2023-2024 College Basketball Other Games Thread

Donate To GopherHole

Gophers7633 said:
I asked you who you thought was good. Your response was whoever the AP thinks is good. Do you not understand what you're doing? You've been preaching people to use their own brains, but can't even do it yourself?
Click to expand...
The AP uses human brains. And I generally agree with their rankings.

Just like I generally agreed when humans picked the NCAA teams.

I used my brain and said when I disagreed on a few teams here & there. But I'm not going to make a huge list of it now.
 


EasyThere Pilgrim said:
Do I really have to spoon-feed my logic to you?

Of course there are a few scenarios where conference tournament wins will help you. But it's largely pointless or even counter-productive.
Click to expand...
If Tennessee wins their conference tournament (or Arizona), they're a 1 seed over UNC. That's why conference tournaments matter. Seeding is important, even though I admit we're seeing way more parity currently than we ever have before.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
No one should be a slave to a computer index but computer indexes are better than humans for:

1) arranging general rankings among a very large group of objects around objective criteria;

2) being able to provide general consensus.

As long as the criteria on those indexes are transparent, understandable, and consistent people can adjust to them.
Click to expand...
I highly disagree.

At least when ranking college basketball teams.
 


Ski-U-Ham said:
If Tennessee wins their conference tournament (or Arizona), they're a 1 seed over UNC. That's why conference tournaments matter. Seeding is important, even though I admit we're seeing way more parity currently than we ever have before.
Click to expand...
I'd rather be a well rested 2-seed than a tired banged-up emotionally-spent 1-seed.

At least the B1G gives a double-bye now...so it's a little better than it used to be.
 

EasyThere Pilgrim said:
Do I really have to spoon-feed my logic to you?

Of course there are a few scenarios where conference tournament wins will help you. But it's largely pointless or even counter-productive.
Click to expand...

When your ONLY path to making the tournament is the AQ(the Gophers), the games aren't meaningless. We just saw FIVE bid stealers.

Also, your logic on many things is dumb, just FYI.
 


Gophers7633 said:
You're not following along. That dude has been preaching about using your own brain to decide who was good and not the computers. I ask him who he thinks is good and he says, well, whoever the AP thinks is good. That makes no sense.

Also, a win in November means just as much as a win in February, as it should. Same with a loss.
Click to expand...
Your last graph is where I disagree. In November a lot of teams are finding out who of their new players can actually play. Most teams now have portal players who are new. For that reason, I think conference wins and how the team plays in February or March are more indicative of the strength of the team at tournament time.

I understand the selection process, just don't agree with it.
 



TwistingMyMelon said:
You're kidding right? The problem isn't access. The problem is the number of hours in the day and the competition from eating, sleeping, working, and other necessary and normal human activities.
Click to expand...
As I said, they can watch as little or as much as they choose. Meaning, they can sleep and eat full time for months and look at a spread sheet this morning and announce the pairings.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
No one should be a slave to a computer index but computer indexes are better than humans for:

1) arranging general rankings among a very large group of objects around objective criteria;

2) being able to provide general consensus.

As long as the criteria on those indexes are transparent, understandable, and consistent people can adjust to them.
Click to expand...
I keep hearing people talk about the computer indexes and rankings like they are created by some form of generative AI. They are simply formulas that calculate inputs deemed important by HUMANS.

I've never seen this argument ever made until this year and it's by a small group of CBJ apologists. It's the same group that thought Betts was so dominant he ruined Battle last year. They thought Wilson was a great signing because of "practice".

This is like placing an order on DoorDash and thinking your iPhone is acting like a chef.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
I keep hearing people talk about the computer indexes and rankings like they are created by some form of generative AI. They are simply formulas that calculate inputs deemed important by HUMANS.

I've never seen this argument ever made until this year and it's by a small group of CBJ apologists. It's the same group that thought Betts was so dominant he ruined Battle last year. They thought Wilson was a great signing because of "practice".

This is like placing an order on DoorDash and thinking your iPhone is acting like a chef.
Click to expand...
Ha! C'mon man, that was a group of one.
 





Gophers7633 said:
When your ONLY path to making the tournament is the AQ(the Gophers), the games aren't meaningless. We just saw FIVE bid stealers.

Also, your logic on many things is dumb, just FYI.
Click to expand...
Logic?? You believe anything you're told by an 'official' looking person on the television. You'd believe in space-aliens if they said they found one.
 
Last edited:

Bob_Loblaw said:
I keep hearing people talk about the computer indexes and rankings like they are created by some form of generative AI. They are simply formulas that calculate inputs deemed important by HUMANS.

I've never seen this argument ever made until this year and it's by a small group of CBJ apologists. It's the same group that thought Betts was so dominant he ruined Battle last year. They thought Wilson was a great signing because of "practice".

This is like placing an order on DoorDash and thinking your iPhone is acting like a chef.
Click to expand...
This is coming from a guy who melted-down when we lost legacy-recruit-from-NBA-player Trevor Winter.

You've never seen anyone say that humans can process information better than computers?? This is seriously THE FIRST TIME I've ever seen people say that computers can process info better than humans...like to select NCAA teams. Things that would have been considered totally absurd are now considered normal. All it takes is a little conditioning.
 

EasyThere Pilgrim said:
This is coming from a guy who melted-down when we lost legacy-recruit-from-NBA-player Trevor Winter.

You've never seen anyone say that humans can process information better than computers?? This is seriously THE FIRST TIME I've ever seen people say that computers can process info better than humans...like to select NCAA teams. Things that would have been considered totally absurd are now considered normal. All it takes is a little conditioning.
Click to expand...
No, I didn't. Again, would you like for me to bump the thread?

Your second paragraph is just pure nonsense. I've never seen a group of people discuss people being "slaves" to a tool. I have no idea what point you're making in the bold.

You're becoming unhinged.
 

Battle with a very good game last night in their win over Cornell. Big 3 pointer to give them the lead with about 45 seconds left.
17 points, 8 rebounds, 5 assists, 39 minutes.
 







Seton Hall losing to St. Joseph's in the second half. The vaunted Big East could potentially be 0-4 in the postseason.....with three of those teams losing on their home courts.

I'm fading BE on my brackets outside of UConn.
 

The Big Least is about to fall to 0-4 in the NIT of Seton Hall doesn't come back...
 





You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom