So according to Palm, a team could have 19 total wins, go undefeated at home where they beat every team in the top 10 (Kansas, Gonzaga, Dayton, Baylor, SDSU, Kentucky, Florida State, Seton Hall, Maryland and Louisville) and they still wouldn’t qualify for the tournament because they only beat one or two teams the road? GTFOH.
Jerry Palm- RU First 4 out
- Thread starter RutgersLarry
- Start date
Him basically saying beating the piss out of Maryland means nothing makes me think he’s a complete moron.
Just because Rutgers beats everyone at home, the win is meaningless. If they played Brown and NJIT on the road it would be ok though, because they would have road wins.
Purdue winning last night makes their tourney hope more realistic. They will be fired up for Saturday and not packing it in
I’m sure Pike and the boys are fully aware of this. More importantly what a win would mean for us. We have something to prove in the road
You meant Quad 3 on Cincy I assume...made me do a double take
My take on Jerry...
He's a great guy. He's not doing it for click-bait, because he dislikes a certain team, etc. He's one of the most knowledgeable people on earth when it comes to the NCAA bracketing principles, selection process, etc.
But a lot of what he does comes down to using historical figures on what teams did/didn't have on their resume that made it into the field in the past. He's always been that way, and it's certainly helped him in the past with teams that he was nailing that others were missing (ie, that Oklahoma team with Young a few years ago, where others thought they were out or in Dayton, and Jerry kept going back to the NCAA not caring about how you finished any more).
I was a member of Jerry's website for 15 years while it was around, have took part in a mock selection committee that Jerry oversaw, and talked to a media member that was in a room for a mock selection committee in Indy a decade ago that told me that Jerry was correcting the NCAA people on how things were done since he knew more about the process than they did.
Jerry is really good at what he does, but he isn't perfect. This Rutgers resume is unlike any before. I think one more win and you guys will be safely in, just too many positives on it. Losing the last two, and I'd personally still think you're clearly one of the most deserving 36, but it's such a unique resume that I don't know what this group of 10 would do.
But remember that Jerry isn't trying to say what he would do if he was on the committee. He's predicting what the committee will actually do. Take it easy on him. Knowing how much he likes the Big Ten, I wouldn't be surprised if he's actually rooting for Rutgers to win a few more and make it obvious.
He's a great guy. He's not doing it for click-bait, because he dislikes a certain team, etc. He's one of the most knowledgeable people on earth when it comes to the NCAA bracketing principles, selection process, etc.
But a lot of what he does comes down to using historical figures on what teams did/didn't have on their resume that made it into the field in the past. He's always been that way, and it's certainly helped him in the past with teams that he was nailing that others were missing (ie, that Oklahoma team with Young a few years ago, where others thought they were out or in Dayton, and Jerry kept going back to the NCAA not caring about how you finished any more).
I was a member of Jerry's website for 15 years while it was around, have took part in a mock selection committee that Jerry oversaw, and talked to a media member that was in a room for a mock selection committee in Indy a decade ago that told me that Jerry was correcting the NCAA people on how things were done since he knew more about the process than they did.
Jerry is really good at what he does, but he isn't perfect. This Rutgers resume is unlike any before. I think one more win and you guys will be safely in, just too many positives on it. Losing the last two, and I'd personally still think you're clearly one of the most deserving 36, but it's such a unique resume that I don't know what this group of 10 would do.
But remember that Jerry isn't trying to say what he would do if he was on the committee. He's predicting what the committee will actually do. Take it easy on him. Knowing how much he likes the Big Ten, I wouldn't be surprised if he's actually rooting for Rutgers to win a few more and make it obvious.
Well then he should take into account who we beat instead of just saying ‘not enough road wins’ (not an actual quote I’m sure)
he should be educated enough to say ‘while no team has made it with only one road win since 1994 (whatever year) that rutgers does check all of the boxes that have mattered before.’ But that’s not what he saying.
Last edited:
Thanks for the write up..
my two cents, I’ve been paying a lot of attention to his bracket, he’s not really good at what he does. He might nail one or two names that no one has, but he’s not really good. He had USC on the seven line at one point when others had them on the bubble. It was a very egregious error and he’s continued to have many of those throughout the process. He’s also been an *** in his write ups. What he said about the RU/Maryland game was flat out obnoxious
This would be really scary if true. If this moron has actual influence on the selection committee and they leave us out the whole thing needs to be blown up.
I didn’t say that he has influence on the selection committee. He doesn’t. He’s just trying to predict what the selection committee will do.
I wouldn't doubt that Jerry Palm is a good guy, but the idea that RPI was the end all/be all on how a team got in or not, is nonsense. If you punched in the numbers from past years, year by year, and put it in the current NET system, I would love to see how many teams got screwed out of a chance to Dance, and how many undeserving got in. We have seen how flawed the RPI system is by the differences in RPI and NET the last 2 years for a lot of teams.
The RPI wasn’t the entire picture, nor did Jerry or the NCAA completely rely on it. It could certainly be argued that it played too big of a role and for too long. But once the MVC figured it out and how to game the system, I think the NCAA went even further away from it.
I like the NET, but still have no idea why the NCAA won’t be transparent about its calculation.
Jerry had TCU in the field last year and refused to put in Belmont. TCU basically did jack **** to go, Jerry loves sos above everything..thats why he is propping these sec schools who have no wins
Hence my "hairy palm" reference.Jerry Palm or Jerry J-O
this is pretty much what I argued in my previous post. Rutgers credentials are so unique that it is likely that his methodology won’t accurately gauge
Our tournament prospects. Who ever heard of a team that went virtually undefeated at home yet lost nearly every road game. It is unprecedented, and our situation won’t accurately be gauged by palms methodology, and that’s ok. We should look at palms analysis as entertainment.
Another reason i get pissed about the road games is the Pitt game. We were the only team that played in ACC-Big Ten who played on road two years in a row. That game should have been at the RAC and then we win we have 20 wins now. That game may screw us.
By Palms reasoing we could be 22-0 at RAC and it wouldn't matter
Here is my question....... have teams been left out in a situation like ours before, or is our situation a unique one that the committee has not had to address before....... assume we lose at Purdue and win one game in the big 10 tourney. Getting to two road wins....
Have we heard of teams with enough quality wins being blocked without road wins..... I know we would have the least, but has it been done as the reason
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
if the season ended today Rutgers would have wins over 4 of the top 5 teams in the Big Ten, the best conference in america.
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
3 things.
1) No P6 team has ever won 17 home games and been left out of the tourney
2) I'm still trying to confirm this but I don't believe any P6 team has ever beaten TWO top 10 teams by 10+ points and missed the tourney
3) I don't believe a P6 team has ever beaten 4 of the top 5 teams in their conference and missed the tourney.
4) Has a team ever beaten 7 tourney teams and not gotten in?
Think about this. A team people are lauding for a 2 seed, Seton Hall has only beaten 6 tourney teams, we've beaten 7. But they get some lower end Q1 opportunities which we don't have the benefit of so their Q1 wins looks high. I mean look, there's going to be human beings looking at these resumes and I think we're safe and at minimum we'll be in Dayton.
Thanks for pointing out the strengths of our schedule results, but your post does not address the flip side of being blocked by few road wins
We have heard over and over that no team has been in the tourney with less than X road wins, but could that just be our unique situation and a new thing for the committee to deal with
Great info kyk! Not sure about 7 wins over tourney teams. PSU 08-09 had 6 wins over at large teams. When I looked back at historical snubs, that one stood out to be as the most concerning one.
I don’t think Purdue or Minny will get in so RU will likely have 6 wins over at large too and hopefully a 7th if SFA wins their tournament.
I don’t think Purdue or Minny will get in so RU will likely have 6 wins over at large too and hopefully a 7th if SFA wins their tournament.
Eric Haslam has us as the third 9th seed in his seedings and metrics he just put out a minute ago. We are right behind Indiana, and right ahead of Wichita, Providene, Marquettte, L$U and Oklahoma..
not sure,
a lot of ncaa writers said to follow him the last few months so I did. Seems like he's been doing it awhile, and has a whole braket and game predictor (he does this every day) ...Its all anyalytics and metrics basically. Very interesting stuff
a lot of ncaa writers said to follow him the last few months so I did. Seems like he's been doing it awhile, and has a whole braket and game predictor (he does this every day) ...Its all anyalytics and metrics basically. Very interesting stuff
Wisconsin winning a share of the B1G regular season title, further strengthens the argument for RU.
Wisconsin, Seton Hall, Maryland are quality wins against league leaders.
In any event, the entire point of saying this 6 to 7 weeks ago, was to point out that RU could be in this spot and it would be a negative to have our own fanbase in agreement with nonsense that any road win is a requirement.
We would not be in the NCAA tournament discussion as an at large team if we were 8-11 today in the B1G with an undefeated OOC slate, even with St Bonaventure and Pitt in the win column. The arguements would be "they're under .500 in their own league".
We have 10 B1G victories, in a very tough league. I would have ZERO argument for RU if they were 8-11 today in the B1G, hoping to beat Purdue on the road to get to 9-11 with the potential to be 8-12, vs being 10-9 in league already and at worse finishing 10-10.
Wisconsin, Seton Hall, Maryland are quality wins against league leaders.
In any event, the entire point of saying this 6 to 7 weeks ago, was to point out that RU could be in this spot and it would be a negative to have our own fanbase in agreement with nonsense that any road win is a requirement.
We would not be in the NCAA tournament discussion as an at large team if we were 8-11 today in the B1G with an undefeated OOC slate, even with St Bonaventure and Pitt in the win column. The arguements would be "they're under .500 in their own league".
We have 10 B1G victories, in a very tough league. I would have ZERO argument for RU if they were 8-11 today in the B1G, hoping to beat Purdue on the road to get to 9-11 with the potential to be 8-12, vs being 10-9 in league already and at worse finishing 10-10.
If the margins were somehow reversed, and RU road losses were all lopsided, and the home wins over top 25 were last second, Palm might have more of an argument..But our wins over Maryland, Seton Hall, Illinois were all destructions..Plus if history is a factor, the post by 1827, should also hold true..lets get in the tournament , advance to the sweet 16, and end any doubt..plus if any open dates are available next year, schedule some easy early road games, maybe get in a nearby holiday tournament..
Last edited:
What’s lost in this translation about “number of road wins”...is that we have played a ridic oTOUGH road schedule
How many teams have played 7 road games against teams that will Go to the NCAA. Not neutral site game ...we played SEVEN road games against teams that will dance???
That’s the exception and the mitigating factor for the “three road wins rule”.
Throw in the margin of victory in all of those games is LOW...that makes the exception even more notable
How many teams have played 7 road games against teams that will Go to the NCAA. Not neutral site game ...we played SEVEN road games against teams that will dance???
That’s the exception and the mitigating factor for the “three road wins rule”.
Throw in the margin of victory in all of those games is LOW...that makes the exception even more notable