|
Replies: 9
| visibility 1
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
This is why Clemson has a chance at an at-large
Mar 16, 2019, 3:51 PM
|
|
If most consider Temple to be "in", there is no way Clemson is not in the convo. Here is what ESPN's "Bubble Watch" says about Temple (who lost to Wichita St. yesterday)
Temple:
"An 80-74 loss to Wichita State in the American quarterfinals greatly increases Temple's risk, but might not be enough to knock the Owls out of the field. Fran Dunphy's men entered the contest being shown as a No. 11 seed, and, to be sure, Temple is now in a position where it needs to count every bid thief carefully. That said, a 23-8 record that includes a win over Houston, even with a 2-6 mark in Quad 1 contests, looks pretty strong next to some of the competing bubble profiles." (Updated: March 15)
So Temple has 2 Quad 1 wins, and Clemson has 1.
Clemson sits at 35 in NET and 30 in KenPom. Temple sits at 54 in NET and 76 in KenPom. Lunardi has had them between "last four in" and "last four byes". Are you kidding me? The Bracket Matrix shows them in as an 11, showing up on 107 brackets.
I am not saying that Clemson deserves a bid... but I don't know how you put those two teams side by side, and go with Temple.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [11471]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 13624
Joined: 10/27/04
|
Re: This is why Clemson has a chance at an at-large
Mar 16, 2019, 3:56 PM
|
|
You are setting up to be really disappointed tomorrow. Have plenty of liquor tomorrow night...
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
I am not advocating for us... we could be left out, and
Mar 16, 2019, 3:59 PM
|
|
deservedly so
but I would be upset if it were to a team like Temple or St. Johns. That's my point. If we are left out, fine. We didn't get it done. But if it's to one of those two, that's terrible.
I firmly believe Clemson is in a position that you would have a strong argument to both be included, or left out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
and as I type that, Clemson moves to 29 in KenPom and
Mar 16, 2019, 4:04 PM
|
|
St. Johns drops to freaking EIGHTY (80) in KenPom and SEVENTY-TWO (72) in NET.
I don't understand how they can be considered in the field. Maybe they won't be, but their inclusion by "experts" is a mystery to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3616]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 3791
Joined: 1/21/16
|
Re: and as I type that, Clemson moves to 29 in KenPom and
Mar 16, 2019, 4:53 PM
|
|
I am not in tune with the newest selection methodology, but i cannot help thinking that there is absolutely no way they are able to choose the Top 68 in KenPom.
With 336(?) schools representing so many conferences and all 50 states, March Madness is the most faux egalitarian sporting event we have.
We can proclaim a certain superiority over the A-10 schools like Temple, but we are like the mid-level aristocracy during the French Revolution: not blue blooded enough to be a pillar of society, not common enough to be a champion of the downtrodden.
After the auto berths, I'm sure they will diversify the field. Can they really go 10 teams deep in the ACC?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
Not all 68.. but it’s a good indicator for the at-large
Mar 16, 2019, 4:58 PM
|
|
and only a handful have ever recieved an at-large with a KenPom ranking over 60. ZERO have with a ranking over 70.
Temple is 76 and St. John’s 80th
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44032]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32946
Joined: 2/22/03
|
That’s why I don’t think either of those teams will be in.***
Mar 16, 2019, 5:06 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16132]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 26434
Joined: 11/18/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2922]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4060
Joined: 11/30/98
|
My guess is the committee will look at "body of work"....
Mar 16, 2019, 4:28 PM
|
|
and the quad 1 win metric has been overhyped. If you're choosing among a few teams....and all of them have a poor record against Quad 1 (let's be real...going 1-10 or 2-8 is not much of a difference)....and then you look and see that one team's "Quad 1" record came against a bunch of top 10 teams, while the other was racking up Quad 1 games in the 30s or whatever.....and then you look at margin of victory, etc.....and then you look at the records against Quad 2, 3, 4, etc....
It just seems like there are a lot of factors, and if the committee gets into the details of it and even starts looking at close games, etc....that probably works in Clemson's favor.
If they take the "drive by" watch ESPN and listen to Lunardi approach, which leans very heavy on the quad 1 win metric, to the extent that a team that is.500 overall (Texas) is in the conversation because they won a game in December....then that probably does not work in Clemson's favor.
I appreciate your approach....I'm not sure Clemson "deserves" a bid....but when you look at other bubble teams, I'm not sure they "deserve" it either, so if we make it somehow, then we were just as deserving as the next team....and if we don't, same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6228
Joined: 1/26/16
|
I agree... I still don't know why everyone seems to be
Mar 16, 2019, 5:27 PM
|
|
putting some of these teams in their brackets, when it has already been said that NET is replacing RPI. I'm not saying others don't deserve it and we do... but it's almost like no one is looking any deeper into the numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 9
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
