I went to those home games in Alumni Hall. Great atmosphere, and always stopped for gyros near the Loyola campus.
How good are *REALLY* these Wildcats?
- Thread starter FeliSilvestris
- Start date
I went to those home games in Alumni Hall. Great atmosphere, and always stopped for gyros near the Loyola campus.
Carmody sucks. I'm glad he is no longer our coach, as is pretty much everyone who cares about NU hoops. I wish we wouldn't have to talk about him any more. As far as I am concerned, NU hoops never existed before Chris Collins.
In the scenario you describe as the path to a guaranteed at-large bid, there is a non-zero chance the 'Cats would simply win the B1G, depending on how Wisconsin closed the season. At worst they'd finish in the top 3 of the B1G with 23 wins. There is simply no precedent for a 23 win (including 12 league wins) power conference team being left out, so your point isn't particularly earth-shattering. Frankly if they win 4 of their last six it is more likely they are a top 5 seed than they are an NIT team.
I do not disagree that the committee does look at the strength of the conference. But last year was an anomaly in that the bottom 4 teams had a total of only 14 wins for the whole season (bottom 2 only 3) . They already have more than that (bottom 2 have 6). True the conference does not have the elite teams but it is much, much stronger at the bottom Last year OSU was kept out with an 11-7 record (first time) but they also had lost a ton of games OOC and first game in BTT and so went to NIT. Even so conference got 7 bids including MI. Last year there were some inflated records because of the extreme weakness at the bottom of the conference, but that weakness is gone. Last year 8 of the teams in the conference had at least 10 wins (7 at least 11 and 6 at least 12) . And the bottom 5 had 21 wins. The bottom 5 already has 20. This year, only 5 teams are in position to win 10 games by playing 0.500 ball or less. While 6 other teams have the potential of getting to 10 wins, the rest have to go at least 4-2 (MN, MI) 4-1 (Ped State, IA) or 5-0( IN, OSU) to get to that level. So without the easy victories at the bottom that were available last year, how many are going to get to the magic 10 wins? I would guess it isn't going to be 8, And for sure, wont have 7 teams with 11 or 6 with 12. So as long as the BIG remains a 6-7 bid conference it is probable that 10-8 gets a team in.
He doesn't suck but he is not a complete coach. Fine Xs and Os but didn't want to recruit and that is a huge part of the game. He did good things here but it was time to move on and we are in a better place.
Most of us of this board knows how to read a post. Most are also educated enough on the topic at hand to see through Feli's nonsense.
Lou knows the 'Cats aren't in with 8 wins, as does any poster that follows the selection process of the NCAA tournament. You need to read between the lines here.
Beating Wisconsin was likely the tipping point - a signature win (on the road no less) was the missing piece for an already tournament caliber resume. History shows that since the NCAAs expanded to 68, the bubble has naturally been weaker (making all of Feli's nonsense about 2004 completely irrelevant). Helping NU's cause this season is a particularly thin crop of mid/low majors capable of landing an "at large" bid.
Based on what we've seen this season (and barring additional injuries), the odds of NU choking away the rest of the season (1-6, 2-5) are highly unlikely.
That's what Lou, or anyone else, means when they say "we're in".
Last edited:
Sorry but I felt he was an A to B guy and it was time for the B to C guy. Had no problem with him being replaced. And we ended up with the better end of the deal.
Come on, there are some good NIT teams worth remembering, including one that made the quarterfinals, and some great moments like beating MSU at their own place that are worth remembering. John Shurna is worth remembering.
Yes, this exactly. Frankly I don't really get why people seem to prefer arguing and trading posts with a madman here (or rehashing BC debate yet again??) over the other threads which are actually talking about basketball or the conference or upcoming matchups in a reasonable manner. But to each their own...
Big game tomorrow, Go Cats!
Honestly think you're speaking for the majority of us here, Hdhntr. We acknowledge and respect what he did here, yet recognize that we'd gotten about as far as we were going to go on his watch. Don't think anybody would second-guess the decision to hire CC.
I have never seen an NU team play like this. They're great around the rim, both offensively and defensively. I have never seen that from an NU team. They're quick leapers, and they're better vertically than any NU team I've ever seen. They're easily the best rebounding team I've ever seen. Watch their team rebounding techniques! They move laterally better than any NU team I've ever seen. Offensively and defensive. With the ball. Away from the ball. And it's not all big guys. A huge part of the reason we're so good around the rim is the way the guards penetrate, move, fake and dish in control! That means guys who are wide open that can actually be hit instead of balls flying into the 5th row!!
And don't ever get me started on the lock down defense these guys play one on one and like Sunday with the lightning quick double teams and more importantly super fast help on the double-teamer's assignment, which takes away all 3 options from the guy with the ball!
These guys are awesome and a joy to watch and cheer for.
And don't ever get me started on the lock down defense these guys play one on one and like Sunday with the lightning quick double teams and more importantly super fast help on the double-teamer's assignment, which takes away all 3 options from the guy with the ball!
These guys are awesome and a joy to watch and cheer for.
As I have explained several times, all "league wins" aren't created equal. This is accentuated by unbalanced (non-RR) league schedules. Conceivably, a team may happen to play the bottom of the conference twice, while another plays the top twice. That is why the concept of "bad losses" and "quality wins" have been introduced.
Whether it has happened or not (have you REALLY checked EVERY single case since the first T?), a major conference team with 12 league wins (and an inflated OOC w/l record thanks to "cup cakes"), MAY AND SHOULD be left out of the T if the vast majority of its wins came against very weak teams at the bottom of its league, and the rest over mediocre teams.
As I have said multiple time, without the Wiscy win, the cats have ZERO win against a major-conf team that is doing well (clearly above .500) in its league. After Wiscy, they have ONE win that satisfies that definition. Still too few, in my book.
With my proposal, the cats would have at least two legit quality wins (WI + PU or Mary), plus avoid a horrible loss (Rutgers), while limiting to one additional bad-to-"baddish" loss (Indy/Illy/Mich). That is a recipe to ENSURE an AL-bid.
Not just having 12 league wins, as if all were worth the same.
Last edited:
A more accurate way to use the letters analogy would be to think in terms of school grades:
BC took the program from F/D level to C-/C+ level (depending on the year).
CC is trying to move from C-ish to B-ish. There are very encouraging signs. However, in terms of actual results (even after the WI upset) CC hasn't YET accomplished anything the previous admin didn't. BC did have some relatively modest but significant accomplishments (especially considering his start point) such as a non-losing B1G season early in his tenure, multiple NIT appearances (and almost as frequent appearances in the proverbial NCAA-T "bubble", FWIW), and many impressive upsets. Those wouldn't even be mentioned in the context of other programs, but at NU they were significant. As a minimum, BC's relatively modest accomplishments have helped CC's recruiting work.
Last edited:
For the record, there is at least one example of a major conference team missing the NCAA Tournament with 12 conference wins: Arizona State in 2009-10, who went 12-6 in the Pac-10, finished second in the conference, and was relegated to the NIT. But that team was RPI 63 on Selection Sunday. NU would basically need to lose out for its RPI to drop that low.
Good example.
But I think you are over-emphasizing the impact of the RPI, as if it was a MAJOR factor. Committee members have in the past clarified that the primary use of the RPI is to categorize a team's opponents, to see how it did, for example, against the RPI-top-50, etc. The RPI does not have a direct explicit effect on a team's own chances, per se. Of course, a team w/l record, which enters the RPI formula, does play a role indirectly, since, after all, a team must win many games in order to receive an AL bid.
From an NCAA page:
"Committee members have a wide-range of observation, consultation and data resources available to them throughout the season and during selection week. These resources provide the foundation for a thorough and educated process that is reinforced by the committee member’s discussion and deliberation. Among the resources available to the committee are an extensive season-long evaluation of teams through watching games, conference monitoring calls and NABC regional advisory rankings; complete box scores and results, head-to-head results, results versus common opponents, imbalanced conference schedules and results, overall and non-conference strength of schedule, the quality of wins and losses, road record, player and coach availability and various computer metrics. Each of the 10 committee members uses these various resources to form their own opinions, resulting in the committee’s consensus position on teams’ selection and seeding."
Last edited:
Think I am still waiting for that board ban wager response, unless Feli posted in a different thread.
How many more times do I have to tell you that:
I DO NOT KNOW how many B1G teams will get AL bids?
I DO NOT KNOW. I HAVE NO INTEREST IN BETTING ON THAT.
DID YOU GET IT, or do I have to repeat it one more time?
Let me try again: I DO NOT KNOW how many B1G teams will get AL bids.
Far too many unknowns at this time, with teams having still about ONE THIRD of their league schedules to play, plus the conference tournaments.
I DO know how many B1G teams are ranked today (NONE in the top 10, 1 in the top 15, only 3 in the top 25). I also know that in recent past years the B1G has only received 2-3 AL-bids. Low number of top-ranked teams suggest low number of AL-bids. But all this applies to rankings by selection Sunday.
Have I said enough time that I DO NOT KNOW how many B1G teams will get AL bids? I'll say one more time just in case:
I DO NOT KNOW how many B1G teams will get AL bids.
You wasted a lot of writing to simply decline the wager. Knew there was not a chance you were accepting, as that would require you to actually back up your ridiculous opinions.
Sure seemed like you were indicating you felt that they were only getting 3 or 4 bids because of only 3 teams ranked. And that we would not get in without 12 victories because of the BIG only getting 3 or 4 bids. Everyone else basically feels at least 6 or 7 bids. Even last year with the extreme weakness at the bottom of the conference inflating records (8 with 10 wins or more 7 with 11 and 6 with 12), BIG still got 7 bids. .In the past it has generally been have a winning record in the BIG and at least 20 victories gave a very good chance of getting into the dance. This year with the strength at the bottom of the conference, those records will not be inflated and there are likely to be only about 6 (maybe 7 but teams will have to stretch) teams with winning records and likely only 5 with a shot at more than 10 wins. That means 10 wins probably gets a team to the dance. Yes many of a teams wins can be against the bottom of the conference but that bottom is much better than last year so it is not as easy. Nebraska beat Md for example. The result is that this year, any team with a winning BIG record is likely in (and possibly even a 9-9 team if enough do not get to 10 wins) IN might be an example of a team that could do it having a couple big wins early and would need to win 4 of 5 down the stretch (a good run)and win at least one in BTT as that would be needed to be 0.500 and get to 20 wins.
Just saying that BIG likely gets at least 6 bids and a good chance at 7 and any team with a winning record is likely to get in. With the strength of the bottom of the BIG this year it is harder to do.
