 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
I don't think that should been considered a "win and get it" game though, seems to me they already did enough. If the committee wanted to get NC State in, they should have tossed BYU, especially with one of their best players (if not THE best) out for the season.Originally Posted by GoBlue77
BUT SMU should have gotten in over BYU.
Could it have had anything to do with them being incompetent when they aren't playing at home?
That was their biggest knock but then win at Connecticut should have put an end to it.
Team should have met alone how embarrassing when youre not a lock to get in.
I could agree in theory due to the injury, but the committee can't simulate how the team will play in the future without him. By the schedule, etc. - BYU did what SMU needs to do in the future if they want to get in. They scheduled great out of conference. Iowa State. UMASS. Texas. Stanford. Weber State. Oregon. Utah. Only one of those was a home game too. The media here in DFW of course are clamoring for SMU to have gotten in. Excuses ranging from them not being able to schedule tougher non-conference because of the construction at Moudy Coliseum early in the season that had SMU playing in a high school gym ... I actually have some respect for Larry Brown after this because he's not made a big deal out of the exclusion. He said it's their own fault for how they played down the stretch. Next year they shouldn't have any excuses because they have their refurbished gym to play in from day one of the season. Up to Brown to schedule tougher because their conference isn't likely to get better RPI wise since Louisville is leaving.
what about iowa too . how many they lose down the stretch
They seemed like locks to get in, every site I looked at had their At-Large odds at over 90%. Forgetting SOS, they were ranked in the Top 40 on a LOT of reputable power ratings, usually in the low 30s actually. They would be favored over some at-larges that got in on neutral courts. I know I put everything in a betting perspective and the committee does not, but just sayin'.
They wont come close to winning the NIT. BOOK IT!
They may be so demoralized they lose the first game.
BYU didn't just get........they are seeded higher then at-larges Tennessee, Iowa, Nebraska, Dayton, NC State and Xavier. Not quite sure how this happened?
and BYUs best all around player tore his acl last game...Weird seeding to say the least
RPI + Strength of Schedule, pretty easy to see what the committee values. There aren't that many cases where you will look at a team and think totally WTF are they doing in the tournament. I'd say one of those every 2-3 years at worst. Generally, the committee does a pretty reasonable job.
RPI - 30, SOS -25.
Iowa had much lower RPI/SOS, both in the 60s. Tennessee had a 42 RPI and a slightly better SOS at 22, so I see the case there - but the SEC had a pretty weak conference RPI, not that it was worse than the West Coast ... but I think in years past, Tennessee would have gotten a better boost. This year, overall the SEC was down. Iowa was relatively weak out of conference with no marquee road wins/scheduled most of their tougher teams I believe at home and finished very poorly.
Last edited by EaglesPhan36; 03-17-14 at 11:52 AM.
What I never quite understood is why SOS is so highly valued, when you lose those games? Sure anyone can step up and play a tough schedule, but unless you win a chunk of them, it really shouldn't be so highly valued. They beat Stanford and Texas out of conference....ok 2 solid wins, the Stanford game was in early November. Lost to Iowa St, Wichita, UMass, Utah and Oregon....some close losses, but the committee has told us time and time again, close losses don't mean anything. So 2-5 of those games...nothing special. On top of that, they lost in conference to Pepperdine, Loyola Marymount and Portland....all inexcuseable.....all outside of the top 150. Was there a BYU alum or staff member on the committee? Does anyone know?
I think SOS should matter. You aren't going to take a 25-5 team from an average conference if they played a bunch of teams with rpi in the 100s and 200s or 300s OOC. Just look at some of the teams SMU played OOC and their rpi. Five teams 200 or much higher. BYU had one cream puff OOC and scheduled six OOC inside the top 50.
You have to at least try to schedule tougher. SMU did no such thing. Their OOC had ONE team scheduled inside the Top 100. That is never gonna get you in if you're not in s top rpi confetence. SMU also had terrible losses to USF and Temple in conference.
Last edited by EaglesPhan36; 03-17-14 at 12:59 PM.
You'll get no argument from me. I thought BYU was a bunk choice too.
Guys who are as dirty as Larry Brown always expect to get what they want. I'm actually quite shocked SMU is the team that got left out. I wouldn't be the least bit shocked if the selection committee chair (Wake Forest's AD) had something major to do with it.
I agree Reg, SOS shouldnt mean nothing if you dont win those games and I dont see how it could mean anything if youre losing the games.
I think the committee goes for competitive balance when they look at SOS in that they are looking for teams that are going to be able to compete with the best.
I'm not sure how you can argue against it not meaning anything. Are you gonna take an Ivy League team if they go 29-3 the majority of their wins against RPI teams in the 100s, 200s and 300s against a team that schedules well OOC and challenges themselves, but might wind up 20-10?
I'm not saying SMU is that because they obviously are in a stronger conference than the Ivy League or something smaller, but be realistic that it's been this way for a long, long time and teams that don't make it because of shitty OOC SOS should never whine about it because they know the basic criteria.
That strength of schedule argument is obviously beyond stupid in my opinion. That SOS is why Louisville is a 4 seed. Which is just a complete joke. Same thing with new mexico. They got a 7 seed, everyone would agree they are way better than a 7 seed. There is no way they are not better than 3 or 4 of the at large teams that made it. Byu for one is gonna get ran. Iowa really hasnt beaten anyone and has lost like 7 of there last 8. You can throw umass in there with it. No way they should be a 6 seed either.
UMASS had a solid OOC showing. Wins against Providence, Nebraska, Clemson, BYU, LSU, and BC. AND THEY BEAT NEW MEXICO. Maybe that's why New Mexico was seeded one spot behind UMASS? Plus, they gave New Mexico a 3 seed last year and they proceeded to lose to 14th seeded Harvard. Could be that had something to do with it. Losing to New Mexico State probably didn't help either.
You guys who think SOS is bullshit do realize that SOS really trumps everything in the conversation ... if you look at how RPI is calculated, 75% comes from the SOS basically because 50% of RPI is opponent's win% and 25% is win percentage of opponent's opponents.
New Mexico is a bit of an oddity overall. They have a great RPI, but they play in a weak sauce conference that had a piss poor RPI overall. And they really had nothing in the way of good road wins until they beat SD State in the neutral venue in Vegas. NM really might have been a double digit seed until that win.
SOS still seems flawed to me. Smu coulda scheduled a bunch of good ooc opponents and gotten whooped in pretty much everyone of them. But just cause they played them there rpi would have been good. Thus giving them a better chance to make the end of season tourney. I just dont think teams necessarily should be rewarded for scheduling hard teams if they dont go out and win a fair share of them. Just another idea out there too is there is only so many preseason games to go around. Some teams might wanna face good ooc opponents but just dont't have that opportunity too.
I don't even follow NCAA Basketball at all. I had no idea Larry Brown's team didn't get in until I read this thread.
UNC alums are self-entitled assholes. Now you know.
It's a sticky situation, but it's also one the committee has abided by for years. SMU honestly probably could have gotten in if they had scheduled just medium tough teams OOC. Their problem was they had a lot of very high RPI teams OOC that basically didn't count for anything when they won. When half of your OOC is RPI over 200 and only two of your 12 OOC is RPI under 100, you're not gonna get much help. Again you can get away with that if you're in the ACC or Big Ten where your conference is very high in RPI, but the AAC just did not get much cred RPI wise this year and that hurt them overall.
Not really. Ask Virginia Tech.
SBR
Poster of
Year
2011
Reply With Quote
