Annual: Who Got Snubbed Thread

[ericd7633]

That’s not true.

I'd like to hear your case then. I'm not sure the 4 of them combined have as many wins against at large worthy tournament teams that Oklahoma does.

 

[ericd7633]

Apparently, the committed agrees with you. I am not sure those things are inconsequential, most people thought 4-11 meant something. Last 10 was once part of the selection talk. Now the committee seems enamoured with RPI and things like conference play and head to head results are ignored

The committee cares about who you've beaten and where you beat them. Conference play should be ignored, especially with the inbalance schedules all the teams play.

 

[CycleandJazz]

I'd like to hear your case then. I'm not sure the 4 of them combined have as many wins against at large worthy tournament teams that Oklahoma does.

Implicit in penalizing a team for playing a soft schedule is the idea that if they had played a tougher schedule they would have lost more games. In this instance, that means the implication is that OK St would have lost more games than Okla if OK St had played Okla's schedule.

That implication (which is speculation at best) is more relevant when comparing teams that haven't played each other or at least enough common opponents (a conference schedule is the obvious example here) to make more of a direct comparison between the two. That implication was not necessary, however, in the case of comparing Okla to OK St. The committee relied too heavily on numbers and too little on the actual direct comparison between the two teams. In other words, the fundamental argument that is settled in any game is who is better than who. If actual games between teams don't count as much as other (speculative) factors, then we are getting away from the point in the first place.

 

[Deep Creek]

The committee cares about who you've beaten and where you beat them. Conference play should be ignored, especially with the inbalance schedules all the teams play.

Not the Big 12...errybody plays errybody twice. No dodges.

 

[Codaxx]

The committee cares about who you've beaten and where you beat them. Conference play should be ignored, especially with the inbalance schedules all the teams play.

What? Conference play is more than half the schedule. Ignoring conference play is asinine.

 

[Myles]

The committee cares about who you've beaten and where you beat them. Conference play should be ignored, especially with the inbalance schedules all the teams play.

You mean like Oklahoma going 2-9 on the road?

 

[ericd7633]

Implicit in penalizing a team for playing a soft schedule is the idea that if they had played a tougher schedule they would have lost more games. In this instance, that means the implication is that OK St would have lost more games than Okla if OK St had played Okla's schedule.

That implication (which is speculation at best) is more relevant when comparing teams that haven't played each other or at least enough common opponents (a conference schedule is the obvious example here) to make more of a direct comparison between the two. That implication was not necessary, however, in the case of comparing Okla to OK St. The committee relied too heavily on numbers and too little on the actual direct comparison between the two teams. In other words, the fundamental argument that is settled in any game is who is better than who. If actual games between teams don't count as much as other (speculative) factors, then we are getting away from the point in the first place.

I would have been fine with Oklahoma State making it based on their quality wins. But you were arguing for ND, St Mary's, MTSU and USC, with your previous comment. I understand why Oklahoma State didn't make, and I'm fine with that too.

 

[ericd7633]

Not the Big 12...errybody plays errybody twice. No dodges.

I know. I was speaking in a general terms.

 

[ericd7633]

What? Conference play is more than half the schedule. Ignoring conference play is asinine.

The committee looks at overall record, where you finish in conference doesn't matter.

 

[ericd7633]

You mean like Oklahoma going 2-9 on the road?

And both of them were against top 25 teams according to the committee's "S" curve. How many did USC, MTSU, and St Mary's have?

 

[gobigred]

And both of them were against top 25 teams according to the committee's "S" curve. How many did USC, MTSU, and St Mary's have?

Pick me! Pick me! I know answer to that one

Spoiler

St Mary’s beat Gonzaga. Believe that’s it

 

[ericd7633]

Pick me! Pick me! I know answer to that one

Spoiler

0

St Mary's actually has 1 but the other two have 0.

 

[gobigred]

St Mary's actually has 1 but the other two have 0.

Yea I realized and fixed that after posted it originally. Was thinking St Mary’s won at home and not on road.

 

[Codaxx]

The committee looks at overall record, where you finish in conference doesn't matter.

That is my point, where you finish is based on your record over 16-18 wins. Again ignoring the results of half the schedule is asinine.

 

[ericd7633]

That is my point, where you finish is based on your record over 16-18 wins. Again ignoring the results of half the schedule is asinine.

They aren't ignoring the results, just the order in which you finish. Which I think is a great thing. Not all conference schedules are created equal, except the Big 12 and Big East.

 

[Deep Creek]

Oklahoma's Women's team was the last one in as well. And their resume isn't even as good as their men's team IMO. Good fortune for the dirt burgler's in hoops this year. Maybe they'll make the most of them and win some games.

 

[Wishbone]

I don't see how OU has a strong resume. Losing conference record. 4-11 to close. Best ball was played early, when other teams were improving OU was going backwards.

So in your mind games played in November and December don't mean as much as games played in February and March. Nobody else sees it that way.

 

[Codaxx]

So in your mind games played in November and December don't mean as much as games played in February and March. Nobody else sees it that way.

They don't? They do call it March Madness. Nobody gets a parade for winning the Maui Classic. It's almost like you are saying conference have tournaments in December to crown their champs.

Has anyone ever won a conference championship by wining 4 straight games in December? Anyone ever win a national title winning 6 straight games in December? Now change December and put in March, does your answer change?

 

[Myles]

And both of them were against top 25 teams according to the committee's "S" curve. How many did USC, MTSU, and St Mary's have?

How about those 9 losses?
Oklahoma was 18-13. That is a shitty record. They went 2-9 on the road. That is shitty. They have an RPI of 49. That is shitty.
Sure they started 14-2, but 12 of those games were at home against teams like Ball State, Portland, Omaha and North Texas.

They should not have made the tourney.

 

[ericd7633]

How about those 9 losses?
Oklahoma was 18-13. That is a shitty record. They went 2-9 on the road. That is shitty. They have an RPI of 49. That is shitty.
Sure they started 14-2, but 12 of those games were at home against teams like Ball State, Portland, Omaha and North Texas.

They should not have made the tourney.

Lmao. Yes they should have. I'm not surprised you think they shouldn't have though because you were the same person pushing for 6 B1G teams to make it when that wasn't even a remote possibility.