Bracketology

[illini510]

It's BUY games not BYE. And this raises two questions for me.

1. What was their asking price? Is it possible they asked for too much?

2. Did they consider scheduling these as non-buy games (i.e. no fee).

I'm just a little skeptical of this narrative that everyone was afraid of Miami (OH). I mean, really? They didnt make the tournament last season and were #146 in KP. Michigan and Indiana scheduled them and got exactly what they paid for: blowout wins. I mean, Akron was a better team than them last season, may well be a better team than them now, and they got a game against Purdue. San Diego St., a very good mid major over the last few years, managed to schedule 2 B1G and 2 Big 12 teams. Something doesn't pass the sniff test.

BYE or BUY...the point was made as you clearly haven't done your due diligence and research into the matter before you decided to spin a narrative that Miami is undeserving of a seat at the table at the NCAA tournament. You don't work for their athletic department and you don't know the ins and outs of scheduling and what goes into that. All the media pundits who are questioning Miami don't know either. Bruce Pearl is vouching for his mediocre former program that he ran that is now being run into the ground by his son who has no business being handed the keys to an SEC program b/c we clearly see how well that is going.

Now, to answer your question. The asking price was 100-150,000 according to the TV telecast. Is that high? I have no idea. It doesn't seem that steep of an asking price for these major college programs. Why would they schedule for no fees? They are not Central Connecticut State or Mercyhurst or some random no name school with 2,000 enrollees. They have to make some kind of money off of going on the road as well, do they not? This is why the gap is widening between mid majors and the power conferences. Your arguments basically are to say that the mid majors don't matter anymore. That's all I'm hearing from you

 

[Piotyr]

Also, forgot to mention Wright State came back and beat Detroit Mercy in the Horizon league final. Their profile is 15 seed, but a bunch of losses by conference champions may push them up to a 14 in this field.

 

[Piotyr]

Tonight's bids up for grabs:

4pm - Southland - SFA vs McNeese - Both very good teams with squint and you see it at-large profiles, winner probably gets a 12 seed, loser still thinks they can sneak in as a play-in candidate at large. Probably not, but with every bubble team losing, someone needs to be in the tournament.

6pm - Patriot - Boston U vs Lehigh - Navy won the league by 6 games and then lost in the semis, leaving two pretty low end teams to fight for a spot in the 16 seed play-in.

10:30pm - Big Sky - Idaho vs Montana - Another tournament of chaos as the final is between the 4 seed and the 7 seed. The winner won't be play-in 16 seed bad, but they'll probably land a 15 seed.

 

[lstewart53x3]

It's always this weak, we're just not used to Illinois being so far ahead of the cut line that the cut line looks awful in comparison.

This is also why I don't feel like giving a bid to a smaller conference champion that loses in their tournament is stealing a bid from anyone. Nobody on that level has earned anything. At least if you win a conference, you earned something.

According to Evan Miya, this is the weakest bubble ever:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2031058349207290277

https://twitter.com/x/status/2031076080551879100

 

[Piotyr]

I do suppose having a weak bubble combined with how top heavy the sport is this year will make that comparison shake out that way. On the flip side, it could just be said that the bracket is very top heavy again this year, maybe even more so than last year (there is a clear top 4, a clear top 8, a very clear top 16, and a fairly clear separation after 24 as well). Combine that with smaller conference tournament being extra chaotic this year (just 5 of 12 tournaments so far have been won by the top seed, and that includes Gonzaga who was miles better than anyone in their conference).

I have a feeling the tournament this year will be extra chalky. Maybe not quite women's tournament chalky (which, to be fair, is partly owed to the top 4 seeds playing at home the first two rounds), but I could very well see 12+ of the top 16 make the second weekend this season.

 

[wc_illini]

Eye test says something different. By the way, if you actually watched their game at Ohio, it was made clear that they reached out to 84 power conference schools(I believe there's only 79 from what they said but probably reached out to a handful of other top mid major programs) and they were declined BYE games by every single one of those schools. Miami put out their schedule in October(which is very late in the process) because they were looking for any high major opponents to play them. Nobody wanted to play them. That's not their fault. Don't fault the mid major for that. That's on the high majors b/c the only BYE games they want to schedule is versus the cupcakes so they can beat them by 30 or 40 and help their NET ranking increase. That's the game being played.

As for Miami, they're good enough to be in the NCAA tournament. Eye test of having seen 5 of their games this season tells me all I need to know. Their 3rd string PG is better than Oregon's backup pg. They have a legit starting five that can be put up against other bubble teams no question. Going 31-0 in any league is reason enough to get an NCAA tournament bid. They've been winning all of their close games and it sounds like the pressure of continuing to go undefeated has definitely worn these players out but they still found a way to get the job done. That is to be commended and rewarded, not put down and mocked. No need for the average Auburns or Indiana's of the world to be put in over this team. They didn't get their chance to play a high major opponent. Now, the NCAA committee needs to give them that chance so they can show that they fully deserve to be there. They are at worst Round of 32 caliber and with the right matchup, Sweet 16 caliber

I don't fault them for their schedule. While I don't think their arguments about scheduling are convincing*, I don't really care. I fault them for barely squeaking by some really bad teams.

I will give them credit that they look better if you ignore Q4. Against Q3 or better, they played like the #50 team in the country. Oklahoma, Auburn, SD St, and New Mexico are all ahead of them, but just barely. I don't personally think we should ignore Q4, but at least it's an opponent-adjusted measure that puts them in the area of being deserving.

I'm also fine with anyone who wants them in based on their resume rankings. I just don't agree that being undefeated is enough by itself. It it is, then that would be a very bad incentive for future scheduling.

* Regarding scheduling, others have already pointed out that other mid-majors didn't have a problem with this. Plus, the argument that opponents want to pad their metrics doesn't make sense. Against a Q4 opponent, top programs must win by as much as expected or it hurts them. By definition, that isn't any easier than beating a Q2 by the expected amount (in fact, Miami OH had this very problem). The reasons that make sense are: (1) top schools are worried about resume ranks and quad records instead of efficiency rankings, so a guaranteed win against Q4 even if they play poorly is better than a possible Q2 loss, or (2) they are thinking about efficiency rankings, and want some garbage time against a Q4 to get their bench players some minutes. Ironically, the solution to both of these motivations is to further emphasize efficiency rankings instead of resume ranks or Quad records (and remove garbage time adjustments in those), but these would exclude Miami OH from the tournament this year.

Edit: I don't even really care about the other bubble teams anyway. In my opinion, only the top 20 or so in efficiency rankings really deserve to be there. The rest are just there for entertainment and chaos.

 

[Justan opinion]

There are zero reasons to keep Miami(OH) out of the tournament. Unless you believe in the power and glory of P4 teams that can't record a 500 conference record. Some dont want to reward a team that won 30 games. I don't care to reward someone who lost 11 conference games.

 

[the juiceman cometh]

Now, to answer your question. The asking price was 100-150,000 according to the TV telecast. Is that high?

Yes that's high. Here's an article about how Louisville paid $85k a piece to three buy game opponents they lost to a couple years back.

Louisville leads men's basketball programs in cost of buy game losses

Louisville, Cal and Oregon led the country in the highest guarantee game totals paid in games each school ultimately lost.

www.on3.com

Keep in mind also that programs are getting stingier with buy game fees as revenue sharing kicks in. Part of the reason you see more 1-amd-1 and neutral site deals between P4 opponents.

I have no idea. It doesn't seem that steep of an asking price for these major college programs. Why would they schedule for no fees?

Because they'd do it as a 1-and-1, get a home game the next season, and lock in a decent win opportunity on their schedule so people like me can't knock their resume.

They are not Central Connecticut State or Mercyhurst or some random no name school with 2,000 enrollees. They have to make some kind of money off of going on the road as well, do they not? This is why the gap is widening between mid majors and the power conferences. Your arguments basically are to say that the mid majors don't matter anymore. That's all I'm hearing from you

Miami (OH) just approved the construction of a new sports arena with a projected cost of up to $281 million. I think they're doing ok?

 

[aaeismacgychel]

There are zero reasons to keep Miami(OH) out of the tournament. Unless you believe in the power and glory of P4 teams that can't record a 500 conference record. Some dont want to reward a team that won 30 games. I don't care to reward someone who lost 11 conference games.

Agreed. I think you can make a weak Non-Con, snack on cupcakes and start banking wins. I really don't have an issue with that and in fairness that was very common scheduling for Minnesota and Indiana at times in the past where they solely relied on the ACC-B10 challenge for their one OOC game of note. But if you do that, you can't suffer bad losses in conference. In this case, it's not like Miami is 27-4 with 3 non-Q1 losses and no Q1 wins. They played a weak schedule but won all the games on it. That's more than deserving of a spot. Even if they had lost a game or 2, I'd still see that more deserving than say an 18-14 P4 team by a decent margin. Miami won the games on their schedule, they should be in no question whatsoever. I know this is harsh judgment for major conference teams, but if you're a sub .500 team in conference, I really don't want to hear the whining and crying about how unfair things are and how deserving you are. You aren't. If you were you would've won more of the games on your schedule.

I feel the same way about college football. You lose 3 games you don't serve to make the playoff. You might sneak in anyways, but you don't deserve it. Especially not more than an undefeated or 1 loss midmajor.

 

[illini510]

I don't fault them for their schedule. While I don't think their arguments about scheduling are convincing*, I don't really care. I fault them for barely squeaking by some really bad teams.

I will give them credit that they look better if you ignore Q4. Against Q3 or better, they played like the #50 team in the country. Oklahoma, Auburn, SD St, and New Mexico are all ahead of them, but just barely. I don't personally think we should ignore Q4, but at least it's an opponent-adjusted measure that puts them in the area of being deserving.

I'm also fine with anyone who wants them in based on their resume rankings. I just don't agree that being undefeated is enough by itself. It it is, then that would be a very bad incentive for future scheduling.

* Regarding scheduling, others have already pointed out that other mid-majors didn't have a problem with this. Plus, the argument that opponents want to pad their metrics doesn't make sense. Against a Q4 opponent, top programs must win by as much as expected or it hurts them. By definition, that isn't any easier than beating a Q2 by the expected amount (in fact, Miami OH had this very problem). The reasons that make sense are: (1) top schools are worried about resume ranks and quad records instead of efficiency rankings, so a guaranteed win against Q4 even if they play poorly is better than a possible Q2 loss, or (2) they are thinking about efficiency rankings, and want some garbage time against a Q4 to get their bench players some minutes. Ironically, the solution to both of these motivations is to further emphasize efficiency rankings instead of resume ranks or Quad records (and remove garbage time adjustments in those), but these would exclude Miami OH from the tournament this year.

This team is an outlier. Undefeated teams are few and far between in this sport. They should be celebrated for what they've achieved. What you've pinpointed continues to be your opinion rather than concrete proof to support that you don't believe they made an effort to schedule major conference schools. The color TV analyst appears to have done more research than you have done on the matter so I will take his word for it. Maybe you should too

 

[illini510]

Yes that's high. Here's an article about how Louisville paid $85k a piece to three buy game opponents they lost to a couple years back.

Louisville leads men's basketball programs in cost of buy game losses

Louisville, Cal and Oregon led the country in the highest guarantee game totals paid in games each school ultimately lost.

www.on3.com

Keep in mind also that programs are getting stingier with buy game fees as revenue sharing kicks in. Part of the reason you see more 1-amd-1 and neutral site deals between P4 opponents.


Because they'd do it as a 1-and-1, get a home game the next season, and lock in a decent win opportunity on their schedule so people like me can't knock their resume.


Miami (OH) just approved the construction of a new sports arena with a projected cost of up to $281 million. I think they're doing ok?

Couple yrs back being the key word. Have you not heard of the word inflation? Clearly the cost to do business goes up as time goes on. You make it seem like 100K and 85K are worlds apart lol. Your argument holds no weight and you actually proved my point that a 100K BUY in request is more than reasonable. Thank you for doing that. Again, unless you work for an athletic department, I will take the word of the TV color analyst who actually did his research and spoke to officials within the program. Maybe you think they are lying or telling falsehoods to spin an agenda but that's just conspiracy theory nonsense that we see in this society at large

I will repeat again. They put their schedule out in October b/c they were attempting to get larger schools to BUY in to playing them. That is a very late schedule release just weeks before the season starts. I trust they were making efforts and unless you're in that athletic department yourself, you cannot disprove that

 

[ChiefGritty]

According to Evan Miya, this is the weakest bubble ever:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2031058349207290277

https://twitter.com/x/status/2031076080551879100

NIL funneling talent upward, conference expansion, the refusal to schedule good mid-majors, there are a lot of factors combining to make those last handful of at-large teams worse than ever.

 

[FloridaMan]

According to Evan Miya, this is the weakest bubble ever:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2031058349207290277

https://twitter.com/x/status/2031076080551879100

Wait until there are 32 more teams added. That will be really entertaining. /s

 

[the juiceman cometh]

Agreed. I think you can make a weak Non-Con, snack on cupcakes and start banking wins. I really don't have an issue with that and in fairness that was very common scheduling for Minnesota and Indiana at times in the past where they solely relied on the ACC-B10 challenge for their one OOC game of note. But if you do that, you can't suffer bad losses in conference. In this case, it's not like Miami is 27-4 with 3 non-Q1 losses and no Q1 wins. They played a weak schedule but won all the games on it. That's more than deserving of a spot. Even if they had lost a game or 2, I'd still see that more deserving than say an 18-14 P4 team by a decent margin. Miami won the games on their schedule, they should be in no question whatsoever. I know this is harsh judgment for major conference teams, but if you're a sub .500 team in conference, I really don't want to hear the whining and crying about how unfair things are and how deserving you are. You aren't. If you were you would've won more of the games on your schedule.

I feel the same way about college football. You lose 3 games you don't serve to make the playoff. You might sneak in anyways, but you don't deserve it. Especially not more than an undefeated or 1 loss midmajor.

I think I'd put them in too, even if they lose in the conference tourney, but come on.

If you (the you for the rest of this post is Miami(OH)) don't have a single Q1 win, your resume deserves to be scrutinized. I get that you can't rack up Q1 wins without Q1 games, but I don't think that means you're entitled to have us ignore how many of your wins against Q3 and Q4 opinions were OT and single score games. You beat 10-21 (4-14) Western Mighigan by 2? 3pt OT win at home vs 17-14 (7-11) Buffalo? 3pt OT win vs 15-17 (9-9) UNC Asheville is one of your better wins?

I think you get in over some of the the other garbage in the bubble this year, but this "deserve it" stuff is nonsense.

 

[the juiceman cometh]

Couple yrs back being the key word. Have you not heard of the word inflation?

Schools are paying less not more, because of revenue share. Read my post again, I did say that.

Other, scarier, mid-major teams managed to get better games on the schedule. What was their secret sauce? Miami (OH) should do whatever they did.

 

[AnnaMay]

I think I'd put them in too, even if they lose in the conference tourney, but come on.

If you (the you for the rest of this post is Miami(OH)) don't have a single Q1 win, your resume deserves to be scrutinized. I get that you can't rack up Q1 wins without Q1 games, but I don't think that means you're entitled to have us ignore how many of your wins against Q3 and Q4 opinions were OT and single score games. You beat 10-21 (4-14) Western Mighigan by 2? 3pt OT win at home vs 17-14 (7-11) Buffalo? 3pt OT win vs 15-17 (9-9) UNC Asheville is one of your better wins?

I think you get in over some of the the other garbage in the bubble this year, but this "deserve it" stuff is nonsense.

Im of the opinion that if they don't win their conference tournament they shouldn't make it. Their strength of schedule is just that bad. Would we even be taking about them is they played 5 quad 1or 2 teams and lost them all in their non conference?

 

[illini510]

Schools are paying less not more, because of revenue share. Read my post again, I did say that.

Other, scarier, mid-major teams managed to get better games on the schedule. What was their secret sauce? Miami (OH) should do whatever they did.

Show me the evidence that they're paying less. It's easy to say they should get better games on the schedule without knowing the why behind why they couldn't do it. Did Illinois schedule a MAC school in their non-conference? Did Illinois schedule a Missouri Valley school in their non-conference? Did Illinois schedule an AAC school in their non-conference? Did Illinois schedule a MWC school? Did Illinois schedule a WCC school? I could keep going on and on if you'd like. The best mid major conference they have scheduled for a BUY game in the last few seasons are Horizon League schools. Those schools aren't asking for 100K

 

[Dan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2031762978823926173

 

[Piotyr]

Im of the opinion that if they don't win their conference tournament they shouldn't make it. Their strength of schedule is just that bad. Would we even be taking about them is they played 5 quad 1or 2 teams and lost them all in their non conference?

You just described Akron, except Akron had a better MOV in conference.

 

[Illini2010-11]

I think I'd put them in too, even if they lose in the conference tourney, but come on.

If you (the you for the rest of this post is Miami(OH)) don't have a single Q1 win, your resume deserves to be scrutinized. I get that you can't rack up Q1 wins without Q1 games, but I don't think that means you're entitled to have us ignore how many of your wins against Q3 and Q4 opinions were OT and single score games. You beat 10-21 (4-14) Western Mighigan by 2? 3pt OT win at home vs 17-14 (7-11) Buffalo? 3pt OT win vs 15-17 (9-9) UNC Asheville is one of your better wins?

I think you get in over some of the the other garbage in the bubble this year, but this "deserve it" stuff is nonsense.

Agreed to all. I think they likely get in barring a monumental collapse tomorrow.

With that said, their resume absolutely deserves a level of scrutiny. 2 out of their 31 games were top half quad games, meanwhile they have 3 games that don't even classify on the quad system. That is mind boggling in an era where you have legitimate control over your non-conference schedule.

They should be celebrated for their achievements, but it does get slightly dampened by the extent of the weak schedule.

 

[aaeismacgychel]

I think I'd put them in too, even if they lose in the conference tourney, but come on.

If you (the you for the rest of this post is Miami(OH)) don't have a single Q1 win, your resume deserves to be scrutinized. I get that you can't rack up Q1 wins without Q1 games, but I don't think that means you're entitled to have us ignore how many of your wins against Q3 and Q4 opinions were OT and single score games. You beat 10-21 (4-14) Western Mighigan by 2? 3pt OT win at home vs 17-14 (7-11) Buffalo? 3pt OT win vs 15-17 (9-9) UNC Asheville is one of your better wins?

I think you get in over some of the the other garbage in the bubble this year, but this "deserve it" stuff is nonsense.

I think the mere fact you went undefeated is deserving enough regardless of schedule. Metrics are metrics, wins are wins. Now your strength of schedule and your quality of win along with your metrics I feel gives you relief for losses. A team that plays the toughest schedule in the country non-con and is also in the toughest conference who has won some Q1 games but still wound up with 14 losses is going to get a lot of relief for those losses. Are they deserving of going to the tourney? No. But they may be more deserving than others. Miami played quite possibly the worst schedule I've ever seen with questionable metrics, so how much relief do they get for their losses? None in my opinion. Nor should they. But they also didn't lose. That's deserving in my opinion.

Reason it's that there are a number of teams over the years who have played horrible non-con schedules. Difference is once they got to conference they start losing and taking on bad losses. Miami hasn't. As such I think they should be extremely easily in the field. Now should they get a 4 seed in the tourney or better? No. But I don't have an issue with them getting a 6 or 7 seed.

 

[Illini2010-11]

I think the mere fact you went undefeated is deserving enough regardless of schedule. Metrics are metrics, wins are wins. Now your strength of schedule and your quality of win along with your metrics I feel gives you relief for losses. A team that plays the toughest schedule in the country non-con and is also in the toughest conference who has won some Q1 games but still wound up with 14 losses is going to get a lot of relief for those losses. Are they deserving of going to the tourney? No. But they may be more deserving than others. Miami played quite possibly the worst schedule I've ever seen with questionable metrics, so how much relief do they get for their losses? None in my opinion. Nor should they. But they also didn't lose. That's deserving in my opinion.

Reason it's that there are a number of teams over the years who have played horrible non-con schedules. Difference is once they got to conference they start losing and taking on bad losses. Miami hasn't. As such I think they should be extremely easily in the field. Now should they get a 4 seed in the tourney or better? No. But I don't have an issue with them getting a 6 or 7 seed.

Well if they go undefeated, then they are automatically in. The hypothetical is them losing in their conference tourney, which makes them a 1 loss team. That likely puts them in bubble territory (likely the right side of the bubble but close to play in territory).

6 or 7 seed. Come on now. That is crazy. 10/11 seeds would be jumping up and down to face Miami right now.

 

[the juiceman cometh]

I think the mere fact you went undefeated is deserving enough regardless of schedule. Metrics are metrics, wins are wins. Now your strength of schedule and your quality of win along with your metrics I feel gives you relief for losses. A team that plays the toughest schedule in the country non-con and is also in the toughest conference who has won some Q1 games but still wound up with 14 losses is going to get a lot of relief for those losses. Are they deserving of going to the tourney? No. But they may be more deserving than others. Miami played quite possibly the worst schedule I've ever seen with questionable metrics, so how much relief do they get for their losses? None in my opinion. Nor should they. But they also didn't lose. That's deserving in my opinion.

Well, what if they lose in their conference tournament, which is what this discussion is?

And to put it another way, you talk about "relief for losses." Would you ever put in a P4 team that won every single one of their Q2, Q3, and Q4 games if they lost all their Q1 games? That's the "relief for losses" you're talking about. So if they went 0-14 in Q1 games but won every other game, would you put them in? If not, you're punishing the P4 team for playing better teams.

The flip to "relief for losses" is "reward for wins." The justification for not putting in that 17-14 P4 team with no bad losses, is that they don't have any wins deserving of reward. You know who else doesn't have any wins deserving of reward? Miami (OH). There are 107 teams with more Q1+ Q2 wins than Miami (OH). 107.

Reason it's that there are a number of teams over the years who have played horrible non-con schedules. Difference is once they got to conference they start losing and taking on bad losses. Miami hasn't. As such I think they should be extremely easily in the field. Now should they get a 4 seed in the tourney or better? No. But I don't have an issue with them getting a 6 or 7 seed.

Now we're just being silly. The best team they've beaten (Akron, at home, by 3) isn't even on the bubble. The second best team they've beaten is going in as an AQ with a projected seed of 14. In no world does Miami (OH) deserve a 6 or 7 seed.

 

[mhuml32]

lol, not optimal for Illinois. Hurley's team mailing-it-in is an insult to the USPS.

 

[Fly Illini Fly!]

View attachment 48179

lol, not optimal for Illinois. Hurley's team mailing-it-in is an insult to the USPS.

They were so terrible it’s honestly absurd. I have no idea how Kansas and TTU lost to that team. Especially Kansas, as they had 23 OREBs.