current RPI rank is 58 with a SOS of 105
I also saw one site give Neb a 65% chance of making the tourney
Top-50 Finishes are Key
Since the 1999-2000 season, just 70 teams with a top-50 RPI come Selection Sunday have missed the NCAA Tournament. That's just nine percent of all teams in that stretch with a top-50 RPI, or an average of 4.4 teams per season missing. It's also heavily influenced by a weird two-year stretch (2006 and 2007) where 16 top-50 teams missed the Big Dance. You may recognize one of them immediately. In 2007, Syracuse had an RPI of 50 and a SOS of 2, yet were famously left out. Outside of that two-year stretch, the average was just 3.4.
The last top-50 RPI ACC team to miss the NCAA Tournament was all the way back in 2006-07, when Florida State's SOS of 94 stopped them from being selected.
Our current RPI rank is 58 with a SOS of 105
I also saw one site give Neb a 65% chance of making the tourney
I don't see it as we were lucky with the league being down. Sure, that probably tacked on some wins....but, I would say we were very unlucky the league was down. I would take this team over most at home. Any regular Big Ten year we would be racking up good wins. The Big 10 being down and us not getting the top three teams @ home very much made us unlucky in how it all played out.
However you look at it the league is down and top heavy.
Michigan against a tougher schedule had the same record as Nebraska. If Nebraska and Michigan switched schedules, would that still be the case, would they have had the same record?
It is one part frustrating and one part amusing to watch the experts try to devise a 100.0% objective formula. So what about a team that has some close but bad early season losses due to star player being out with injury for the first several weeks? Is there a mathematical formula to accommodate that- or our scenario of many new players figuring things out as the season went on and peaking late (inexplicable Illinois loss aside)? Got a be a postulate or theorem to apply to that!?!
Last edited:
I totally agree with that. I also think they are a better team this year.
With that said. The BIG is horrible. This is a historically bad Illini team...Indiana is in shambles right now. NW is back to being NW. Iowa is way worse than anyone expected, This is the worst Wisconsin team in 20 years. It is just one of those freaky bad years.
I've been saying it since the Illinois loss. If we dont make it to the B1G championship we're NIT bound.
Those are the things that you hope get you the subjective nod - but realize every other bubble team is going to be able to make a case as well. The committee seems to emphasize different aspects each year. If they highlight overall record, conference placing, close losses then we compare favorably. If they weigh top 25 wins (plural), strength of schedule, RPI we aren't as strong.
Going to be holding my breath come selection Sunday. But right now most of the experts - those that make a living predicting these things - have us out. I hope they are wrong or we at least have a chance to play ourselves in with a win over Michigan. If Michigan gets upset it is a disaster for us
The part he did not get right is that he seems so definite we won't make the big dance. Win one game in the B1G tourney and I think we are in.
The schedule didn’t give them the opportunity.Playing one of the top 3 at home and beating them and we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
They beat Michigan St on the road. We got beat by 30
Purdue beat them at home and on the road.
And they split with Ohio St.