ameshawkeye
Well-Known Member
This is why I think they are so similar. Its interesting though, no one seems to mention this about Virginia when its all they talk about when discussing Iowa.
Virginia
- Thread starter HerkeyHawk
- Start date
This is why I think they are so similar. Its interesting though, no one seems to mention this about Virginia when its all they talk about when discussing Iowa.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
again stop with the losses ****. It doesn't matter. All bubble teams have proven they can lose.
eveningnewsteam
Well-Known Member
Every single bubble team has horrendous losses. It's basically bubble teams saying your resume is as bad as ours so we should be in the conversation. At the end of the day, the tournament has 68 teams so someone has to make it.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
I still say there's really nothing on Virginia's resume that gives them a clear edge over Iowa. They don't have any more wins over the Top 50 than Iowa does, and their RPI is only marginally better (70 vs 76 as of today's rankings).
I
ILHawk
Guest
If Iowa had beaten Duke, Michigan, or Indiana I am sure we would be on the bubble list.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
HawkPrdatr40
Well-Known Member
Virginia is getting consideration because of the 10-7 ACC record.
golfingwags
Well-Known Member
ameshawkeye
Well-Known Member
No, the committee will not take into account conference records.
ameshawkeye
Well-Known Member
I get that, but even before they beat Duke, they were listed as in.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
Thats only a problem for folks who don't understand how things work.
HawkPrdatr40
Well-Known Member
It is the only way they are even in consideration right now ames by those that have them on the bubble.
wundergrape
Well-Known Member
Which I'm not sure you do. The committee considers every single metric that has been listed here, including poor losses and conference records. They may weight them differently, but every data point is considered. I scratch my head when people say that the committee "doesn't consider" something. They're not a bunch of data-biased morons.
They look at every aspect of a teams resume. The chairman of the committee says this every single year after the bracket is announced, and people still seem to tune it out 12 months later.
SlaterNation
New Member
"It's all the 200 plus teams we played."
As far as the bad RPI is concerned it is more about the teams ranked 300+ as we played 5 of them and only played 2 teams ranked 200-299. Minnesota played zero 300+ teams and 3 in the 200-299 group. ISU only played one 300+ team and 9 200-299 (lost to one of them).
"We didn't play many 100 - 200 teams period."
We played 10 teams ranked 100-200 and lost to 3 of them.
A few Road Wins against good teams would have been nice, we only have 2 Road Wins and they came at 161 NW and 174 Penn St. We have 2 Neutral Court Wins against 72 UNI and 180 W. Kentucky.
As to the team that is the subject of this thread, Virginia played 3 300+ teams and lost to one of them on a neutral court by 2. they are 4-0 against 200-299 and 7-6 against 100-199. They have Road Wins at 40 Wisc, 86 Mary, 164 VIRGINIA TECH (score was 73-55). There losses do look a lot worse than Iowa's.
As far as the bad RPI is concerned it is more about the teams ranked 300+ as we played 5 of them and only played 2 teams ranked 200-299. Minnesota played zero 300+ teams and 3 in the 200-299 group. ISU only played one 300+ team and 9 200-299 (lost to one of them).
"We didn't play many 100 - 200 teams period."
We played 10 teams ranked 100-200 and lost to 3 of them.
A few Road Wins against good teams would have been nice, we only have 2 Road Wins and they came at 161 NW and 174 Penn St. We have 2 Neutral Court Wins against 72 UNI and 180 W. Kentucky.
As to the team that is the subject of this thread, Virginia played 3 300+ teams and lost to one of them on a neutral court by 2. they are 4-0 against 200-299 and 7-6 against 100-199. They have Road Wins at 40 Wisc, 86 Mary, 164 VIRGINIA TECH (score was 73-55). There losses do look a lot worse than Iowa's.
Last edited:
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
Listen. Every single team on the bubble has bad losses. Every one. That's how they ended up on the bubble to begin with. Whether a team is 11-4 or 13-2 against sub 150 teams doesn't matter st that point. What DOES matter is who you can beat. The committee wants teams in the tourney who can WIN. They don't care so much that you can lose to Va Tech if you can beat OSU or MSU.
All you guys bringing up loses are just like they guys who had us out of the NIT last year because we lost to Campbell and were barely over .500. What none of you took into account is all the quality wins we had. You were so caught up in who we could lose to you didn't realize who we could beat.
I don't know if we or Virginia gets in or now. What I do know is I would give an edge to Virginia because they've proven they can seal the deal against a 1 seed and Iowa hasn't shown that.
I also know Woody ain't a lottery pick.
99topdawg
Well-Known Member
Lunardi--Virginia
A couple of charts in this article worth noting: Lowest RPIs to make the tourney in last 20 years and Most 100+ RPI losses to make tourney in last 20 years.
A couple of charts in this article worth noting: Lowest RPIs to make the tourney in last 20 years and Most 100+ RPI losses to make tourney in last 20 years.
ameshawkeye
Well-Known Member
Well, that's your opinion. I'm more inclined to believe its about their quality wins.
wundergrape
Well-Known Member
Don't tell me to "listen". I'm not the one making broad - to say nothing of untrue - generalizations. The amount of bad losses for bubble teams is relative and should be weighted against the other bubble teams. Just like every other data point. You don't not consider something just before everyone else has some amount of it. That's like saying that you won't consider what conference someone plays in because everyone plays in a conference. Silly and myopic.
thejumper5
Well-Known Member
FIFY
