The Mighty Big 12

HawkeyeShane said:
Exactly...the RPI means nothing if Iowa closes out on a couple of the wins they pi$$ed away...a win at Wisky and a home or Big10 Tourney win vs Michigan State and Iowa's playing today instead of last night.
Click to expand...

Then your question turns into is it (potentially) better for a young team to play as many games as possible in the NIT, or get bounced in the first round of the NCAA's, before they even get to really experience it?
 
HawkeyeShane said:
Exactly...the RPI means nothing if Iowa closes out on a couple of the wins they pi$$ed away...a win at Wisky and a home or Big10 Tourney win vs Michigan State and Iowa's playing today instead of last night.
Click to expand...

but if they win those games their RPI also goes way up. Iowa wins the two you just mentioned and they're top 50 RPI and in.
 
tanabs said:
because there's lots of really good teams every year that get left out because of their RPI?

don't get me wrong, RPI isn't a flawless measurement by any means, but it rarely if ever leaves out a team that is absolutely deserving of a tournament bid.

Iowa didn't do enough to get in. you need to move on. The "experts" are the guys that select who gets in the tournament year in and year out. it is their job to determine the teams most deserving and most qualified to make the NCAA field, not CBS, ESPN, and FOX sports analysts.

you can talk about eye ball tests all you want, but your eye ball doesn't get you any more quality wins which is what it takes to make it.
Click to expand...
Hey doofuss...stop confusing "good team" and "in the tourney"...I don't need to move on from anything since I'm not claiming Iowa deserved a bid. You're the only one linking the 2.
 
ShadasRevenge said:
Then your question turns into is it (potentially) better for a young team to play as many games as possible in the NIT, or get bounced in the first round of the NCAA's, before they even get to really experience it?
Click to expand...

NCAA's is always the answer to this question.

one or two extra games isn't the difference between guys developing or not. NCAA goes way further for the program and for a developing kids confidence/psyche
 
ShadasRevenge said:
Then your question turns into is it (potentially) better for a young team to play as many games as possible in the NIT, or get bounced in the first round of the NCAA's, before they even get to really experience it?
Click to expand...
I think you always want to get into the dance...deep run NIT experience is better judged the following year, when your guys can draw from it in similar situations. Not to mention, the extra games and practices to draw from.
 
HawkeyeShane said:
No it wasn't...another win vs Nebraska doesn't pitch a tent for anyone on the committee.
Click to expand...

No, but it gives them a 10-8 conference record, and maybe they don't go into the game against MSU having to win it.

I guess another way of saying it is the losses at Wisconsin and Minnesota didn't hurt Iowa as much as losing in Lincoln did. Iowa was still in a good position after those two games to get in if they ran the table in the back half of the schedule.
 
HawkeyeShane said:
Teams with RPI in the 30's get left out of the tourney...who you beat is more important than RPI.
Click to expand...

there's an obvious correlation between the two though. you need some good wins, but you need RPI also. remember there's hardly anyone with a 60+ RPI that has ever made it (i don't know if the high water mark is exactly 60 but it's somewhere around there)

look at Iowa last year. didn't Iowa they have like 3 or 4 top 25 wins? I would argue their resume last year was way better than this year had they not dropped so many non con games that brought their overall record too low for contention and killed their RPI.
 
HawkeyeShane said:
I think you always want to get into the dance...deep run NIT experience is better judged the following year, when your guys can draw from it in similar situations. Not to mention, the extra games and practices to draw from.
Click to expand...

I would agree with this if this was a senior-laden team that was in its last year together. But the majority of this team comes back, and there's no reason to think that from here on out Iowa won't be in the mix for the dance most years.
 
ShadasRevenge said:
I would agree with this if this was a senior-laden team that was in its last year together. But the majority of this team comes back, and there's no reason to think that from here on out Iowa won't be in the mix for the dance most years.
Click to expand...
Not sure why you don't totally agree with me then...
 
tanabs said:
there's an obvious correlation between the two though. you need some good wins, but you need RPI also. remember there's hardly anyone with a 60+ RPI that has ever made it (i don't know if the high water mark is exactly 60 but it's somewhere around there)

look at Iowa last year. didn't Iowa they have like 3 or 4 top 25 wins? I would argue their resume last year was way better than this year had they not dropped so many non con games that brought their overall record too low for contention and killed their RPI.
Click to expand...
Their schedule strength was definitely better...the Top25 wins had Iowa receiving a smidge of bubble talk until they stumbled at the end and bounced themselves off of it. I'm not sure of the high water mark either...going to check it out since you have me wondering now!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top