Blind Resume (pick 2 of 5)

Donate To GopherHole
S

SelectionSunday

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
24,714
Reaction score
4,870
Points
113
Face the Facts got it started a couple days ago, now let's try another bubble exercise.

Below are 5 teams generally considered to be hovering around the bubble. I won't list their RPI, but I will tell you that all five have RPIs between 49-55. With the information provided, if you were on the Selection Committee and there were only 2 at-large bids still available, which 2 teams would you select?

I'll identify the teams at 12:15, as well as reveal my own selections.

Team A
Record: 16-10
Overall SOS: 35
Nonconference SOS: 5
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 2-5
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 6-7
Road/Neutral Record: 5-9
Best 3 RPI Wins: vs. #23, @ #46, #51 (total = 120)
Bad Losses (101+ RPI): 3

Team B
Record: 16-8
Overall SOS: 50
Nonconference SOS: 111
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 3-5
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 6-7
Road/Neutral Record: 5-6
Best 3 RPI Wins: #2, @ #43, @ #46 (total = 91)
Bad Losses (101+ RPI): 1

Team C
Record: 15-9
Overall SOS: 24
Nonconference SOS: 37
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 3-5
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 5-7
Road/Neutral Record: 5-6
Best 3 RPI Wins: vs. #10, vs. #22, vs. #31 (total = 63)
Bad Losses (101+ RPI): 2

Team D
Record: 18-7
Overall SOS: 94
Nonconference SOS: 71
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 1-2
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 7-2
Road/Neutral Record: 5-6
Best 3 RPI Wins: #48, @ #60, #76 (total = 184)
Bad Losses (101+ RPI): 5

Team E
Record: 14-9
Overall SOS: 9
Nonconference SOS: 34
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 2-5
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 6-7
Road/Neutral Record: 4-6
Best 3 RPI Wins: #18, vs. #36, #62 (total = 116)
Bad Losses (101+ RPI): 2

Please note that for the "best 3 wins", "vs." indicates a neutral-site game, "@" indicates a road game, and only the # indicates a home game.
 

B,C, and E were the ones it came down to for me but I would go with C and E.
 

They are all crap, but will all get in!!




A doesn't have any great wins.

B has the least bad losses and a fair SOS.
Best wins aren't impressive. The one really good win could be a fluke.

C has several pretty good wins.

D is last. Several bad losses and no top 40 wins. Making hay on teams ranked 41-100 it appears.

E has a strong SOS, but I wonder how bad the record will get.

A, B, C, and E all have essentially the same Top 100 record.


I'll rank them...

C - Very good SOS and best top wins
B - Second best top wins, and still a pretty good SOS

E - Looks really good, but by end of year they need to have 2-3 more wins. 2-3 more losses is really all they can handle.


A - Similar to E, but more losses and weaker SOS.



D -Needs to play someone decent. This looks like Middle Tennessee State's resume last year.
 


The funniest thing in looking at exercises like this is that some people want to expand from 68 to 96. There are already some pretty weak teams getting in as-is. A field of 96 would be a traveshamockery from a quality standpoint.
 


I would say C and B due to their impressive best wins and minimal bad losses. E would be a close third.
 

dpodoll68 said:
The funniest thing in looking at exercises like this is that some people want to expand from 68 to 96. There are already some pretty weak teams getting in as-is. A field of 96 would be a traveshamockery from a quality standpoint.
Click to expand...

Yep. I rue the day they expand the field again, but I suspect it'll be up to 96 (or more) sooner rather than later.
 


SelectionSunday said:
If all five of these end up getting in, it would prove what we pretty much already know. ... it really is another weak bubble.
Click to expand...

What is surprising is how much the bubble seem to have changed when they went from 64-65 to the 68.

At 64 or 65, there was usually a pretty good case for a team that missed the bubble. Since the expansion to 68, teams have gotten in, and those who didn't make it are like "Yeh, we don't belong. We should have beat team A, B, C, or D."

Seems in recent years there's been a lot more press around teams like the Gophers last year where people were "That team is falling flat, they shouldn't be in." and they still get in with relative ease.
 



Face The Facts said:
What is surprising is how much the bubble seem to have changed when they went from 64-65 to the 68.

At 64 or 65, there was usually a pretty good case for a team that missed the bubble. Since the expansion to 68, teams have gotten in, and those who didn't make it are like "Yeh, we don't belong. We should have beat team A, B, C, or D."

Seems in recent years there's been a lot more press around teams like the Gophers last year where people were "That team is falling flat, they shouldn't be in." and they still get in with relative ease.
Click to expand...

Well said. Doesn't seem like going from 65 to 68 should make all that much difference, but it has. Wasn't a fan of expanding to 68, still not, but must admit I don't mind that the last 4 at-larges have to play their way into the main bracket. Certainly none of the at-larges that play in the "First Four" should ever complain about the extra game, but to their credit I don't think anyone has, nor should they. Seems like those teams realize they're lucky to be there, and a couple have even prospered (VCU, La Salle).
 

I clearly didn't make this exercise difficult enough. That's OK. Down the road it'll get tougher.

We only had 4 responses. I chose C and B, in that order. My "first team out" would have been A.

The Results
Team C (Georgetown) = 4 votes
Team B (Cal) = 3 votes
Team E (Tennessee) = 1 vote
Team A (BYU) = 0 votes
Team D (Saint Mary's) = 0 votes

Looks like the one thing we all agree upon was Saint Mary's doesn't belong. Interestingly, Saint Mary's and BYU go head to head for the 2nd time this weekend. BYU won the 1st meeting.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom