Jump to content

Rickylovesweed

Full Members
  • Posts

    14673
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by Rickylovesweed

  1. It's still way too early but aggy was at #142 in RPI coming into this weekend. Only team in a worse position is Missouri.
  2. Now he should do the same test with UNC's Q2 wins. He only compares the Q1 wins/losses because he knows UNC's Q2 wins are dogshit. But yeah, "unlucky straw."
  3. Their schedule hasn't even been tough so that record is pretty deceiving too.
  4. Leaving Texas out wouldn't send that message. If you replace our losses to UCONN and Ohio State, in non-conference, with scrubs we would clearly be in the tournament. If you want to incentivize teams to schedule tough in non-conference reward quality wins and don't care about teams having a couple more wins playing a much softer SOS (like UNC).
  5. I mean this is trending from having the #1 preseason team in the nation to not even making a regional. He might be gone quick.
  6. Is Earley even going to get more than a year at aggy?
  7. Florida doesn't look like they have the pitching to slow down this lineup.
  8. Bases juiced and 1 out for Alabama in the top of the 9th in a 2-2 game with aggy.
  9. Would probably be bases loaded and nobody out if not for that base running decision. That decision even looks worse now.
  10. This Alabama and aggy game has been a shit show for the most part.
  11. Memphis survives. That helps.
  12. Yeah but Lunardi isn't a very good bracketologist. #118 based on past brackets. http://www.bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html
  13. The team I do not understand being seeded above us by Lunardi is San Diego State. They're #52 in NET, they only have 3 Q1 wins, they have a bad loss (Q3), and they're #47/#46 in predictive metrics the committee uses like Kenpom and T-Rank. San Diego State played a much softer SOS, is lower in NET, has fewer Q1 wins, has a bad loss that we do not have, is ranked lower in the predictive metrics, and so on. There is zero reason San Diego State should get in the tournament over us.
  14. Very unlikely it happens but weird shit happens in the tournament. Which is why you always want to make it. We would play a mediocre team in the first 4, then a 4 or 5 seed in the round of 64, then pray for an upset so we get an easy opponent in the round of 32. 1 first round upset and you're potentially only playing one top 30 caliber team in those 3 gmaes.
  15. Getting back to this, Q1 wins aren't "the end all" but definitely the most important factor in selection. At least in past years. When aggy missed the tournament in '22 the reasoning given by the NCAA selection chair was the 4-10 Q1 record for aggy. Specifically, they didn't win enough Q1 games. They were the 1st team out that year.
  16. Sweet 16 isn't happening because if we do make the tournament we're almost certainly going to have to play a first 4 game. So 3 games in a short amount of time assuming we even advance that far.
  17. I want a new coach too but I'll never be one to argue against us making the tournament especially in this context. Xavier and UNC have beaten absolutely nobody all year. It's insane anybody thinks they should get in over us.
  18. We won more quad 1 games this week than UNC and Xavier won all year but people want those teams in over Texas. It's actually laughable.
  19. yes, our resume is better than the teams on the bubble based on the metrics the committee says they prioritize. The bubble sucks. Do you think these teams are final 4 type teams? UNC is 1-12 against Q1 teams but you would rather them make the tournament with their 13 losses?
  20. Yup, teams with a bunch of losses make the tournament every year. Do you want a 11 loss Xavier or 13 loss North Carolina team to make it over us simply because they played in a much easier conference and beat absolutely nobody all year.
  21. Also of note, no team in the NET era with at least 7 Quad one wins has ever missed the tournament. We would be the first team in the NET era to miss the tournament with at least 7 quad one wins.
  22. This is why we will likely get in or should get in based on the metrics the committee prioritizes. https://www.ncaa.org/news/2025/3/10/media-center-debunking-ncaa-tournament-myths.aspx 1) Myth No. 3: Winning 20 games guarantees a tournament spot Reality: There is no magic number of wins that automatically secures an NCAA tournament bid. The committees evaluate the quality of a team's wins and losses rather than focusing solely on win totals. A team with 20 or more wins but a weak schedule or few Quadrant 1 victories may still be left out, while a team with fewer wins but a strong resume of quality victories could earn an at-large bid. Myth No. 10: A winning conference record ensures a bid Reality: Having a winning record in conference play does not automatically result in a tournament bid. The committees look at each team's complete body of work in their evaluations. A team with a 10-8 record in a weak conference may be left out, while a team with an 8-10 record with significant Quadrant 1 wins could still make the cut. It's really clear they prioritize Quad 1 wins. At least that's what they promote.
  23. Yeah, but that's why we should get in. The committee has never prioritized conference record. Now we should be punished for it? I won't be mad if we get left out because if you're on the bubble that's your fault but reality is our resume is clearly good enough to get in based on the objective data the committee says they prioritize.
  24. The committee has emphasized many times they don't prioritize conference record due to unbalanced schedules and disparities in strength of conferences. It's why a 6-18 aggy softball team made the postseason in '22.
×
×
  • Create New...