Noblesville Illini
- Nappanee, IN
Has to be one of the quickest top 6 to out of the rankings in recent memory.
Free Fallin’
Has to be one of the quickest top 6 to out of the rankings in recent memory.
Not there yet. They still have a good resume.This may be a silly question, but this is one heck of a free fall, which I do believe has a smattering of a Michigan and a Minnesota L. How far away are they from closing in on the bubble?
Wisky and MSU are fringe top 25. They have to drop about 7-10 spots before biting nails startsNot there yet. They still have a good resume.
Arkansas, yikes.Just a preseason poll refresher (we were 25)
7 of these teams are not currently ranked. Overall, much better than some of their totally non-biased preseason polls in the past.
Love triangles have a way of messing with team chemistry.Arkansas, yikes.
Not at all, Illinois and Wisconsin are basically equal at this point. They have the two best wins but they have 3 not great losses compared to Illinois with 1 (but Illinois has the worst loss). Their record is worse but their SOS is better. Illinois has better efficiency metrics. It's very close. Higher seed could easily go to who wins @ Wisconsin on 3/2.This may be a silly question, but this is one heck of a free fall, which I do believe has a smattering of a Michigan and a Minnesota L. How far away are they from closing in on the bubble?
Bama once went from #1 to unranked in the space of about a month during the conference season.
I feel like the days of the slick scumbag recruiter who can't coach his way out of a paper bag are leaving us. Mark Gottfried, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
I ask this with genuine interest and am not playing devil's advocate: should those Marquette and N-UVa wins be discounted substantially because of Wisc's current slide or should we view those wins as the product of the same team (physically and psychologically) on the floor today?I still like their resume better than ours to be totally honest.
A bit inflammatory I guess, but Marquette, N-Virginia and @MSU are three wins better than our best.
Kinda goes back to my point from the other day, KenPom, seeding, AP rankings, these are different kinds of questions. Never in a million years would I fill out an AP ballot with Wisconsin above us, if I were a bookmaker in Vegas I probably wouldn't make Wisconsin a favorite on a neutral floor, but the resume is not "what have you done for me lately".
Yeah, reasonable people can disagree on this stuff.I ask this with genuine interest and am not playing devil's advocate: should those Marquette and N-UVa wins be discounted substantially because of Wisc's current slide or should we view those wins as the product of the same team (physically and psychologically) on the floor today?
Last season at this time of February our UCLA and Texas wins back in December gave me little comfort about our seeding and March prospects given the way we we'd just played at Penn State and Indiana. After the way we played at Ohio State a week later I felt those two wins might just as well have occurred when Ayo was in uniform two seasons earlier.
So, acknowledging that the resume indeed is not a "what have you done for me lately" document... shouldn't it be? Am curious what everyone thinks of that.
Its not just about having better wins. They have way worse losses than us.I still like their resume better than ours to be totally honest.
A bit inflammatory I guess, but Marquette, N-Virginia and @MSU are three wins better than our best.
Kinda goes back to my point from the other day, KenPom, seeding, AP rankings, these are different kinds of questions. Never in a million years would I fill out an AP ballot with Wisconsin above us, if I were a bookmaker in Vegas I probably wouldn't make Wisconsin a favorite on a neutral floor, but the resume is not "what have you done for me lately".
We don't have a loss worse than Michigan, Rutgers and Penn St.Not at all, Illinois and Wisconsin are basically equal at this point. They have the two best wins but they have 3 not great losses compared to Illinois with 1 (but Illinois has the worst loss). Their record is worse but their SOS is better. Illinois has better efficiency metrics. It's very close. Higher seed could easily go to who wins @ Wisconsin on 3/2.
@ Michigan and home against Maryland are fairly comparable.We don't have a loss worse than Michigan, Rutgers and Penn St.
This is where I start to get cranky about the quad system.@ Michigan and home against Maryland are fairly comparable.
@ Rutgers and @ Penn State are "less bad" losses on a team sheet. Those are high-end Quad 2 games.
No. Michigan is the worst team in the conference this year.@ Michigan and home against Maryland are fairly comparable.
I get it but we don't have a loss worse than any of those 3 teams based off of Net rankings which is what you said.@ Rutgers and @ Penn State are "less bad" losses on a team sheet. Those are high-end Quad 2 games.
that's just creeping me out...
I just want to thank Underwood for putting together teams that are going to make the tournament without us sweating on selection Sunday.
I love March Madness, and hated not having a dog in the fight year in and year out.
The top spot has to go to UNC for last year. From #1 to unranked in 2 weeksHas to be one of the quickest top 6 to out of the rankings in recent memory.
7 new teams in the Top 25........hmmmm........I have no idea what that means as far as upcoming tourney.......parity , for sure.......
Interestingly , bucky's fall from grace is delicious and heart warming........It really really is...........
Huh? The Illinois worst loss is at home against Maryland(Kenpom #52). Their other losses are road losses against Tenn(5), Purdue(3), NU(47), and MSU(15) and home loss to Marquette(14).Not at all, Illinois and Wisconsin are basically equal at this point. They have the two best wins but they have 3 not great losses compared to Illinois with 1 (but Illinois has the worst loss). Their record is worse but their SOS is better. Illinois has better efficiency metrics. It's very close. Higher seed could easily go to who wins @ Wisconsin on 3/2.
Neither team has a Q3 or Q4 loss, so neither team has a bad loss in the eyes of the committee.Huh? The Illinois worst loss is at home against Maryland(Kenpom #52). Their other losses are road losses against Tenn(5), Purdue(3), NU(47), and MSU(15) and home loss to Marquette(14).
Wisconsin lost at Providence(57), Arizona(4), Penn State(93), Nebraska(40), Michigan(104), Rutgers(83), Iowa(57) and home to Tennessee(5), and Purdue(3).
They don't have a bad home loss but I'd argue the Michigan and Penn State losses are worse then the Maryland loss even if it was at home(also minus TSJ). Realistically that 22 point loss to Rutgers is also probably worse then any Illini loss.
Home/Away makes a big difference in resumes.No. Michigan is the worst team in the conference this year.
I get it but we don't have a loss worse than any of those 3 teams based off of Net rankings which is what you said.
Not in this case. They lost to the worst team in the conference. I don't care if it was played on Mars. And as I and another has said their 3 worst losses are worse than our worst. What was originally stated is that we have the worst loss out of the two teams is incorrect.Home/Away makes a big difference in resumes.
They're all quad 2 losses.Not in this case. They lost to the worst team in the conference. I don't care if it was played on Mars. And as I and another has said their 3 worst losses are worse than our worst. What was originally stated is that we have the worst loss out of the two teams is incorrect.