How good are *REALLY* these Wildcats?

[Sec.112]

Uninformed are you ...

We DO KNOW that in past recent tournaments very few AL bids have been awarded to B1G teams (2-3 in specific cases).

It's pretty obvious you don't know.

Only once in the last ten years has the B10 received as few as three at-large bids - and never two at-large bids.

"Once" is NEVER defined as a multiple measurement - "years" or "tournaments" in this case. THAT IS CERTAIN.

What a waste of server space you are. Rivals could double its revenue if they charged you for every obviously incorrect statement.

 

[NURoseBowl]

Respond to MikeWebb's offer to take you up on your bet, Felis.

Felis? Hello? Yeah, that's what we thought.
Time for you to stop talking.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

, a team that essentially hasn't beaten anyone with a conference winning record..., and has lost badly to its only ranked B1G opponent, while losing to a mediocre and 2 losing teams is NOWHERE NEAR T-caliber.

To get close they should take at least 2 of 3 against PU/Wiscy/Mary, while losing at most one from Indy/Mich/Illy and definitely beating Rutgers (while not harming their case at the B1G-T). That's going 5-2 or better (including 2-1 against the B1G "top-3") the rest of the way.

Fantastic win by the cats against, arguably, the best team in the B1G this year..on the road no less...This is a super GOOD win, however measured. Great way to respond after the Illy disappointment.

That said, no time to relax. This is only the 8th B1G win, with 6 games remaining. An 8-10 B1G record is still a mathematical possibility (although an improvable one).

In my book, to ENSURE an AL bid, the cats as minimum NEED one of Mary/Purdue, and at least two of Mich/Indy/Illy plus Rutgers, of course.

Do that (or better), and count on a bid. Don't, and it would at best depend on a lot of other things happening.

Regardless, congrats, again!

 

[mikewebb68]

Of

Fantastic win by the cats against, arguably, the best team in the B1G this year..on the road no less...This is a super GOOD win, however measured. Great way to respond after the Illy disappointment.

That said, no time to relax. This is only the 8th B1G win, with 6 games remaining. An 8-10 B1G record is still a mathematical possibility (although an improvable one).

In my book, to ENSURE an AL bid, the cats as minimum NEED one of Mary/Purdue, and at least two of Mich/Indy/Illy plus Rutgers, of course.

Do that (or better), and count on a bid. Don't, and it would at best depend on a lot of other things happening.

Regardless, congrats, again!

Are you seriously saying that we need 12 regular season wins to make the NCAAs?

 

[ColumbusCatFan1]

Of


Are you seriously saying that we need 12 regular season wins to make the NCAAs?

Yeah, 12 wins regular wins to clinch = utter nonsense. Wrassler level nonsense, in fact.

12-6 prior to DC probably gets NU a 6 seed, perhaps higher depending on how things play out.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

Of


Are you seriously saying that we need 12 regular season wins to make the NCAAs?

TO ENSURE a bid, we need what I described.
Drop 2 to Mary/Purdue and the Wiscy win would be the ONLY against a major conference team with a conf winning record, and the only against a ranked team. Not good at all, especially if competing "bubble" teams have more "quality" wins.
Drop 2 to or more to Mich/Indy/Illy and those would be 2+ more losses to mediocre-or-worse teams (on top of others in that category). Again, no good to compete in the bubble.
Lose to Rutgers and....let's not even go there.

 

[Katatonic]

^ Um, you do know that the field is projected to be pretty weak this season?

2 wins all but pretty much does it and 3 would be a lock (2 wins w/ one being over UMD would be a virtual lock).

 

[mikewebb68]

TO ENSURE a bid, we need what I described.
Drop 2 to Mary/Purdue and the Wiscy win would be the ONLY against a major conference team with a conf winning record, and the only against a ranked team. Not good at all, especially if competing "bubble" teams have more "quality" wins.
Drop 2 to or more to Mich/Indy/Illy and those would be 2+ more losses to mediocre-or-worse teams (on top of others in that category). Again, no good to compete in the bubble.
Lose to Rutgers and....let's not even go there.

We don't need 12 regular season conference wins to go dancing, Period.

 

[DaCat]

We don't need 12 regular season conference wins to go dancing, Period.

But just to be sure, we WILL get at least 12 wins before heading to D.C. Felix Sylvester must be miserable.

 

[Styre]

We don't need 12 regular season conference wins to go dancing, Period.

This. With as terrible as our schedule was last year we might have needed 12 regular season wins to go dancing. This year? 10 will be sufficient.

 

[hdhntr1]

All of Feli's posts taste like chicken.

Yes but Hannibal Lecter got to him first with a little Chianti and some fava beans.

 

[hdhntr1]

I hope I will be eating crow a few weeks from now. Lots of it.

However, a team that essentially hasn't beaten anyone with a conference winning record (except for IOA who is above .500 by a hair), and has lost badly to its only ranked B1G opponent, while losing to a mediocre and 2 losing teams is NOWHERE NEAR T-caliber.

To get close they should take at least 2 of 3 against PU/Wiscy/Mary, while losing at most one from Indy/Mich/Illy and definitely beating Rutgers (while not harming their case at the B1G-T). That's going 5-2 or better (including 2-1 against the B1G "top-3") the rest of the way.

I do NOT see it happening (especially the 1st condition) since we lost by 20+ the only time we faced the top 3, and looked very vulnerable in losing to Illy, Minny and a mediocre MSU. 2-5 or worse seems far more likely to me.

So now it takes12 victories in the BIG to make it?

 

[hdhntr1]

Of course the number of ranked teams a conference has does matter because it relates to THE STRENGTH of the conference, which in turns influences how many AT bids the committee allocates to that conference.

Care to guess how many B1G teams finished ranked in 2004, when ONLY THREE B1G teams made the T?

I'll help you.

ONLY TWO.

Do you think it was a coincidence that a conference with only 2 top-25 teams late in the season 'happened' to get ONLY TWO AL bids?

That year Michy finished with a 23-11 W/L record and still was left out. Why? Because the conference was perceived as weak. Other teams with similar records out of stronger (that year) conferences got the bids.

Same could happen this year. And keep in mind that Mary is #21, and Purdue was #23 recently when it played NU. Either or BOTH could drop out before selection Sunday!

If they do, it is likely because NU and MSU for example, move in.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

This. With as terrible as our schedule was last year we might have needed 12 regular season wins to go dancing. This year? 10 will be sufficient.

As explained in previous messages, the main weakness in the cats "resume" is a scarcity of so-called "quality wins".

Of course after the Wiscy victory (which hadn't yet happened at the start of this thread) the situation has significantly improved.

W/O Wiscy, the ONLY "quality" victory that the cats could claim was Dayton, which is leading a relatively modest conference, without a single top-25 team. Other "good sounding" wins (Texas comes to mind) had devalued significantly as the losers faded throughout the season.

Playing a reasonably tough schedule helps, provided you beat the tougher teams once in a while. If you schedule relatively tough teams but only manage to beat the mediocre-to-bad ones (as the cats were doing until recently) that may inflate your RPI and other ratings, but would NOT impress committee members much. Of course, other bubble teams may or may not be in the same boat.

What I have said is that if the cats, in addition to beating Rutgers, take at least 2 of Wiscy/PU/Mary and 2 of Mich/Indy/Illy they would both limit the bad-sounding losses while adding at least 2 legit quality wins.

That would ENSURE an AL-bid.

Getting the bid without the above would remain a possibility but would depend on others.

P.S. Don't complain: It seems the cats are heeding me!!! Wouldn't you prefer they do????

 

[FeralFelidae]

Other "good sounding" wins (Texas comes to mind) had devalued significantly as the losers faded throughout the season.

Wake Forest doesn't come to mind? Before Texas?

 

[FeliSilvestris]

If they do, it is likely because NU and MSU for example, move in.

Maybe, but not necessarily. These teams could hurt each other, enough to make a couple of them drop out of the top-25 without anyone rising enough to take their places. Teams like Mich, Indy, IOA and Illy are good enough to beat the top teams in a given night, yet they are unlikely to do well enough consistently over their remaining games to reach the top 25. And the top teams could beat each other, which may hurt all.

 

[hdhntr1]

Of course the number of ranked teams a conference has does matter because it relates to THE STRENGTH of the conference, which in turns influences how many AT bids the committee allocates to that conference.

Care to guess how many B1G teams finished ranked in 2004, when ONLY THREE B1G teams made the T?

I'll help you.

ONLY TWO.

Do you think it was a coincidence that a conference with only 2 top-25 teams late in the season 'happened' to get ONLY TWO AL bids?

That year Michy finished with a 23-11 W/L record and still was left out. Why? Because the conference was perceived as weak. Other teams with similar records out of stronger (that year) conferences got the bids.

Same could happen this year. And keep in mind that Mary is #21, and Purdue was #23 recently when it played NU. Either or BOTH could drop out before selection Sunday!

You know that 23-11 Michigan team got to 23 by winning the NIT right? That is 5 of those wins. They were 8-8 in conference which gave them a 17-9 record going into BTT and went 1-1 in BTT. THere was only one team with a winning record in conference that did not go to NCAA and that was IA who lost in their first round BTT game. And while they were 9-7 in conference, they did not exactly do well OOC. So Mich had a 18-10 record coming out of the BTT. That was also the year that NU had an 8-8 record and went 1-1 in BTT but had an overall losing record so went nowhere. Yes the BIG was weaker that season but teams but it is not like winning in the BIG did not get you in. Just that an 8-8 record wouldn't do the job.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

Wake Forest doesn't come to mind? Before Texas?

Mentioned them above. Last I checked WF was 5-7 incon and only 2-games over .500 over all, with upcoming probable losses to Lou and Duke, and a tough game at VT. Hard to argue beating them is a quality win (although obviously better than losing to them!)

 

[Walker Fan]

The ACC is toughest conference in the nation. The ACC will have 9 or maybe 10 teams make the tourney that makes Wake Forest have a very tough schedule and that is why their RPI is still 31 even with a 5-7 conference record. Dayton is NU's best victory prior to last night. Dayton is 19-5 with a RPI of 28 which means they will be in the tourney. And yes, everyone knows that if NU loses every game on the schedule the rest of the way and in the BTT, they will not make the tourney (deep thoughts by FS) but I do not believe that will happen if you have watched this team this year. Too bad you have and still have no clue what you are watching. BTW, next year NU will be better with 4-star players returning in Aaron Falzon and Rapolas Ivaunaskas with a talented freshmen in Anthony Gaines coming abroad and probably two additional talented players which will be NU's most talented team possibly ever but 100% more talented than any team in the BC era. But if they lose all 31 of their games they will not make the tourney following your ridiculous reasoning.

 

[hdhntr1]

Apply your own advice to yourself.
There are no "official" metrics that the committee must follow in order to allocate the AL bids. Each committee member has full sovereignty. They are people like us, and of course can read rankings (both human and computerized), look at W/L records, Look at SoS, how certain team did against certain other(s), and so on.

If you believe that it is a coincidence that the year in which the B1G only had 2 top-25 teams is the same one in which the B1G only got 2 AL bids (leaving out a 23-11 Michigan team, among others) go ahead and believe it. It's your damn problem.

Heck, go ahead and also believe that it was also a coincidence that in 2008 , when the B1G had only THREE top-25 teams most of the season, the B1G also got only THREE AL bids (which left out 24-13 OSU, among others). It's your damn business.

And only 5 teams had winning BIG records that year with the 5th being OSU who lost in first round. but they also won the NIT so 5 of their wins were post BIG season. So they had 5 OOC losses in the preseason. Everyone else had losing BIG records. So again easy enough to figure out why.

 

[hdhntr1]

Nobody knows how many bids the B1G will get. What we DO know is that as of today the B1G only has 3 teams in the top 25, and only ONE in the top 15. We further know that in 2004 the B1G got only TWO AL bids (which left 23-11 Mich out), and 'coincidentally' it had ONLY TWO ranked teams in the last weeks of the season.
If the B1G enters selection Sunday with 3 or fewer top-25 teams, will history repeat itself (sort of)? We shall know in due time.

At this point it looks like at least 6 and probably 7.

 

[hdhntr1]

You're such a doofus. The BIG is not getting 3 bids, They are getting 7, minimum. I would be willing to wager you a board ban on it (loser does not post on the Basketball board for one year)

Well 6 for sure and likely 7

 

[hdhntr1]

Fantastic win by the cats against, arguably, the best team in the B1G this year..on the road no less...This is a super GOOD win, however measured. Great way to respond after the Illy disappointment.

That said, no time to relax. This is only the 8th B1G win, with 6 games remaining. An 8-10 B1G record is still a mathematical possibility (although an improvable one).

In my book, to ENSURE an AL bid, the cats as minimum NEED one of Mary/Purdue, and at least two of Mich/Indy/Illy plus Rutgers, of course.

Do that (or better), and count on a bid. Don't, and it would at best depend on a lot of other things happening.

Regardless, congrats, again!

So now it is down to 11 required from 12

 

[hdhntr1]

This. With as terrible as our schedule was last year we might have needed 12 regular season wins to go dancing. This year? 10 will be sufficient.

Last year, would not have needed 12. 11 for sure and 10 good probablility

 

[FeliSilvestris]

Last year, would not have needed 12. 11 for sure and 10 good probablility

You and others keep on making the same VERY OBVIOUS mistake:
to assume that the committee views all B1G victories alike.

The committee sure as hell knows that as in most major conferences in a given season there are weak, mediocre, and strong teams.

Hence, talking about number of B1G wins without specifying the "quality" of the wins is misguided.

Can a team with 11, even 12 B1G wins fail to get an AL bid?

OF COURSE YES.

Just imagine 8 of the 11 (or 12) wins were against the 4 worse teams in the league (which were really weak that year) and the remaining 3-4 wins were against 3 mediocre (also relatively weak) teams. Suppose also that this team has an inflated non-con W/L record thanks to playing a bunch of "cup cakes". Further suppose that team also got routed a few times by some of the better teams it played in/out the conf.

Of course a team like that not only may but SHOULD be left out. Even with a (12-6, 23-8) record or something like that.

Evidently it isn't likely that such a thing happens often (among other reasons, it is hard to play all the bottom teams twice in the same season). But is sure a shell CAN happen.

Bottom line: All victories (in/out of conf) are not created igual. You need to look at the specific teams involved.

 

[FeralFelidae]

Hence, talking about number of B1G wins without specifying the "quality" of the wins is misguided.

Northwestern victories over Penn State, Nebraska, Ohio State, and Indiana are RPI top-100 wins, which are not cupcakes and are considered as quality wins by the NCAA committee. Also, none of Northwestern's losses would be considered a bad loss by the committee.

 

[SimpsonElmwood]

Cats are also 5-2 on the road in the B1G. But everyone knows that's super easy to do!

 

[NJCat]

Cats are also 5-2 on the road in the B1G. But everyone knows that's super easy to do!

Good thing because the road warrior Cats play 31 games away from Evanston next season!

 

[hdhntr1]

You and others keep on making the same VERY OBVIOUS mistake:
to assume that the committee views all B1G victories alike.

The committee sure as hell knows that as in most major conferences in a given season there are weak, mediocre, and strong teams.

Hence, talking about number of B1G wins without specifying the "quality" of the wins is misguided.

Can a team with 11, even 12 B1G wins fail to get an AL bid?

OF COURSE YES.

Just imagine 8 of the 11 (or 12) wins were against the 4 worse teams in the league (which were really weak that year) and the remaining 3-4 wins were against 3 mediocre (also relatively weak) teams. Suppose also that this team has an inflated non-con W/L record thanks to playing a bunch of "cup cakes". Further suppose that team also got routed a few times by some of the better teams it played in/out the conf.

Of course a team like that not only may but SHOULD be left out. Even with a (12-6, 23-8) record or something like that.

Evidently it isn't likely that such a thing happens often (among other reasons, it is hard to play all the bottom teams twice in the same season). But is sure a shell CAN happen.

Bottom line: All victories (in/out of conf) are not created igual. You need to look at the specific teams involved.

Even in your worst case scenario years of 2004 and 2008, the equivalent of a 11-7 teams (4 games over 500) has never kept out by their record. there was a 9-7 IA team in 2004 and a 10-8 OSU team in 2008 but both had poor OOC records and lost in the first round of BTT. The Mich team you referred to only had an 8-8 record in the BIG and did not get near 20 wins. The magic number has generally been a winning record in the BIG and at least 20 wins overall would get you in. I am not saying they do not look at who you beat but even so, don't recall an 11-7 record being kept out (since they went to 64 or more) And we are already past your possibility no wins against the upper eschelon sp teams with the win over WI. And if if you do take care of business it also means no bad losses.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

Northwestern victories over Penn State, Nebraska, Ohio State, and Indiana are RPI top-100 wins, which are not cupcakes and are considered as quality wins by the NCAA committee. Also, none of Northwestern's losses would be considered a bad loss by the committee.

Since you are a member of the committee we must take it as a given, right?
Since the T only includes about 50 "worthy" teams (once you remove the AQ from "trashy" conferences), I'd bet "the other" committee members do NOT agree with your definition of quality win.

Whatever, I see a difference between beating a team like Wisc (at or near the top of a top conference) and beating teams in one such conference that are near or below .500. Maybe it's only me.

YOU BELIEVE WHATEVER THE F YOU WANT.

Now, you're happy, right?

 

[Styre]

Last year, would not have needed 12. 11 for sure and 10 good probablility

11 maybe, 10 no way. (Assuming no big runs in the conference tournament.) The bottom of the conference was terrible last year, and multiple games against Rutgers, Minnesota, and Illinois were schedule killers. Also, our OOC schedule was a garbage fire, with the best win over a mediocre Florida State team that bowed out early in the NIT and a number of teams that were RPI 300+. Remember, we won 20 games and didn't even sniff the NIT. Three more Big Ten wins would not have jumped us over the entire NIT field and into the NCAAs.

As for this year: while the OP is correct to say that the committee looks at the quality of conference wins, what he's overlooking is that the bottom of the conference is much better this year than last. Even Rutgers is RPI 150 instead of being in the mid-200s like last year. So many of the wins over the bottom feeders actually look respectable to the committee. Also, our OOC schedule was much better than last year's, even if it arguably still had too many 300+ teams. Add to that a statement win at Wisconsin and it's hard to see our resume as anything other than tournament-worthy, assuming we don't lose out or anything like that.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

don't recall an 11-7 record being kept out (since they went to 64 or more) And we are already past your possibility no wins against the upper eschelon sp teams with the win over WI. And if if you do take care of business it also means no bad losses.

Read what I wrote again.

I said, it is NOT OFTEN that a team wins 12 games by beating the 4 worst teams twice each and a few mediocre ones. You just don't have that many games against the weakest teams in the same season.

IF IT DID HAPPEN THAT TEAM MAY AND SHOULD BE LEFT OUT.

See previous post for further detail.

 

[PZAZ]

Feli proves himself again with his predictions about how bad the Cats are. Guess no one told them they couldn't be Wisconsin!

 

[D_C_B]

Read what I wrote again.

Except by accident, why in the name of all things Holy would someone read anything you wrote once, let alone twice?

 

[mikewebb68]

You and others keep on making the same VERY OBVIOUS mistake:
to assume that the committee views all B1G victories alike.

The committee sure as hell knows that as in most major conferences in a given season there are weak, mediocre, and strong teams.

Hence, talking about number of B1G wins without specifying the "quality" of the wins is misguided.

Can a team with 11, even 12 B1G wins fail to get an AL bid?

OF COURSE YES.

Just imagine 8 of the 11 (or 12) wins were against the 4 worse teams in the league (which were really weak that year) and the remaining 3-4 wins were against 3 mediocre (also relatively weak) teams. Suppose also that this team has an inflated non-con W/L record thanks to playing a bunch of "cup cakes". Further suppose that team also got routed a few times by some of the better teams it played in/out the conf.

Of course a team like that not only may but SHOULD be left out. Even with a (12-6, 23-8) record or something like that.

Evidently it isn't likely that such a thing happens often (among other reasons, it is hard to play all the bottom teams twice in the same season). But is sure a shell CAN happen.

Bottom line: All victories (in/out of conf) are not created igual. You need to look at the specific teams involved.

Yeah, everybody on this board is wrong and the almighty Feli is correct. Ever consider the possibility that, when everyone disagrees with you, maybe, just maybe, YOU are the one who is wrong?

 

[Mr Wickerpark]

First, congrats to players and coaches on a solid 7-4 B1G start. Great to be in a position to speculate about making the NCAA T this late in the season. The cats are obviously a good team.

That said, we should REALISTICALLY evaluate our performance, in order to determine how good we REALLY are versus the competition, and our chances of making the NCAA T.

What have we ACTUALLY accomplished?

Here it is:

Of our 7 B1G victories, over half, 4 to be exact, have come against Rutgers, Nebby and PSU. These 3 are almost certainly among the 4 weakest B1G programs considering recent history (b4 and after they joined the conference). Neither is particularly horrendous this year, nor is having a "break out" season. Basically playing at the level of their reputation, roughly, which isn't much.

Another was a 2-pt V in Columbus. In most seasons that would be a great resume-building win. NOT this season, since OSU is only 4-7, about the same as PSU and Nebby, and worth about the same as beating those 2 (see above).

There is also a comfortable win vs another (historical) big-name school: Indy. Unfortunately they are just below .500 in the B1G, and hence not much better than the previously mentioned team.

That leaves an impressive rout of IOA, a solid program which on occasions challenges the conference elite. This is our ONLY win over a team with a winning conf record. But IOA is just half-a-game over .500 and not much better that others mentioned.

THOSE ARE ALL OUR B1G WINS. All over teams with losing B1G records, except for IOA which is only 1/2-game over .500!

Along the way, we have managed to lose to Illy (4-8), Minny (4-6) and MSU (6-5).
Our other loss was a rout by #16 8-3 Purdue. Nothing shameful, but that was our only game against this years conference elite, which also includes #7 Wiscy and #21 Mary.

I am sorry but the above is NOT the resume of even a bubble team!!

We have 7 games left, and unfortunately 3 of them are against the conference elite (see above). While the cats could conceivable win all 3, most would expect them to go 0-3. Additionally, there are tough road games at Illy and Indy. NU should be happy if it steals one of these 2. NU's best shots are at home against Mich (which is a bit weaker than normal, but still near .500), and against Rutgers (likely the only game in which the cats will be clear favorites).

Conclusion: In all probability, the cats will add at most a couple of wins the rest of the way. They will NOT be in the bubble, but almost surely make the NIT.

While i cant dispute your current assessment, i dont think your conclusion is reasonable but in fact mathematically fakenews.
For instance, the cats are 5-3 on the road so i think they have better than avg chances splitting indy/ill.
Michigan hasnt won one single game on the road i think so we should be expected to win that along with Rutgers.
Thats 3 expected wins but we also know that we play very good against maryland. And we get purdue at home where we only lost 2 games all year (minny, illinois).
Mathematically, we could say the over/under is 4 more wins.
Your reasoning isnt supported with math.
Vegas you arent.

 

[julescat]

we also know that we play very good against maryland

except for that January 2 game at Welsh-Ryan last year.. very ugly.

 

[NJCat]

Michigan hasnt won one single game on the road i think so we should be expected to win that along with Rutgers.
.

Tom Crean wishes you were correct. UM beat IU Sunday at Assembly Hall causing a Crean melt-down.

 

[Mr Wickerpark]

Read what I wrote again.

I said, it is NOT OFTEN that a team wins 12 games by beating the 4 worst teams twice each and a few mediocre ones. You just don't have that many games against the weakest teams in the same season.

IF IT DID HAPPEN THAT TEAM MAY AND SHOULD BE LEFT OUT.

See previous post for further detail.

Honestly, many really dont know how to read on here. Your post actually does have merit. 12 wins does ensure. 11 wins isnt an automatic bid and many of us will be watching the selection show. 10 wins puts us in the nit or on the bubble but most likely nit unless we go deep in the BTT.
Finishing the season 3-6 is too risky.

Whatever the case, i totally disagree with LouV as he claims we are already in.
That said, we play some awful teams so unless we have a complete fail i think we split our last 6, at minimum. Im guessing we win 4.

 

[willycat]

Good thing because the road warrior Cats play 31 games away from Evanston next season!

They also played all "road games" the year they played at DePaul's Alumni Hall and went to the NIT. If the "loyal" NU fans show up in Rosemont the games will seem like they are at W-R. The students will be bused in, along with the band, cheerleaders and of course Willie.