Bubble Teams

[A-Tex Devil]

Ok. I'm confused. I just got done watching the ESPN guys do "in or out" with some bubble teams. How on EARTH is Stanford in with all of these guys and FSU is out? It makes ZERO sense. The only thing that would come into play is maybe conference record, but look at this:

FSU - 20W 12L, 7 and 9 in conference with 1 win in the tourney, RPI is 42, SOS 17, last 10=4-6, Rd/Neut=6-9, Bad losses (not top 50) - NONE, Good wins - Duke, Florida, Va Tech, Maryland

Stanford - 18W 12L, 10 and 8 in conference, no tourney wins, RPI is 66(!!), SOS 28, last 10=4-6, Rd/Neut-6-7, Bad losses (not top 50) - Santa Clara, Cal, Gonzaga, Washington, Good wins - Oregon, SC, UCLA, Wazzu

I'm not saying Florida State deserves to get in necessarily, but why is Stanford in the discussion? If it came down to these two teams, FSU has no losses outside top 50, better SOS and RPI and beaten as many good teams. They are basically equal everywhere else except conference schedule. We all know how top heavy (or perhaps bottom light) the Pac 10 is.

I guess we'll see, but if Stanford gets in, there will certainly be some unhappy teams out there.

[dukie8]

Ok. I'm confused. I just got done watching the ESPN guys do "in or out" with some bubble teams. How on EARTH is Stanford in with all of these guys and FSU is out? It makes ZERO sense. The only thing that would come into play is maybe conference record, but look at this:

FSU - 20W 12L, 7 and 9 in conference with 1 win in the tourney, RPI is 42, SOS 17, last 10=4-6, Rd/Neut=6-9, Bad losses (not top 50) - NONE, Good wins - Duke, Florida, Va Tech, Maryland

Stanford - 18W 12L, 10 and 8 in conference, no tourney wins, RPI is 66(!!), SOS 28, last 10=4-6, Rd/Neut-6-7, Bad losses (not top 50) - Santa Clara, Cal, Gonzaga, Washington, Good wins - Oregon, SC, UCLA, Wazzu

I'm not saying Florida State deserves to get in necessarily, but why is Stanford in the discussion? If it came down to these two teams, FSU has no losses outside top 50, better SOS and RPI and beaten as many good teams. They are basically equal everywhere else except conference schedule. We all know how top heavy (or perhaps bottom light) the Pac 10 is.

I guess we'll see, but if Stanford gets in, there will certainly be some unhappy teams out there.

you forgot to mention another key factor for fsu -- that it was missing douglas for several of its losses. the committee will take that into account.

i wouldn't exactly call gonzaga and washington "bad" losses. losing on the road in conference to the #79 rpi team (wash) isn't "bad" and neither is losing to #63 gonzaga. the santa clara (#93) at home was more in the neighborhood of bad but it certainly isn't horrible.

[A-Tex Devil]

I was cheating and redefining "bad losses" as those below 50. The main point is that FSU has no losses to anyone below the top 50.

You are right, though. Bad losses are considered out of top 100. Neither team has any. I'm just blown away that Stanford is even in the conversation. I think I agree with many that conference record needs to be tossed as a factor, or at least put toward the bottom. 7-9 in the ACC is better than 10-8 in the Pac 10 this year. I think that is what is keeping teams like Kansas St. and Stanford in the conversation when they really shouldn't be (unless K State happens to beat KU today).

[Dar95]

You left out Stanford wins vs Texas Tech and @Virginia, which gives them 6 wins against tournament teams (if you have TT in, as I do), as opposed to 4 for FSU. Stanford also had some injury concerns; Brook Lopez missed at least one of their early losses, and their main guard, Goods, missed about the same time period that Douglas did.

So, it's close, but I have Stanford in and FSU out, although it seems like the consensus amongst the various "experts" out there is that they are both out.

[Dar95]

The team I really don't understand the love for is Kansas State. OK, they beat Texas Tech, but that was just their third win against the top 80 RPI teams (against 7 losses). I think they need to beat Kansas.

[dukie8]

I was cheating and redefining "bad losses" as those below 50. The main point is that FSU has no losses to anyone below the top 50.

You are right, though. Bad losses are considered out of top 100. Neither team has any. I'm just blown away that Stanford is even in the conversation. I think I agree with many that conference record needs to be tossed as a factor, or at least put toward the bottom. 7-9 in the ACC is better than 10-8 in the Pac 10 this year. I think that is what is keeping teams like Kansas St. and Stanford in the conversation when they really shouldn't be (unless K State happens to beat KU today).

if you are defining "bad" losses as those outside of the top 50, then fsu has 3 -- 2 to #52 ga tech and 1 to #54 uva.

ksu shouldn't even be in consideration until they beat kansas. they definitely have seen the benefit of an unbalanced conference schedule.

i keep on hearing that strength of oos is going to be a key stat. i think that that is ridiculous and greatly hurts bcs school. if you play good teams, why should it matter if they are in conference or ooc? a good opponent is a good opponent and you shouldn't get bonus points if that team is oos. i think that this is a result of having too many mid major people on the committee.

[crimsonandblue]

KState beat Texas at Texas. Lost in OT to Texas A&M at home. Lost to Texas Tech on the road early only to pound them yesterday. So, if anything, not getting multiple cracks at the south teams may have hurt them in terms of building a resume. Their problem is they got pasted at OkState a week or so ago in a game they needed to win.

I don't really care much either way. When it gets down to these last teams in, they're all comparable and they've all shot themselves in the foot on multiple occasions. I understand the dichotomy between analysts and fans who think the midmajors should get in over the majors and vice versa. But when you're comparing various big conference schools against each other, I can't get too worked up one way or another.

[A-Tex Devil]

I figured someone that FSU lost to would eventually drop out of the top 50. I still put them up against Stanford and think they look much better. The fact that there is disagreement indicates it's not so clear. I agree neither may get in, but not sure why Stanford is even being considered (ack, my Pac 10 bias is back!)

The problem with KSU is they beat NOBODY out of conference, and I think their 10-6 record is indicative that they benefitted from being in the Big XII North. There are 6 "should" wins there for any NCAA worthy team this year with Iowa State, Colorado and Nebraska. I mean, K-State took care of business and got an upset of Texas, but the South schedule and the North schedule were not comparable this year. Not sure they would have gone 10-6 in the South, just as I'm not sure UVa would have had their in conference record with Duke's schedule.