Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room...
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 34
| visibility 2,986

Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room...


Mar 16, 2019, 8:17 PM

I have posted several different things about comparing the bubble teams. This is not to advocate for Clemson, but rather to just show the numbers. This may be what the committee is looking at.

Here are several different metrics to compare what is largely seen as "last 14 teams considered for 8 spots". These are based on what Lunardi has for "last four byes, last four in, first four out, and next two out. He has Clemson as the 6th team out right now.

Pretend you are on the committee, and try to be unbiased. Who would you put in and why? As of now, Lunardi has 3 of the 4 top seeds from the ACC.

I will start with Clemson, then go in order from what is seen as "safest" to "out".

Clemson:
NET- 35
KenPom- 29
Quad 1: 1-10
Quad 2: 6-3
Quad 3: 6-0
Quad 4: 6-0

LAST FOUR BYES:
Oklahoma: NET--37 KenPom- 39
Quad 1: 4--10
Quad 2: 6-2
Quad 3: 9-1
Quad 4: 0- 0

Florida: NET- 31 KenPom- 28
Quad 1: 4-11
Quad 2: 6-1
Quad 3: 6- 2
Quad 4: 5-0

Ohio St. NET- 55 KenPom- 43
Quad 1: 4-10
Quad 2: 5-3
Quad 3: 5-1
Quad 4: 5-0

Arizona St. NET- 63 KenPom- 61
Quad 1: 3-3
Quad 2: 8-3
Quad 3: 5-2
Quad 4: 6-2

LAST FOUR IN
Temple: NET- 54 KenPom- 75
Quad 1: 2-6
Quad 2: 6-2
Quad 3: 7-2
Quad 4: 8-0

St. Johns: NET- 72 KenPom- 78
Quad 1: 5-7
Quad 2: 5- 3
Quad 3: 3- 2
Quad 4: 8-0


TCU: NET- 51 KenPom- 48
Quad 1: 3-9
Quad 2: 6- 4
Quad 3: 7-0
Quad 4: 4- 0

NCST: NET- 34 KenPom-- 32
Quad 1: 3- 9
Quad 2: 5-0
Quad 3: 4-2
Quad 4: 10- 0

FIRST FOUR OUT:
Belmont: NET- 47 KenPom-- 53
Quad 1: 2-2
Quad 2: 2-1
Quad 3: 4-2
Quad 4: 17--0

Texas: NET- 38 KenPom- 30
Quad 1: 5-10
Quad 2: 4- 5
Quad 3: 4-1
Quad 4: 3-0

Indiana: NET- 53 KenPom- 41
Quad 1: 6- 9
Quad 2: 2-6
Quad 3: 3- 0
Quad 4: 6-0

Oregon: NET- 56 KenPom- 49
Quad 1: 2-5
Quad 2: 4-4
Quad 3: 8-2
Quad 4: 8-1

NEXT OUT:
Alabama: NET- 61 KenPom- 60
Quad 1: 3-10
Quad 2: 7--3
Quad 3: 5- 2
Quad 4: 3-0

CLEMSOM

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


If teams like St Johns & Temple get in over Clemson...


Mar 16, 2019, 8:46 PM

they are obviously looking at nothing but quad one wins!

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

but where do you draw the line? Many schools that he has


Mar 16, 2019, 9:04 PM

above us have much worse records in Quad 2-4 games.

We are 18--3 in those games, with no Quad 3 or 4 losses. Many teams have losses in those categories, and thus much worse NET rating than we do.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


We are burnt toast


Mar 17, 2019, 2:21 AM

NIT bound

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room...


Mar 16, 2019, 9:08 PM

Sadly, we are likely not to get in, but I think we are good enough to do some damage. We just have to close a couple of games. We could easily be a Sweet 16 team again. I don't think we will get that chance though.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

fair enough


Mar 16, 2019, 9:09 PM

who is in over us, and why? Is it only b/c of Quad 1?

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: fair enough


Mar 16, 2019, 9:26 PM

I just don't think we get in after listening to the pundits. I think we are way underrated and just choked a few times. We're definitely good enough to be there.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Not all Q1 are created equal...


Mar 16, 2019, 9:22 PM [ in reply to Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room... ]

That's the first thing that stands out. If they were, the other metrics would be on par...and they're not. The other aspect is, it would seem the field experts are still applying past metrics since there's no data on how the committee is really assessing teams.

Rest assured, there are a lot of teams hoping Clemson doesn't make the field, because they know that 5 L's by 8 points is some tough luck...and that can turn at any time. Think of this anomaly, for example: Reed missed 24 FT's all season...in 161 attempts...yet missed 4 in a one minute stretch. In response, NC State throws up a prayer at the buzzer. Miami gets just enough grip on the ball to bounce one off the backboard at the buzzer.

The UNC and second NC State games are contrasts at the buzzer on what is, or isn't a foul...and both go against the Tigers. If you were teaching an officiating course and used those two games, how would you explain no whistle in at least one game. What lesson is the take-away? (Oh...anyone see the end of Florida's game today? Hack...hack!)

The changes made in determining selections, one would think, were intended to place more logic into the process and weight the competition better. Let's be real...with exceedingly few exceptions has an in-conference .500 or less team made the Dance. Changes are made and all of a sudden, teams 3 or more below are under consideration...but NONE are from the ACC? Really?

2024 orange level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The question I have is how they weigh the quad 1 games....


Mar 16, 2019, 9:17 PM

There’s a difference between a quad 1 game against a # 30 type team and playing Duke, UVA & UNC (for instance).
Our quad 1 schedule is likely tougher than others, if that makes sense...I assume they study all that stuff (hence the NET ranking).
I think the espn guys have overhyped the ‘quad 1 record’ without examining the whole picture.
Not sure what the committee will do.
I’d have us in over St John’s, Temple, Ohio St, Indiana, TCU, Texas & Bama & the PAC 12 teams for sure.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

great point... our Quad 1 schedule would have to be really


Mar 16, 2019, 9:25 PM

strong

and if you are comparing us with a team that is 3- 8 or something in Quad 1 games, that has to count for something.


Our NET is higher than all Bubble teams outside of NCST (1 above us), and it's not really even close.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: great point... our Quad 1 schedule would have to be really


Mar 17, 2019, 7:04 AM

Why are you relying so heavily on the NET ranking other than that it’s our most favorable metric? Hasn’t pretty much everyone said they’re not sure how the committee will use it? Definitely not something I would hang my hat on. Let’s face it, we did not perform well enough against the lock tournament teams to get in.

No matter how you want to spin it going 1-11 in Quad 1 games, no significant OOC wins to hang our hat on, and now several bid stealers winning their conference, the outlook isn’t favorable.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Immediately eliminate anyone with a quad 4 loss


Mar 16, 2019, 9:33 PM

or more than 9 quad 4 games played.

That leaves us with 10:
Clemson
Oklahoma
Florida
Ohio St
Temple
Alabama
St Johns
TCU
Texas
Indiana

Eliminate anyone with less than 10 Quad 1 games:

Down to 9:
Clemson
Oklahoma
Florida
Ohio St
Alabama
St Johns
TCU
Texas
Indiana

With only 1 left to eliminate, we go with the worst winning percentage in quad 1 games.

Final 8 in:
Oklahoma
Florida
Ohio St
Alabama
St Johns
TCU
Texas
Indiana

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


good points... I would argue how do you distinguish


Mar 16, 2019, 9:41 PM

between a team with Quad 2 and 3 losses, and one with few Quad 1 wins... also do you look at the strength of Quad 1 schedule, as mentioned above?

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


I'd have to assume that most power 5 schools


Mar 16, 2019, 10:28 PM

that are on the bubble win about 75% of their quad 2/3 games and the mid major schools are probably around 50% in those same games since they probably play more of them. If there was a team that under performed greatly in those games, we could take a look there, however I'd use those games as a tie breaker only if needed.

I see Indiana didn't fare well in those games, so there could be an argument between them and Clemson if it went down that far. However comparing Indiana to Clemson in quad 1 games is the real difference for me.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


I would be curious to see the breakdown of QD1 games


Mar 16, 2019, 10:32 PM

it includes 1-30 at home, but 1-75 on the road

Winning 3 games at teams 65, 68, and 75 isn’t comparable to losing 5 -6 games to top 20 teams

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Yeah, it really does need to be broken down a little further


Mar 16, 2019, 10:54 PM

and does a Q1 win remain a Q1 win all year or does it change during the season. Kinda like last football season when LSU beat #8 Miami and was credited with a top 10 win all year long even though Miami ended up 7-6

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


a great example is our games with Syracuse... their win over


Mar 16, 2019, 11:10 PM

us was a Quad 1 loss for us... but the win over them was not a Quad 1 win

same team

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room...


Mar 16, 2019, 9:47 PM

Yeah, I really don't see a clear path. Our kids fought like heck when they could have quit mid-season. I would love for them to get the chance but the only real thing I can think of is if the committee places a higher emphasis on the latter third of the season. Then there might be some hope for a team climbing up vs a team fizzling out. I just do not trust that "quasi-eye" test.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

8-4 over our last 12***


Mar 16, 2019, 9:56 PM



badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


I thought when we beat cuse should have been in.


Mar 16, 2019, 10:06 PM

Even if a close loss to NC state. At that point the metrics said we were in. But the media acted as if that was a play in game. Reality is both teams should be in.

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


The media have the collective IQ of


Mar 16, 2019, 10:08 PM

Cattle gas...so....

2024 orange level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I thought when we beat cuse should have been in.


Mar 16, 2019, 10:18 PM [ in reply to I thought when we beat cuse should have been in. ]

Heck, I even thought the NC State game was the play-in game. My thinking was that the winner was a lock and the loser had to sweat other teams in the same boat bowing out early. Unfortunately some non-favorite conference winners combined with some teams like UF doing better made our bubble smaller. We have a change... but it is an outside looking in chance that will depend on the humans. I don't like that.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Our clear path is if the committee values NET


Mar 16, 2019, 10:20 PM [ in reply to Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room... ]

as much as they are supposed to. That, plus our strong finish to the season (8-5 in our last 13 games).

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"All those 'Fire Brownell' guys can kiss it." -Joseph Girard III

"Everybody needs to know that Coach Brownell is arguably the best coach to come through Clemson." -PJ Hall


If we get in


Mar 16, 2019, 10:33 PM

It will be the first close one we've won this year

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room...


Mar 16, 2019, 10:39 PM

Looking at that I could see why TCU and Texas could be in. Okie, UF, and OSU seem like locks from just these numbers. I would have us and NCST after that. I would just like to know who all those quad 1 teams are and how those teams lost or won before judging. Texas must have a top 10 sos bud idk.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I can't wrap my head around


Mar 16, 2019, 10:50 PM

Other conferences being stronger than the ACC...they're not...yet having sub-.500 teams being considered...they are. Bilas just wrapped the Duke-FSU game by saying the ACC could have 3 #1 seeds, which means a lot of conference losses came from the best teams. His point was, in that instance, that doesn't make the rest of the teams bad...they just have tough competition.

That's how the committee should think, too.

2024 orange level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room...


Mar 16, 2019, 10:41 PM

Clemson isn’t getting in. Quit doing this to yourselves.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room...


Mar 16, 2019, 10:42 PM

Nor do we deserve to.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room...


Mar 16, 2019, 11:03 PM [ in reply to Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room... ]

And why not?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Posts like this are why I want to bang my head against the wall.


Mar 16, 2019, 11:39 PM [ in reply to Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room... ]

Why don’t you think we are getting in? Please cite convincing data to offset the fact that our NET ranking is excellent compared to all of the other teams in and around the bubble.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"All those 'Fire Brownell' guys can kiss it." -Joseph Girard III

"Everybody needs to know that Coach Brownell is arguably the best coach to come through Clemson." -PJ Hall


I dont think we get in because with the bubble


Mar 17, 2019, 2:04 AM

so clustered I think the committee leans much more on name and emotion than metrics. The human element will decide it

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I hear what you’re saying... but if it comes down to the


Mar 17, 2019, 2:10 AM

few teams that it seems it will ... they will have to put very limited emphasis on NET to leave us out. We are that far ahead of everyone else

QD1 games are not equal, and our NET shows that

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


It's the NCAA


Mar 17, 2019, 7:46 AM

They're going to do what they want, and then we'll have the same yearly discussion of the teams that didnt get in. With this squishy bubble, they won't sweat a thing. I really hope I'm wrong, but it's the NCAA

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room...


Mar 16, 2019, 11:13 PM

Look at how many ahead of us played 8 Q4 teams. We didn’t play any

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Go Tigers! Once A Tiger Always A Tiger


Re: Ok- here we are- put yourself in the committee room...


Mar 16, 2019, 11:13 PM

Look at how many ahead of us played 8 Q4 teams. We didn’t play any

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Go Tigers! Once A Tiger Always A Tiger


Replies: 34
| visibility 2,986
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic