PDA

View Full Version : Carolina on the bubble?



JasonEvans
01-05-2010, 03:16 PM
In the wake of last night's result, Carolina is down to #46 in the Pomeroy rankings. Ken now projects they will finish the season 18-13 with an ACC record of 7-9. BC and NC State are the only road games where the Tarheels will be favored according to Pom. Can you say bubble?

Sagarin has the Heels at #33, which is probably more reasonable than #46. A telling statistic though -- UNC is just 1-3 against the Sagarin top 50. They have played the 179th toughest schedule in the land.

Perhaps most troubling for Carolina fans, CBS's RPI rankings have them at #58. We all know that the RPI matters to the NCAA Selection committee. 6 of the Tarheels wins are against teams ranked outside the RPI top 200 meaning their record against the RPI top 200 is 5-4... not too good.

By comparison, Duke has played just 2 games against teams ranked outside the top 200 in the RPI. The Devils are #2 in the RPI, #2 in Pomeroy and #3 in Sagarin.

--Jason "Ugly season so far in Chapa Heeya" Evans

uh_no
01-05-2010, 03:22 PM
We all know that the RPI matters to the NCAA Selection committee.

--Jason "Ugly season so far in Chapa Heeya" Evans

Disagree. Members of the committee have said that the RPI of a team has little significance. What does matter is who they have beaten in the top 25, 50 and 100 in the RPI rankings. Not that these numbers make carolina look better, but if carolina gets some quality wins throughout the season, this will matter much more than whatever their actual ranking is.

dolver
01-05-2010, 03:26 PM
Disagree. Members of the committee have said that the RPI of a team has little significance. What does matter is who they have beaten in the top 25, 50 and 100 in the RPI rankings. Not that these numbers make carolina look better, but if carolina gets some quality wins throughout the season, this will matter much more than whatever their actual ranking is.

Which they will -- I think it is a mistake to write off a young Carolina team with as much talent/potential as they have, this early in the season.

That said, I am convinced that Duke is decidedly better than UNC this year, which I haven't been able to say for a little while now.

Duvall
01-05-2010, 03:30 PM
--Jason "Ugly season so far in Chapa Heeya" Evans

I hate the Heels as much as the next guy, but "ugly" is a bit strong for an 11-4 squad.

The concept of the "on the bubble" has no meaning for teams like UNC that will get the benefit from the doubt from the Committee; either they are in or they are out. (And they won't be out; they have too much talent for a complete collapse.) Their worst case scenario is a season akin to Duke in 2007 - .500 conference mark and early exits in the ACC and NCAA tournaments.

slower
01-05-2010, 03:33 PM
In the wake of last night's result, Carolina is down to #46 in the Pomeroy rankings. Ken now projects they will finish the season 18-13 with an ACC record of 7-9. BC and NC State are the only road games where the Tarheels will be favored according to Pom. Can you say bubble?

Sagarin has the Heels at #33, which is probably more reasonable than #46. A telling statistic though -- UNC is just 1-3 against the Sagarin top 50. They have played the 179th toughest schedule in the land.

Perhaps most troubling for Carolina fans, CBS's RPI rankings have them at #58. We all know that the RPI matters to the NCAA Selection committee. 6 of the Tarheels wins are against teams ranked outside the RPI top 200 meaning their record against the RPI top 200 is 5-4... not too good.

By comparison, Duke has played just 2 games against teams ranked outside the top 200 in the RPI. The Devils are #2 in the RPI, #2 in Pomeroy and #3 in Sagarin.

--Jason "Ugly season so far in Chapa Heeya" Evans

If this situation keeps up, I can see this eventually turning into a "Taylor King 10PPG" profile/sig Jumbo vs. whoever-type bet later this season (Will they or won't they make the field? What seed will they get?). Maybe Wheat vs. the field for pink slips.

But I think it's WAAAAY premature to think the Holes won't get in the tournament. I mean, if they don't, somebody might actually pull a spontaneous Klemnop or something.

But we can dream, I guess!

uh_no
01-05-2010, 03:38 PM
I hate the Heels as much as the next guy, but "ugly" is a bit strong for an 11-4 squad.

The concept of the "on the bubble" has no meaning for teams like UNC that will get the benefit from the doubt from the Committee; either they are in or they are out. (And they won't be out; they have too much talent for a complete collapse.) Their worst case scenario is a season akin to Duke in 2007 - .500 conference mark and early exits in the ACC and NCAA tournaments.

2007 uconn team fresh of an elite eight, and 2 championships in the last 7 years started the next year 11-0 or something and was ranked in the top 10 in the country and failed to make the NIT.....i wouldn't count anyone in....but if anyone gets boost its UNC and duke.....we'll have to see how they do in the acc

grossbus
01-05-2010, 03:41 PM
"Perhaps most troubling for Carolina fans"

is the fact that they lost last night after letting a team come back from an 11 pt deficit late.

Eternal Outlaw
01-05-2010, 03:42 PM
2007 uconn team fresh of an elite eight, and 2 championships in the last 7 years started the next year 11-0 or something and was ranked in the top 10 in the country and failed to make the NIT.....i wouldn't count anyone in....but if anyone gets boost its UNC and duke.....we'll have to see how they do in the acc

Don't forget Arizona. Their consecutive streak is only alive these days because of their name.

CDu
01-05-2010, 03:43 PM
I suspect that the Pomeroy ranking of #46 is influenced a good bit by the loss yesterday. But the team that lost yesterday (without Ginyard and Graves) is much different than the team will be in February. Simply adding those two players makes the backcourt much deeper and more experienced (replacing Watts and Wear and some of the Strickland/McDonald minutes) which makes them better. And that's assuming no development for a team that is very young and inexperienced at key positions.

I'm not saying that UNC will be a 12/13-win ACC team, but I don't think that 7-9 is reflective of how they'll perform in the ACC this year. I think they'll get to 9-10 ACC wins and be comfortably in the field. I think the rest of the ACC (aside from us, obviously) is mediocre enough that UNC will get their share of wins.

However, I'd LOVE it if UNC somehow managed to wind up on the outside of the bubble. And if the backcourt doesn't progress, it's not out of the realm of possibility that they could go 7-9.

striker219
01-05-2010, 03:44 PM
Disagree. Members of the committee have said that the RPI of a team has little significance. What does matter is who they have beaten in the top 25, 50 and 100 in the RPI rankings. Not that these numbers make carolina look better, but if carolina gets some quality wins throughout the season, this will matter much more than whatever their actual ranking is.

I may be reading this wrong, but those sentences seem to contradict each other.

striker219
01-05-2010, 03:46 PM
I suspect that the Pomeroy ranking of #46 is influenced a good bit by the loss yesterday. But the team that lost yesterday (without Ginyard and Graves) is much different than the team will be in February. Simply adding those two players makes the backcourt much deeper and more experienced (replacing Watts and Wear and some of the Strickland/McDonald minutes) which makes them better. And that's assuming no development for a team that is very young and inexperienced at key positions.

I'm not saying that UNC will be a 12/13-win ACC team, but I don't think that 7-9 is reflective of how they'll perform in the ACC this year. I think they'll get to 9-10 ACC wins and be comfortably in the field.

However, I'd LOVE it if UNC somehow managed to wind up on the outside of the bubble.

If I remember correctly, they were somewhere in the 38-40 range before the CoC loss. Can anyone confirm?

shoutingncu
01-05-2010, 03:47 PM
I hate the Heels as much as the next guy, but "ugly" is a bit strong for an 11-4 squad.

The concept of the "on the bubble" has no meaning for teams like UNC that will get the benefit from the doubt from the Committee; either they are in or they are out. (And they won't be out; they have too much talent for a complete collapse.) Their worst case scenario is a season akin to Duke in 2007 - .500 conference mark and early exits in the ACC and NCAA tournaments.

Agreed, except that Duke 2007 is already better than Carolina 2010. I don't think I ever chimed in during that "bubble" discussion three years ago, but at one point midway through conference play, it was conceivable that Duke might lose a couple more conference games than they wound up dropping, and ending up just below .500. Had that happened, it was Duke's OOC that would have kept them out of the bubble talk.

Not necessarily the case for Carolina this year.

InSpades
01-05-2010, 03:49 PM
I may be reading this wrong, but those sentences seem to contradict each other.

He's saying that their actual RPI # could be 80, but if they have a good record against other teams that have good RPI then that will matter and their actual # won't matter.


If I remember correctly, they were somewhere in the 38-40 range before the CoC loss. Can anyone confirm?

I looked at it today and I believe it was 36 before CoC.

CDu
01-05-2010, 03:51 PM
Agreed, except that Duke 2007 is already better than Carolina 2010. I don't think I ever chimed in during that "bubble" discussion three years ago, but at one point midway through conference play, it was conceivable that Duke might lose a couple more conference games than they wound up dropping, and ending up at .500 or lower. Had that happened, it was Duke's OOC that would have kept them out of the bubble talk.

Not necessarily the case for Carolina this year.

Yeah, a 7-9 Duke team in 2007 would have still had a good shot at making the tournament thanks to several strong non-conference wins. A 7-9 UNC team has only the letters on the front of the jersey and wins over Mich St and OSU (literally nothing else of value, and that OSU win will likely lose value over time) to support their case this year.

It could happen (for example, if a couple of UNC's ACC wins come against Duke and Clemson), but it'd be a really tough sell. That said, I think UNC will get enough ACC wins to make the issue moot.

MChambers
01-05-2010, 03:53 PM
I suspect that the Pomeroy ranking of #46 is influenced a good bit by the loss yesterday. But the team that lost yesterday (without Ginyard and Graves) is much different than the team will be in February.

UNC was 37 yesterday. So the team wasn't doing all that well even before last night. I agree with you, however, that it is very unlikely that UNC will not deserve to go to the NCAA tournament.

I intend to keep dreaming, however.

Paging Matt Doherty, paging Matt Doherty.

moonpie23
01-05-2010, 03:53 PM
unless unc absolutely TANKS a bunch of important games in the ACC and goes out first game of the acc tourny, they will be in the big dance......

i'm not writing them off.....

roywhite
01-05-2010, 03:55 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bracketology

Lunardi had the Heels as a #3 seed in his latest bracketology, which was dated 1/4, before the Charleston game.

I'm not buying the "bubble team" designation, but a mediocre season and early tournament exit...that would be fine.

dolver
01-05-2010, 03:59 PM
I may be reading this wrong, but those sentences seem to contradict each other.

Ha -- true. However, in this statement, a team's RPI seems to matter, but more so for the teams that they played against than for their own NCAA candidacy.

Chitowndevil
01-05-2010, 04:02 PM
It's fun to think about, but waaaay premature, after one bad loss, to talk about UNC missing the NCAAs.

The Holes are 2-3 against the Pomeroy top 50, including a very close road loss at #2 UK and a semi-away game at #3 Texas where they trailed by 4 with 7 minutes left. Subjectively, as the committee likes to say, they looked like a tournament team.

And as much as I'd love to see UNC finish 7-9 in the ACC, I don't see it. Georgia Tech's best wins are against Southern Cal and Siena, both at home. Clemson has a one point win against Butler but has losses to likely bubble team Texas A&M and probable NIT-bound Illinois, the latter at home. Virginia Tech, continuing their trend, played exactly one legit nonconference opponent (Temple) and got beat handily (no credit for beating Seton Hall). Miami has a nice win over Minnesota and nothing (and I really do mean nothing) else.

I could go on, but bottom line, aside from Duke, UNC's tournament resume is in my view BY FAR the best among ACC teams at this point. I'd love to see them have to sweat it out, but I think 9-7 in the ACC would get them in, especially if one of those wins was over Duke.

InSpades
01-05-2010, 04:03 PM
unless unc absolutely TANKS a bunch of important games in the ACC and goes out first game of the acc tourny, they will be in the big dance......

i'm not writing them off.....

I don't think anyone is writing them off. Just realizing that it is possible for them to be a bubble team. Let's look at their schedule and predict some things:
W Virginia Tech
L @Clemson
? Georgia Tech
? Wake Forest
W @North Carolina St.
W Virginia
? @Virginia Tech
? @Maryland
L Duke
W @North Carolina St.
? Georgia Tech
W @Boston College
? Florida St.
L @Wake Forest
? Miami FL
L @Duke

That leaves them 5-4 w/ 7 games left in the air. If they lose 4 of those 7 then are they in? 5 of those 7? I don't think so and it's not beyond the realm of possibility.

Bob Green
01-05-2010, 04:21 PM
Last year, the eventual National Champion Carolina Tar Heels started their ACC schedule 0-2 with losses to Boston College and Wake Forest so I would say it is really early to label Carolina "on the bubble." I'll take a wait and see approach myself.

Jarhead
01-05-2010, 04:26 PM
I don't think anyone is writing them off. Just realizing that it is possible for them to be a bubble team. Let's look at their schedule and predict some things:
W Virginia Tech
L @Clemson
? Georgia Tech
? Wake Forest
W @North Carolina St.
W Virginia
? @Virginia Tech
? @Maryland
L Duke
W @North Carolina St.
? Georgia Tech
W @Boston College
? Florida St.
L @Wake Forest
? Miami FL
L @Duke

That leaves them 5-4 w/ 7 games left in the air. If they lose 4 of those 7 then are they in? 5 of those 7? I don't think so and it's not beyond the realm of possibility.

Good analysis, and quite likely. If you got it right I think the committee will keep them in, but at a pretty low seed for them. Maybe a 9 or a 10 seed if your 5 of 7 holds up, but a 7 or 8 seed if they take 4 of those seven. It depends somewhat on how many at-large bids are available for the ACC. As banner-centric as they are, they may not accept a bid. They may think they would get a walkover in the NIT. Didn't that happen with some other team a while back?

CDu
01-05-2010, 04:34 PM
UNC was 37 yesterday. So the team wasn't doing all that well even before last night. I agree with you, however, that it is very unlikely that UNC will not deserve to go to the NCAA tournament.

I intend to keep dreaming, however.

Paging Matt Doherty, paging Matt Doherty.

37 sounds about right given their early-season results. I'd guess that Pomeroy probably expected UNC to go either 8-8 or 9-7 in conference before yesterday as well. #37 and 8-8 in the ACC with a win over Michigan State would put them in the field fairly comfortably (like a 7-8 seed I'd guess). And when they get Graves and Ginyard back, they're at least an 8-8 ACC team, in my opinion.

CDu
01-05-2010, 04:36 PM
Good analysis, and quite likely. If you got it right I think the committee will keep them in, but at a pretty low seed for them. Maybe a 9 or a 10 seed if your 5 of 7 holds up, but a 7 or 8 seed if they take 4 of those seven. It depends somewhat on how many at-large bids are available for the ACC. As banner-centric as they are, they may not accept a bid. They may think they would get a walkover in the NIT. Didn't that happen with some other team a while back?

I can't imagine that a team would turn down an NCAA bid in favor of an NIT bid. This is especially true with UNC - lest we forget the 2000 debacle when they made the Final Four as an 8 seed.

Saratoga2
01-05-2010, 04:46 PM
Thats how I saw them at the start of the season and I still see them in that light.

InSpades
01-05-2010, 04:57 PM
For curiousity sake... this is how KenPom predicts the ACC to go:
Duke 14-2
Fla St. 10-6
Clemson 9-7
Miami 8-8
Wake 8-8
GA Tech 8-8
VA Tech 8-8
Maryland 7-9
UNC 7-9
Virginia 7-9
NC St. 4-12
Boston College 4-12

Incredibly jumbled in the middle. 8 teams between 7 and 9 wins.

hq2
01-05-2010, 05:13 PM
A little early to write them off. They're a young team with decent talent, and they'll get better. Roy will get some mileage out of them. I could see them having a 20-10 type year, maybe bottom of the top 20. More importantly for us, this could be a good year to sweep them. A triple crown season (1988) with three wins against the Holes in a year would be sweet; it's been a while since that happened. The '88 year was the best, because they hadn't done it in more than 20 years when it happened. I loved the last play of the Carolina ACC championship that year, when Quin Synder swatted King Rice to win the game and seal a sweep. Quin takes King, checkmate!:D

CameronBornAndBred
01-05-2010, 05:22 PM
Gotta lotta season left before anyone declares the holes as a bubble team. They were without Ginyard last night. I do think they have a rough ACC schedule ahead and will be facing a few losses, but not enough to finish lower than 6th in the conference. Usually the 6th team is the bubble team, and if it's the heels they get the invite because it's the heels. I think the better question to guess at now would be seed. Anywhere from a 3 to 5 seed is possible.

ice-9
01-05-2010, 05:25 PM
For curiousity sake... this is how KenPom predicts the ACC to go:
Duke 14-2
Fla St. 10-6
Clemson 9-7
Miami 8-8
Wake 8-8
GA Tech 8-8
VA Tech 8-8
Maryland 7-9
UNC 7-9
Virginia 7-9
NC St. 4-12
Boston College 4-12

Incredibly jumbled in the middle. 8 teams between 7 and 9 wins.


In the above scenario, I see UNC making the field. There is precedent for a 7-9 ACC team to make the tournament, and UNC would have two very good OOC wins on their resume to boot: Michigan State (ranked #2 in the preseason lest we forget) and Ohio State before Evan Turner got injured.

Ohio State is 9-1 with Evan Turner. Their lone loss? UNC.

All that PLUS the fact that UNC is the defending champs will mean that UNC gets in, just with a relatively low seed. I think one ACC tournament win will cement it.

In the above scenario, the ACC gets 8 teams into the dance:
1. Duke 14-2
2. Fla St. 10-6
3. Clemson 9-7
4. Miami 8-8
5. Wake 8-8
6. GA Tech 8-8
7. VA Tech 8-8
8. UNC 7-9

This is what I mean when I previously wrote that the bottom tier in the ACC will increase the probability the conference gets more teams in this season.

Greg_Newton
01-05-2010, 05:47 PM
If the ACC gets 8 teams in this year, I will be SHOCKED. The league is just not very good this year, and is certainly not good enough to warrant NCAA berths for a virtually unprecedented 2/3 of its teams. (IMO)

However, for that same reason I would be equally shocked if Carolina goes 7-9, and (pleasantly) surprised if they win less than 10 games... I would probably set the line at 9.5. They've certainly got some issues, but they've got so much talent that they're still very dangerous when they get rolling(especially relative to the rest of the league).

As far as Carolina settling into mediocrity, I'll believe it when I see it. In the meantime I'll enjoy the fact that we clearly have a better team right now, and that both fan bases know it.

Duvall
01-05-2010, 06:09 PM
If the ACC gets 8 teams in this year, I will be SHOCKED. The league is just not very good this year, and is certainly not good enough to warrant NCAA berths for a virtually unprecedented 2/3 of its teams.

Well, that's the problem. Not very good compared to what? Compared to past years, perhaps not. But compared to other conferences this year - and that's who the ACC teams will be fighting against for NCAA berths - the ACC is relatively strong.

ice-9
01-05-2010, 06:34 PM
If the ACC gets 8 teams in this year, I will be SHOCKED. The league is just not very good this year, and is certainly not good enough to warrant NCAA berths for a virtually unprecedented 2/3 of its teams. (IMO)

However, for that same reason I would be equally shocked if Carolina goes 7-9, and (pleasantly) surprised if they win less than 10 games... I would probably set the line at 9.5. They've certainly got some issues, but they've got so much talent that they're still very dangerous when they get rolling(especially relative to the rest of the league).

As far as Carolina settling into mediocrity, I'll believe it when I see it. In the meantime I'll enjoy the fact that we clearly have a better team right now, and that both fan bases know it.


I know it's counter intuitive, but the formula to getting teams into the NCAA tournament from a given conference is pretty simple:

1. Do well OOC
2. Have a really weak bottom tier that middle tier teams can get many easy wins from

For years this is why the Big East and the Big 10 (despite losing the challenge to the ACC how many years in a row) can get so many teams in -- because their bottom tier is piss poor and feeds their middle teams.

In contrast, for many seasons the ACC was decent top to bottom and this made it hard for the middle teams to build enough of a resume in-conference to make the NCAA tournament.

This year, finally, we have a weak bottom tier composed of more than one or two teams. To maximize the ACC's chances of getting eight teams into the dance, BC, UVA, NC State and Maryland would need to lose all their other ACC games.

uh_no
01-05-2010, 07:02 PM
I know it's counter intuitive, but the formula to getting teams into the NCAA tournament from a given conference is pretty simple:

1. Do well OOC
2. Have a really weak bottom tier that middle tier teams can get many easy wins from

For years this is why the Big East and the Big 10 (despite losing the challenge to the ACC how many years in a row) can get so many teams in -- because their bottom tier is piss poor and feeds their middle teams.

In contrast, for many seasons the ACC was decent top to bottom and this made it hard for the middle teams to build enough of a resume in-conference to make the NCAA tournament.




Clearly your post is validated by the big east and acc's relative performance in the tournament last year.....by my count the acc had only 1 elite eight team while the big east had 4.....

juise
01-05-2010, 07:13 PM
Clearly your post is validated by the big east and acc's relative performance in the tournament last year.....by my count the acc had only 1 elite eight team while the big east had 4.....

Is your point validated by the 2008 tournament in which the Big East had zero Elite Eight teams? I'm not saying the OP was correct, but they did say "For years," which would indicate an intended sample size greater than one.

jimsumner
01-05-2010, 07:14 PM
"They may think they would get a walkover in the NIT. Didn't that happen with some other team a while back?"

Al McGuire and Marquette turned down an NCAA bid in 1970. They were ranked in the top ten but the NCAA wanted to send them out of their regional. McGuire was offended and they went NIT instead. Won the whole thing.

Boston College turned down an NCAA bid for the NIT in the 1960s. NIT was closer to their recruiting base and they thought they could win it. Georgia Tech did the same thing during the Yunkus era because the NCAA wanted to send them out west to open against UCLA.

But the financial realities are so much different now. I can't imagine any team turning down March Madness and a guaranteed spot on national TV for the NIT.

Greg_Newton
01-05-2010, 07:14 PM
I guess just don't really see what any ACC team outside of Duke and UNC has done OOC to warrant a berth at 8-8. Okay... GT beat USC, FSU beat Marquette and Providence, Clemson beat Butler, and Wake beat Zaga and Seton Hall... there's really not much else, and none of those teams are in the top 20.

It just seems that our past bubble teams have had a big-time win or two - for example, Maryland snuck in at 7-9 last year, but they beat #6 MSU and a very good Michigan team OOC, and upset #3 UNC in conference play. And no one's going to be beating a top 5 team in conference this year unless they pick off Duke...

If I had to guess, I'd predict Duke, UNC, FSU, Clemson, GT and Wake as in, as they've all looked decent relative to the rest of the country. I just don't think anyone has played like a tourney team so far... it's a strange season. Perhaps the mid-majors will finally usurp a few tourney spots from the BCS schools this year.

uh_no
01-05-2010, 11:35 PM
Is your point validated by the 2008 tournament in which the Big East had zero Elite Eight teams? I'm not saying the OP was correct, but they did say "For years," which would indicate an intended sample size greater than one.

Other than UNC, the acc's performance in the tournament the last 3 or so years has been less than stellar.....

ice-9
01-06-2010, 05:24 AM
Clearly your post is validated by the big east and acc's relative performance in the tournament last year.....by my count the acc had only 1 elite eight team while the big east had 4.....

Sarcasm...nice.

But my point doesn't have much to do with how conferences actually perform in the tournament, just what it takes to get as many teams in.

airowe
01-06-2010, 12:28 PM
This one's from IC :eek: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~passthepaxil/NewTee.jpg

Duvall
01-06-2010, 12:31 PM
This one's from IC :eek: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~passthepaxil/NewTee.jpg



Optimists.

juise
01-06-2010, 12:42 PM
Optimists.

Maybe that's NCAAT seeding?

kellsie16
01-06-2010, 12:58 PM
i think UNC fans should be buoyed by possibility of being back to back champs, just like their neighbor blue devils did in the early 90's.

2009 NCAA champs, 2010 NIT champs!

i can see the t-shirts already....