Week of 3/2 Games Thread

[lstewart53x3]

I would settle on they’re a clearly “more accomplished” team than Indiana, which should matter more than metrics.

Are they though?

Miami OH has 0 Quad 1 wins. They haven't even played a single Q1 game this season. They're ranked #103 in the country in combined Q1 and Q2 wins at 2-0. They're 26-0 in Q3-Q4 games. Utah is 10-20. They have more Q1/Q2 wins than Miami OH (3).

Indiana doesn't have a great resume either. They're ranked #70 in combined Q1 & Q2 wins at 5-12, but that's still 3 more Q1/Q2 wins than Miami and they're ranked 32 spots higher.

If Miami OH played in the B1G, they'd be lucky to have a record as good as Minnesota. On a neutral court, Minnesota would be favored.

 

[Fly Illini Fly!]

I would settle on they’re a clearly “more accomplished” team than Indiana, which should matter more than metrics.

What does “more accomplished” refer to? They’ve played ZERO Q1 games and TWO Q2 games.

Indiana has beaten Purdue, Wisconsin, and @UCLA. Who has Miami OH beaten?

Genuine question for everyone on the Miami OH hype train: if Indiana and Miami OH played on a neutral court today… would you really pick Miami OH to win?

 

[Fighter of the Nightman]

Are they though?

Miami OH has 0 Quad 1 wins. They haven't even played a single Q1 game this season. They're ranked #103 in the country in combined Q1 and Q2 wins at 2-0. They're 26-0 in Q3-Q4 games. Utah is 10-20. They have more Q1/Q2 wins than Miami OH (3).

Indiana doesn't have a great resume either. They're ranked #70 in combined Q1 & Q2 wins at 5-12, but that's still 3 more Q1/Q2 wins than Miami and they're ranked 32 spots higher.

If Miami OH played in the B1G, they'd be lucky to have a record as good as Minnesota. On a neutral court, Minnesota would be favored.

View attachment 48041

View attachment 48043

When the players and coaches of Miami (OH) began their season, they had the schedule in front of them ... and they've won every single time they took the court. I understand you guys' points, but it's needless to say that this cold, analytical approach using things like KenPom and Quad classifications completely discounts the "romance" of NEVER losing a game. And that's my point. I don't think a lot of people are saying Miami (OH) is better than Indiana or even Minnesota ... they're wanting to hang on to the parts of college hoops that don't immediately and totally defer to analytics ... we want the pageantry of rewarding ANY undefeated team with some actual recognition, not immediately discounting them because their schedule sucked.

If the response is to point out that the computers think Miami (OH) is mediocre or that they haven't played quality opponents ... we are talking past each other. Those of us sticking up for Miami (OH) are taking a stance that "Undefeated is undefeated, period." No argument using metrics or stats is going to really counter that.

What does “more accomplished” refer to? They’ve played ZERO Q1 games and TWO Q2 games.

Indiana has beaten Purdue, Wisconsin, and @UCLA.

The genuine question here is: if Indiana and Miami OH played on a neutral court today… would you really pick Miami OH to win?

But that's not the genuine question ... the question is how should Miami (OH) be rewarded for the season they've had, which currently is that of an undefeated team? Some of us want a more romantic and mystical element retained in college hoops that rewards an undefeated team with recognition and a better spot in NCAAT seeding than the computers would suggest. If they get blown out, fine ... give them that shot.

If our goal is to ONLY put the best teams, in order, in the NCAA Tournament ... then stop giving auto bids to conference tournament champions. Indiana and Minnesota would beat a lot of those teams. If someone doesn't think that would be a massive mistake as far as maintaining the mystique and uniqueness of March Madness, I really don't know what to tell them.

 

[NarrowJ]

When the players and coaches of Miami (OH) began their season, they had the schedule in front of them ... and they've won every single time they took the court. I understand you guys' points, but it's needless to say that this cold, analytical approach using things like KenPom and Quad classifications completely discounts the "romance" of NEVER losing a game. And that's my point. I don't think a lot of people are saying Miami (OH) is better than Indiana or even Minnesota ... they're wanting to hang on to the parts of college hoops that don't immediately and totally defer to analytics ... we want the pageantry of rewarding ANY undefeated team with some actual recognition, not immediately discounting them because their schedule sucked.

If the response is to point out that the computers think Miami (OH) is mediocre or that they haven't played quality opponents ... we are talking past each other. Those of us sticking up for Miami (OH) are taking a stance that "Undefeated is undefeated, period." No argument using metrics or stats is going to really counter that.

If they go undefeated, they'll be in and there's no discussion

 

[Fighter of the Nightman]

If they go undefeated, they'll be in and there's no discussion

I was speaking more to how people are talking about them now. A certain level of respect should be afforded to any undefeated team at this point in the season, regardless of metrics.

 

[Fly Illini Fly!]

When the players and coaches of Miami (OH) began their season, they had the schedule in front of them ... and they've won every single time they took the court. I understand you guys' points, but it's needless to say that this cold, analytical approach using things like KenPom and Quad classifications completely discounts the "romance" of NEVER losing a game. And that's my point. I don't think a lot of people are saying Miami (OH) is better than Indiana or even Minnesota ... they're wanting to hang on to the parts of college hoops that don't immediately and totally defer to analytics ... we want the pageantry of rewarding ANY undefeated team with some actual recognition, not immediately discounting them because their schedule sucked.

If the response is to point out that the computers think Miami (OH) is mediocre or that they haven't played quality opponents ... we are talking past each other. Those of us sticking up for Miami (OH) are taking a stance that "Undefeated is undefeated, period." No argument using metrics or stats is going to really counter that.

But they aren’t undefeated — that’s the point. We’re talking about if they lose their conf tourney do they deserve an at large.

Your points are valid — but that’s why the auto bids for the conf tourneys exist.

When the discussion boils down to an at large, we need to take into account the totality of the picture.

 

[Second place is 1st loser]

When did I say that?

I said put the 33-1 team in over the 20-12 team.

That’s not hard to understand. And we have to stop blindly relying on these computer programs to tell us what to think.

Take two minutes and look at our schedule this year. What would Miami(OH)'s record be if they played it! I'm going to go through this is give them ALL 50/50 games.

Jackson State W
Florida Gulf Coast W
Texas Tech L
Colgate W
Alabama. L
LIU. W
UT Rio Grande Valley. W
UConn. L
Tennessee. L
at Ohio State L
Nebraska L
Missouri. L
Southern W
at Penn State W (50/50)
at Rutgers W (50/50)
at Iowa. L
at Northwestern. L
Minnesota L
Maryland. W (50/50)
at No. 4 Purdue. L
Washington. L
at No. 5 Nebraska. L
Northwestern. W (50/50)
at No. 10 Michigan State. L
Wisconsin L
Indiana. L
at USC. L
at UCLA L
Michigan. L
Oregon L
at Maryland. W (50/50)

I have them at 11-21, which is before the Big Ten Tournament. They'd lose game one.

Yes, metrics matter.

 

[NarrowJ]

I was speaking more to how people are talking about them now. A certain level of respect should be afforded to any undefeated team at this point in the season, regardless of metrics.

Just to go on record, I have been rooting for them and hope they get in. They are fun to watch and have attitude, though the 4 taunting technicals and subsequent flipping the bird to the crowd last night might have been overkill haha.

 

[Iloveorangekoolaid]

That's about right. Senior night for Purdue and Wisconsin, while they have some nice wins, can have some real clunkers.

Also Nolan Winter left Wisconsin’s last game with an injury. Looks like he’s out today with an ankle injury.

 

[Fly Illini Fly!]

If our goal is to ONLY put the best teams, in order, in the NCAA Tournament ... then stop giving auto bids to conference tournament champions. Indiana and Minnesota would beat a lot of those teams. If someone doesn't think that would be a massive mistake as far as maintaining the mystique and uniqueness of March Madness, I really don't know what to tell them.

Our goal is not to only put the best teams. That’s why there’s the conf tourney bids. If Miami OH wins their conference — they’re in. No discussion.

We DO (or at least should) care about who the best teams are when it comes to the AT LARGE bids.

 

[EmeraldCityIllini]

When the players and coaches of Miami (OH) began their season, they had the schedule in front of them ... and they've won every single time they took the court. I understand you guys' points, but it's needless to say that this cold, analytical approach using things like KenPom and Quad classifications completely discounts the "romance" of NEVER losing a game. And that's my point. I don't think a lot of people are saying Miami (OH) is better than Indiana or even Minnesota ... they're wanting to hang on to the parts of college hoops that don't immediately and totally defer to analytics ... we want the pageantry of rewarding ANY undefeated team with some actual recognition, not immediately discounting them because their schedule sucked.

If the response is to point out that the computers think Miami (OH) is mediocre or that they haven't played quality opponents ... we are talking past each other. Those of us sticking up for Miami (OH) are taking a stance that "Undefeated is undefeated, period." No argument using metrics or stats is going to really counter that.

For what it's worth, @Fighter of the Nightman, i agree with you. The bubble is super weak this year, and I'd just prefer see Miami of Ohio in over whatever mediocre P4 .500 team - like Auburn or Indiana. That's my preference.

BUT the "undefeated is undefeated, period" thing does only apply to smaller schools, right? Like, Illinois could schedule all Q4 games next non-con, and we would be getting clowned for it. But im not sure our defense would "well, come on! we never lost!" I'm far more moved by the argument bigger schools don't want to schedule Miami of Ohio, therefore they don't get a shot, which means I don't care as much about comparing Indiana and Auburn, because they got their chances, and multiple of them.

All of this debate too is based on the assumption they lose in the conference tournament ofcourse, in which, they wouldn't be undefeated anyway.

 

[lstewart53x3]

When the players and coaches of Miami (OH) began their season, they had the schedule in front of them ...

And they’re lucky that schedule didn’t include any good teams. Because they would’ve gotten absolutely smoked.

 

[illiniguy1234]

Ref show in Stillwater.

 

[Second place is 1st loser]

Our goal is not to only put the best teams. That’s why there’s the conf tourney bids. If Miami OH wins their conference — they’re in. No discussion.

We DO (or at least should) care about who the best teams are when it comes to the AT LARGE bids.

I hear what you're saying, but you have to take into account who those wins are against. 16 out of 18 Big Ten teams would have a record that puts them in the top 5 in that conference and probably 6 of them also run the table.

Edit: By win their conference, do you mean regular season or conference tournament? I might have misunderstood your post(I think I did). If you mean conference tournament, yep....they're in, no questions asked.

 

[PleaseMakeABowlGame]

When the players and coaches of Miami (OH) began their season, they had the schedule in front of them ... and they've won every single time they took the court. I understand you guys' points, but it's needless to say that this cold, analytical approach using things like KenPom and Quad classifications completely discounts the "romance" of NEVER losing a game. And that's my point. I don't think a lot of people are saying Miami (OH) is better than Indiana or even Minnesota ... they're wanting to hang on to the parts of college hoops that don't immediately and totally defer to analytics ... we want the pageantry of rewarding ANY undefeated team with some actual recognition, not immediately discounting them because their schedule sucked.

If the response is to point out that the computers think Miami (OH) is mediocre or that they haven't played quality opponents ... we are talking past each other. Those of us sticking up for Miami (OH) are taking a stance that "Undefeated is undefeated, period." No argument using metrics or stats is going to really counter that.


But that's not the genuine question ... the question is how should Miami (OH) be rewarded for the season they've had, which currently is that of an undefeated team? Some of us want a more romantic and mystical element retained in college hoops that rewards an undefeated team with recognition and a better spot in NCAAT seeding than the computers would suggest. If they get blown out, fine ... give them that shot.

If our goal is to ONLY put the best teams, in order, in the NCAA Tournament ... then stop giving auto bids to conference tournament champions. Indiana and Minnesota would beat a lot of those teams. If someone doesn't think that would be a massive mistake as far as maintaining the mystique and uniqueness of March Madness, I really don't know what to tell them.

You keep bringing up the term “undefeated.” However, they won’t be undefeated if they lose in their conference tournament.

 

[Fighter of the Nightman]

Our goal is not to only put the best teams. That’s why there’s the conf tourney bids. If Miami OH wins their conference — they’re in. No discussion.

We DO (or at least should) care about who the best teams are when it comes to the AT LARGE bids.

And my personal opinion is that for the second question, the answer should be less black and white. I don't see anything wrong with putting a 1-loss conference tournament runner-up with bad metrics in the field over Indiana. And it's fine if folks disagree with me, and I recognize I'm in the minority. Indiana took its massive NIL budget and put together a mediocre season against a "good schedule," while Miami (OH) kept clawing and scrapping toward zero losses vs. a "bad schedule" ... I'm more impressed by the latter, myself, even if they get one loss.

And they’re lucky that schedule didn’t include any good teams. Because they would’ve gotten absolutely smoked.

Yes, so say the computers. And for now, we'll just have to trust them in this hypothetical.

 

[Second place is 1st loser]

Houston is down by 13 to Ok State
Suck on that Samscum!

Yeah, this didn't age well whatsoever. Houston is on the cusp of blowing the doors off Ok St.

Edit: OSU with one final rally

 

[Justan opinion]

Our goal is not to only put the best teams. That’s why there’s the conf tourney bids. If Miami OH wins their conference — they’re in. No discussion.

We DO (or at least should) care about who the best teams are when it comes to the AT LARGE bids.

If Indiana wins their conference tournament they are in, no discussion. But if Indiana finishes 9-11 in the conference how is that letting the best teams in? Are we to reward playing 18 quad 1/2 and losing 13 of them? How does that make Indiana more worthy than a 32-1 team?

 

[Fighting I 95]

What does “more accomplished” refer to? They’ve played ZERO Q1 games and TWO Q2 games.

Indiana has beaten Purdue, Wisconsin, and @UCLA. Who has Miami OH beaten?

Genuine question for everyone on the Miami OH hype train: if Indiana and Miami OH played on a neutral court today… would you really pick Miami OH to win?

I would much rather see Miami OH make a run than see indiana lose by 20 in the first game. That indiana team is dookie buns.

 

[illiniguy1234]

Steve Lutz with a mind-boggling no challenge decision. Absolutely insane call to not challenge there.

 

[Fly Illini Fly!]

Edit: By win their conference, do you mean regular season or conference tournament? I might have misunderstood your post(I think I did). If you mean conference tournament, yep....they're in, no questions asked.

Conference tournament.

 

[wc_illini]

When the players and coaches of Miami (OH) began their season, they had the schedule in front of them ... and they've won every single time they took the court. I understand you guys' points, but it's needless to say that this cold, analytical approach using things like KenPom and Quad classifications completely discounts the "romance" of NEVER losing a game. And that's my point. I don't think a lot of people are saying Miami (OH) is better than Indiana or even Minnesota ... they're wanting to hang on to the parts of college hoops that don't immediately and totally defer to analytics ... we want the pageantry of rewarding ANY undefeated team with some actual recognition, not immediately discounting them because their schedule sucked.

If the response is to point out that the computers think Miami (OH) is mediocre or that they haven't played quality opponents ... we are talking past each other. Those of us sticking up for Miami (OH) are taking a stance that "Undefeated is undefeated, period." No argument using metrics or stats is going to really counter that.


But that's not the genuine question ... the question is how should Miami (OH) be rewarded for the season they've had, which currently is that of an undefeated team? Some of us want a more romantic and mystical element retained in college hoops that rewards an undefeated team with recognition and a better spot in NCAAT seeding than the computers would suggest. If they get blown out, fine ... give them that shot.

If our goal is to ONLY put the best teams, in order, in the NCAA Tournament ... then stop giving auto bids to conference tournament champions. Indiana and Minnesota would beat a lot of those teams. If someone doesn't think that would be a massive mistake as far as maintaining the mystique and uniqueness of March Madness, I really don't know what to tell them.

My opinion is that they could have proven their ability by winning more convincingly against such a bad schedule. I don't care that their schedule is bad- they just should have won convincingly.

The committee has at times talked about wanting to reward tough schedules because it's good for the sport. I don't think they should go so far, since a team can't always control that. But they certainly shouldn't reward a team for lots of close wins against bad opponents

 

[Second place is 1st loser]

Yeah, this didn't age well whatsoever. Houston is on the cusp of blowing the doors off Ok St.

Edit: OSU with one final rally

And.....good teams(Houston) finds a way vs bad teams(OSU), who finds a way to kose. OSU being worth a darn would have been ideal.

 

[Fly Illini Fly!]

There’s zero chance they lose (and quite frankly, don’t know if that’d do us any good), but it’s so idiotic the folks who were claiming they’d choose to rather be in Duke/AZ bracket.

 

[lstewart53x3]

Yes, so say the computers. And for now, we'll just have to trust them in this hypothetical.

They’re 16-0 in Q4 games.

Here are a couple of those:

76-71 vs (277) Mercyhurst
90-87 OT @ (244) UNC Asheville
105-102 OT vs (189) Buffalo
86-84 vs (201) Massachusetts
69-67 @ (285) Western Michigan

They’re 11-0 in Q3 games.

Here are a couple of those:

107-101 OT @ (144) Kent St
73-71 @ (189) Buffalo
74-72 vs (149) Toledo
110-108 OT @ (229) Ohio

They’re lucky they don’t have 9 Q3/4 losses.