Revsine
- Thread starter FrankZ_RU93
- Start date
Before the Wiscy win Revsine had Mike DeCourcy on BTN and asked what one would think is a simple question. "North Carolina has only one Quad 1 win yet you, and everyone else, have them solidly in the tournament. But with all their Quad 1 wins no one has Rutgers on the bubble. Why?"
DeCourcy blinked like he hadn't considered such a quaint notion. Then said something about North Carolina's losses being better than RU's.
Maybe so, and we have no one to blame but ourselves for digging such a deep hole early in the season.
More telling to me me than discounting Rutgers is just how obvious the power of the received wisdom that the University of No Classes should be in the tournament as a prejudice among "those who know basketball."
Revsine did get him to admit that if Rutgers wins a few outside the RAC he might have to reconsider. Thanks Mike.
DeCourcy blinked like he hadn't considered such a quaint notion. Then said something about North Carolina's losses being better than RU's.
Maybe so, and we have no one to blame but ourselves for digging such a deep hole early in the season.
More telling to me me than discounting Rutgers is just how obvious the power of the received wisdom that the University of No Classes should be in the tournament as a prejudice among "those who know basketball."
Revsine did get him to admit that if Rutgers wins a few outside the RAC he might have to reconsider. Thanks Mike.
Last edited:
So we judge teams on their "not bad losses" versus their "great wins". What a concept. Awful.
You can’t line up UNC and RU and say UNC goes in over RU right now.
starting to guess (and it is a guess) that 19 may be the number. I do think we are still a long shot to get there. The schedule is very tough.
starting to guess (and it is a guess) that 19 may be the number. I do think we are still a long shot to get there. The schedule is very tough.
they have zero bad losses'
there are 3 weeks to go
North Carolina is not safely in
the bubble is fluid
most bracketologists get caught in a narrative bias where the schools they had in the field in January they struggle to move out for teams winning in February. I see it all the time and seeing it this year. Thats is why bracketology is worthless until February and I despise its being talked about in January.
I respect all of that....there are 3 weeks to go. Just saying if season ended now.
Between you and me RU is still a long shot to dance. I think Wednesday's game is enormously important.
I do think we get too caught up in placing games in quad boxes.
I wonder if we beat Illinois if we graduate to next four out or perhaps even last four in. Will be interesting to see how the experts place us. We’re still in a very fragile place. A loss Wednesday puts us back in the territory of having to pull off another road win.
I can’t see how if we beat Illinois Wednesday we at that point in the so called bracketology are NOT in!!
agree...the fanbase is not looking at the loss column. We can very well be 15-11 at the end of the week and that is not a good thing, I dont care how many quad 1 wins we have. People here seem to want to be selective on criteria. They forget we went 6-4 in a non conference schedule that is ranked 298. Illinois is a must win but to continue on our thread the needle blueprint to get to the tournament laid out a few weeks its probably one we have to have.
This x10000000
And actually , I think that even THIS week is one week too early …
after this week, most of the majors have 4 regular season games left and the big ten tourney and you really can focus on a seed with 25-27 games played and then rassonable range of seeding fluctuation based on how they finish…
A lot of bradketolgy by the experts is formed from their staring Point and needing to justify changing from the starting point , even when the starting point is wrong
Miss “Judgement week”….which would be our week playing at Michigan and Wisconsin at the RAC
RU would be in if the tourney was selected Tuesday night but no IN in terms of lock, not at all
we have the opportunity to play our way in now..... there should be no grumbling about the task ahead
if we don't make it, it will be because of games not won from Wednesday on out....
if we don't make it, it will be because of games not won from Wednesday on out....
the gradient is tight between schools seeded 3-6 and then those schools seeded 7-12 is really tight. One loss or one win can change alot at this point, Bracketologists do not want to admit that. There are less locks than you think. Schools like USC are not even locks yet with so many games to play. Its very apparent that starting point narrative has hurt RU with the bracketlogists and even though most say their brackets are if the field was projected today, they are lying as they are using predictive measures looking at upcoming schedules with respect to certain schools like RU
Thats why I have RU in my bracket as of today based on the numbers. Should RU start to amass a bunch of losses in the upcoming 2 games, that is going to change.
Iowa and UNC have virtually nothing on their resume except they dont lose to bad teams. I think Iowa has a better case than UNC at this point who is really a last 8 in school at this point but Iowa isnt safe either. Indiana is another who should be worried.
Bart still has us at a 3.8% chance of going to NCAAs. If we don't win on Wednesday there is a better than 60/40 chance we are 15-12 looking at a Wisconsin team that will be looking for revenge.
I can't call Illinois game must win. but if GRF RU dancing probability is 15% it goes to a 3% if we lose.
Bart is still assuming we're the 85th best team and that for some reason Indiana is the 17th best team (KenPom has them 42nd). We've been better than them in conference play. Still underdogs, but I don't like that he's only giving us a 17% chance in that game.
In boxing, styles make fights. I think that carries over to basketball too. We match up well with Indiana assuming Cliff can slow down TJD like Myles did the last few seasons. Our guards are capable of harassing the Indiana guards again. Harper can bang with Thompson. The only thing that makes me hesitant is it will be senior day for Indiana. I am not a gambler but if you gave me 5 to 1 odds on the outcome, I would be tempted to put some money down.
Do any of these services like Bart put out numbers for in-conference play only? Our garbage November results mean nothing for how we are playing now.
#37 UNC(18-7) has 2 close losses in Q1 0-7,
*N 9 Purdue 84-93*, N 10 Tenn 72-89, N 3 Kentucky 69-98, *@ 56 Notre Dame 73-78*, @ 68 Miami 57-85, @ 40 Wake Forest 76-98, Vs 21 Duke 67-87
Q2 wins(4-0) 35 Michigan(13-10) by 21, 38 VA Tech(15-10) by 10, @ 88 Clemson(12-13), @ 128 Louisville(11-13)
Q3 wins(8-0) @ 157 Charleston(13-10), @ 151 GA Tech(9-14), 82 Furman(16-10), @ 168 BC(9-14), 77 Virginia(16-9), 151 GA Tech(9-14), 137 NC St(10-16), 97 FSU(13-11)
It's a tough sell to put UNC in right now, they have only 2 Q1s left @ Va Tech and @ Duke left to get 1, 3 Q3s, 1 Q4. If UNC's NET stays 35-50, it is a first four, 11 seed resume with only 1 Q1 win. They lose both no way they get in with 0, doesn't matter what their NET is. Even the old RPI, you had to have at least 1-2 wins. Lot of games and movement still can happen.
*N 9 Purdue 84-93*, N 10 Tenn 72-89, N 3 Kentucky 69-98, *@ 56 Notre Dame 73-78*, @ 68 Miami 57-85, @ 40 Wake Forest 76-98, Vs 21 Duke 67-87
Q2 wins(4-0) 35 Michigan(13-10) by 21, 38 VA Tech(15-10) by 10, @ 88 Clemson(12-13), @ 128 Louisville(11-13)
Q3 wins(8-0) @ 157 Charleston(13-10), @ 151 GA Tech(9-14), 82 Furman(16-10), @ 168 BC(9-14), 77 Virginia(16-9), 151 GA Tech(9-14), 137 NC St(10-16), 97 FSU(13-11)
It's a tough sell to put UNC in right now, they have only 2 Q1s left @ Va Tech and @ Duke left to get 1, 3 Q3s, 1 Q4. If UNC's NET stays 35-50, it is a first four, 11 seed resume with only 1 Q1 win. They lose both no way they get in with 0, doesn't matter what their NET is. Even the old RPI, you had to have at least 1-2 wins. Lot of games and movement still can happen.
they need to beat Duke to end speculation but if they win all the others, they are dancing..thats 23-8, even another loss somewhere puts them 22-9, one win in acc tourney and 23-10 likely enough, again....nothing spectacular but a pretty clean profile will get rewarded.
lots of season to play
right now they are FIRST FOUR game material along with RU
I like De Courcy but he is also full of **** and not really the best bracketologist out there.
DeCourcy is lost. He is exactly as BAC said , he declared teams in the tourney in early January and cannot wrap his head around teams getting better and refuses to remove those teams from his list. He didn’t even consider UNC has been blown out by 20 or more 5 times and has no Quad 1 wins. He rates Iowa so high with a bunch of Quad 3 and 4 wins and little in the first 2 Quads and harps on a Virginia win early , when Virginia was putrid and they are only 77 in the NET and they won by 1. He hadn’t moved Indiana and he loves the old school BIG 10 like Michigan.
Last night Pizzo was on with him and Raphael Davis ( who is absolutely terrific , honest and dead on most times ) and he had the nerve to call the Rutgers/ Michigan game at Michigan 10 days away an elimination game between RU and Michigan. Did he not realize what Rutgers just did ? Did he not realize what is in front of both Rutgers and Michigan with Quad 1 opportunities galore ? He kept on pointing to predictive models that look foolish predicting Rutgers last 3 games. He has lost all my respect. The best brackrtologists are Brad Wachtel and our Own BAC that is better than most of them. Ignore the ******** bracketologists that do not even have us in the picture as they are dinosaurs and do not adapt their predictions until after the fact
Last edited:
It isn't a man....it is us, it is our season.
The computer still tells us that we aren't nearly as good as we think we are. People forget it was less than a few weeks ago people thought we were terrible. I put a thread showing how 6 possessions framed our season to that point. It wasn't designed to say we were better than our record said, but almost everyone said it didn't matter and we are bad.
We have now had 3 great games in a row and people want to say we are so much better than what a computer says. Computers have no emotions, fans do. You get a more objective look analyzing data.
You can look back the past 2 1/2 years and find quite a bit of amazing 3 game runs from Rutgers. It shows us what we are capable of, not who we really are. the same can be said when looking at the rough patches.
Give me kcg probabilities......
at Purdue
at Indiana
GRF has.....
at Purdue 12.5%
at Indiana 30%
0-2 61.25%
Indiana is juiced up because they destroyed that sisters of the poor. They are probably us or worse against real teams
computers cannot predict NCAA tournament selections its ********. They are useless. Is their a program that inputs all the ncaa selection criteria plus the subjectiveness of committee members
That isn't their primary purpose. It is really meant to evaluate teams and their strengths and weaknesses and how teams stack up against each other......not for NCAA tournament purposes.
Looking at bart or kenpom can tell you a lot about what has happened the past 3 games and helps you objectively tell you why a game was won or lost.
It doesn't tell you everything. You can see as clear as day our offensive output is extremely correlated with our 3 point shooting (OSU game as an outlier).
No you don’t. You said we were terrible when we were 6-5. Most of the sane people on the board were frustrated at what an inconsistent team we were not that we were terrible .,That’s , because we already saw them play well and beat a # 1 at the time that was truly playing like a number 1 then and they are not now , and then we wouldn’t score 25 in the. first half and commit 10 or more unforced turnovers in 6 straight BIg 10 games against teams we were better than. That is what most people saw Jekyll and Hyde. You trying to rewrite your posting history is ridiculous.
If you cannot see what has happened in the last 7 halves of basketball , offensively ( including efficiency ) , defensively ( including 2 point efficiency and end of game efficiency , mostly by our beloved and your favorite Caleb ) and at the foul line , then you are missing it. The reason computers should never be used to select teams is because computers cannot recognize when a team gets better as the season goes on , that a team in November is not the same as February and March , nor does it account for injuries or other factors, nor does it know how hot a team has become. Human eyes the eye test should determine the teams and if you then want to use the efficiency metrics to back up your position that this is the team you are seeing with your eyes then use them in that way. By the way your Bart predictive model is a perfect example of what I am talking about.
(23-8) 1-8, 4-0, 11-0, 7-0 is still very weak but will barely get in, even mid-majors need 2 Q2 wins or a ton of Q2s and/or Q3s to make up the difference to even get a 7-11 at large, UNC's only 4 Q2s wins will put them at Q1/2 5-8 unless Virginia or Furman get and stay above 75, vs Ga Tech at 151 could fall to Q4, @ Louisville 128 could fall to Q3.
The only scenario from ACC that resembles it recently, 18-19 Syracuse was 3-10, 3-2 with 10-2 Q3 was a 9 seed, I think, because of the Q3 wins. UNC would be better in some cases to take an L to improve some of their wins and don't tell me that top teams and P6 conferences don't tank to improve other teams in their conference's Quad status and NCAA hopes because they do and have over the years for tourny payouts.