Consensus Bubble Watch

[MI Sooner]

While I agree that they should get in, where do you draw the line? do you not count loses that are against tourney teams anymore? Hey TCU only has four conference loses against teams that aren't going dancing!

Right. So TCU doesn't have a lot of bad losses. The do, however, have a lot more non-bad losses along with no good wins?

See how easy it is for me (and the NCAA tournament selection committee) to distinguish Oklahoma St from TCU?

 

[opsooner]

I don't need to have that explained. Go pull up the RPI poll on ESPN. Many in this thread appear to be buying what the media is saying and combining it with "potential" rather than what actually happened.

This is what the "BPI" has caused. The what-if rankings.

 

[CarlWeathers]

The biggest take away here is the strength of the big 12. Any other year osu is on the wrong side of the bubble having struggled in the 3rd or 4th best conference. Years past there were a few osu type resumes in the big east who got in because they were in that conference. One bad loss, enough good wins, average to above average ooc, weak bubble, and playing in the strongest league. That is why.

 

[Section31]

This is what the "BPI" has caused. The what-if rankings.

That poll loses ALL credibility by having OSU ranked ahead of OU by 6 places. Good grief. I wonder if that poll is used to hand out participation ribbons.

 

[campbest]

The last 10-12 games argument is only really used to compare teams with similar resumes and is generally only on a case by case basis with the individual committee member...it is not a bulleted variable the entire committee considers in unison.

It's all about the body of work vs. the last 10-12 games.

From the committee chairman...

Smith reminded reporters that the committee no longer subscribes to any official "last 12 games" criteria, but that each committee member can take each team's recent performance into consideration if he or she so desires. Basically, how your team's recent performance will be viewed depends on the subjective whim of each committee member.

 

[Section31]

The last 10-12 games argument is only really used to compare teams with similar resumes and is generally only on a case by case basis with the individual committee member...it is not a bulleted variable the entire committee considers in unison.

It's all about the body of work vs. the last 10-12 games.

From the committee chairman...

Right, and if you go to the RPI page, you will see OSU is a little better in some ways and worse in others.

As I said, MANY of those teams considered to be on the bubble have equal or better resumes and almost ALL of them were MUCH better over the last 10 or 12

 

[DenverSooner]

The biggest take away here is the strength of the big 12. Any other year osu is on the wrong side of the bubble having struggled in the 3rd or 4th best conference. Years past there were a few osu type resumes in the big east who got in because they were in that conference. One bad loss, enough good wins, average to above average ooc, weak bubble, and playing in the strongest league. That is why.

Why would you say any other year the Big XII is the third or fourth best conference. The Big XII/Big 8 is consistently one of the top major conferences not one of the weakest major conferences. The conference has been down the last few years but it roared back this year and it wasn't that down just OU, OSU and Texas were down a bit.

 

[oSuJeff97]

Right, and if you go to the RPI page, you will see OSU is a little better in some ways and worse in others.

As I said, MANY of those teams considered to be on the bubble have equal or better resumes and almost ALL of them were MUCH better over the last 10 or 12

I'd like to see a list of the MANY teams that are considered to be "on the bubble" that have an "equal or better resume."

You can yell about the "last 10 or 12" all you want. The plain fact is that you're just looking for a reason to not include OSU because you don't like them.

Finishing strong can help a team, but not if it's because they played a bunch of weak teams down the stretch. First and foremost, making the tournament is about your TOTAL resume and piling up quality wins while avoiding bad losses.

Every single person making an objective analysis of the NCAA tournament field has OSU easily in at this point. There is a good reason for that - and the reason, that BOK and a few others have pointed out over and over again, is that the bubble is relatively weak this year.

The reason for that, IMO, is that one of the power leagues (the SEC) was complete junk this year.

 

[MI Sooner]

That poll loses ALL credibility by having OSU ranked ahead of OU by 6 places. Good grief. I wonder if that poll is used to hand out participation ribbons.

Oklahoma St is ahead of Oklahoma in virtually every predictive rating and would likely be favored over Oklahoma on a neutral court. The BPI isn't purely predictive, but neither is it purely backward looking. Furthermore, it doesn't ignore margin of victory like RPI (dumbest rating ever conceived) or ELO and the like.

A ranking should be measured by how well it sets out to do what it does.

ND should have been ranked ahead of Alabama in 2012 (pre-title game) based on what the did. However, based on what you'd expect to happen, Bama should have been ahead of ND. Taking a Sagarin predictor or other ranking that had one loss Bama ahead of undefeated ND and saying "it loses ALL credibility" would make as much sense as you saying that about BPI.

 

[Section31]

Oklahoma St is ahead of Oklahoma in virtually every predictive rating and would likely be favored over Oklahoma on a neutral court. The BPI isn't purely predictive, but neither is it purely backward looking. Furthermore, it doesn't ignore margin of victory like RPI (dumbest rating ever conceived) or ELO and the like.

A ranking should be measured by how well it sets out to do what it does.

ND should have been ranked ahead of Alabama in 2012 (pre-title game) based on what the did. However, based on what you'd expect to happen, Bama should have been ahead of ND. Taking a Sagarin predictor or other ranking that had one loss Bama ahead of undefeated ND and saying "it loses ALL credibility" would make as much sense as you saying that about BPI.

Does it consider roster? So, what you're saying is you trust a ranking that contends one team will beat another even though it's been wrong TWICE in the season its rankings are based on? Go Aggies!

 

[oSuJeff97]

Does it consider roster? So, what you're saying is you trust a ranking that contends one team will beat another even though it's been wrong TWICE in the season its rankings are based on? Go Aggies!

Do you understand how probability works?

I don't know what the predictor rankings were before the two Bedlam games, but I'm fairly certain that it wasn't giving OSU a 100% chance of victory.

It was probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 65% or whatever, which is just barely better than a coin flip.

 

[DenverSooner]

Every single person making an objective analysis of the NCAA tournament field has OSU easily in at this point. There is a good reason for that - and the reason, that BOK and a few others have pointed out over and over again, is that the bubble is relatively weak this year.

The reason for that, IMO, is that one of the power leagues (the SEC) was complete junk this year.

It is more than that. What team that will get a 10 seed or lower is better than OSU? I am serious about this.

OSU is a good basketball team. If they didn't lose Cobbins and Clark they are even better.

 

[steverocks35]

Oklahoma St is ahead of Oklahoma in virtually every predictive rating and would likely be favored over Oklahoma on a neutral court. The BPI isn't purely predictive, but neither is it purely backward looking. Furthermore, it doesn't ignore margin of victory like RPI (dumbest rating ever conceived) or ELO and the like.

A ranking should be measured by how well it sets out to do what it does.

ND should have been ranked ahead of Alabama in 2012 (pre-title game) based on what the did. However, based on what you'd expect to happen, Bama should have been ahead of ND. Taking a Sagarin predictor or other ranking that had one loss Bama ahead of undefeated ND and saying "it loses ALL credibility" would make as much sense as you saying that about BPI.

In what universe would OSU but favored over OU on a neutral court? I hope we play them in the Big 12 tournament and put that ridiculous notion to rest.

 

[Section31]

Oklahoma St is ahead of Oklahoma in virtually every predictive rating and would likely be favored over Oklahoma on a neutral court. The BPI isn't purely predictive, but neither is it purely backward looking. Furthermore, it doesn't ignore margin of victory like RPI (dumbest rating ever conceived) or ELO and the like.

A ranking should be measured by how well it sets out to do what it does.

ND should have been ranked ahead of Alabama in 2012 (pre-title game) based on what the did. However, based on what you'd expect to happen, Bama should have been ahead of ND. Taking a Sagarin predictor or other ranking that had one loss Bama ahead of undefeated ND and saying "it loses ALL credibility" would make as much sense as you saying that about BPI.

Before you make asinine statements again, go google college basketball RPI and look at ALL of the information that is supplied. I'm not giving any one element more weight than another. I'm not making anything up like you. I'm not basing my opinion on anything but what the numbers bear out. Hell, I'm not even taking into consideration how dysfunctional they actually look watching with my own two eyes OR that they have one of the single worst coaches in basketball.

How dumb does it sound for you to question my judgment when you're not even looking at the data. You may WANT them to CURRENTLY be a full strength talented basketball team, but it doesn't make it true. Right now, OSU is an average team with a couple of talented athletes.

 

[Section31]

Oklahoma St is ahead of Oklahoma in virtually every predictive rating and would likely be favored over Oklahoma on a neutral court. The BPI isn't purely predictive, but neither is it purely backward looking. Furthermore, it doesn't ignore margin of victory like RPI (dumbest rating ever conceived) or ELO and the like.

A ranking should be measured by how well it sets out to do what it does.

ND should have been ranked ahead of Alabama in 2012 (pre-title game) based on what the did. However, based on what you'd expect to happen, Bama should have been ahead of ND. Taking a Sagarin predictor or other ranking that had one loss Bama ahead of undefeated ND and saying "it loses ALL credibility" would make as much sense as you saying that about BPI.

Problem with BPI is it COULD rank ND above bama.

 

[Section31]

Do you understand how probability works?

I don't know what the predictor rankings were before the two Bedlam games, but I'm fairly certain that it wasn't giving OSU a 100% chance of victory.

It was probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 65% or whatever, which is just barely better than a coin flip.

Do YOU understand how sports work and how math generally doesn't work? You keep clinging to your higher BPI rating and I'll keep celebrating the actual wins.

 

[Section31]

BTW, why do some of you get in a huff over these kinds of discussions?

 

[steverocks35]

The BPI also has Iowa ahead of OU....fail.

 

[MI Sooner]

In what universe would OSU but favored over OU on a neutral court? I hope we play them in the Big 12 tournament and put that ridiculous notion to rest.

Can you quantify ridiculous for me? Does a notion have to have a 10% or less chance of being true for it to be ridiculous?

I'm happy to put my money where my mouth is, especially at 9:1 odds.

 

[DenverSooner]

Can you quantify ridiculous for me? Does a notion have to have a 10% or less chance of being true for it to be ridiculous?

I'm happy to put my money where my mouth is, especially at 9:1 odds.

I want in at 9:1 too. Is a pick-em a push because that is what I think the line would be.