OSU, USC, and St. Marys got screwed.

[Zimwillett]

I'm not complaining about anything.

Just pointing out that it isn't ridiculous like you guys make it out to be that people are upset that OU is in and OSU is out.

It is ridiculous if you actually know the way the committee does it's work. There is a very good reason why literally every reputable bracketologist had OSU out of this tournament---teams with an RPI in the 85-90 range never get at large bids. Never. There aren't many bright lines in this process, but that's one of them.

Now you're free to agree or disagree with that as a criteria, but given the criteria they've been using for literally decades, there is just no real argument for OSU in the tournament, and to make this about OU vs. OSU simply reveals a myopic misunderstanding of the process.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

How was OSU consistently good and we were consistently bad, yet we had the same record and split the regular season series?

Sorry, that was supposed to be that they were inconsistently good and we were consistently bad

 

[152219]

I'm not complaining about anything.

Just pointing out that it isn't ridiculous like you guys make it out to be that people are upset that OU is in and OSU is out.

Except of course the matrices consistently show that OU had a superior season. Only OSU homers, OU/Trae Young haters, or idiots think that OSU deserved a bid above OU.

 

[MichaelM]

Except of course the matrices consistently show that OU had a superior season. Only OSU homers, OU/Trae Young haters, or idiots think that OSU deserved a bid above OU.

...and people who get their information from ESPN.

 

[152219]

...and people who get their information from ESPN.

Aka, “idiots”

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Except of course the matrices consistently show that OU had a superior season. Only OSU homers, OU/Trae Young haters, or idiots think that OSU deserved a bid above OU.

...and people who get their information from ESPN.

Aka, “idiots”

Or those that have watched the entire season.

OSU was a better team for half of the season and they proved it on the court.

Of course I'm happy that we got in over them.
I just think it is odd that people act like we are a vastly superior team than them

 

[skyvue]

OSU was a better team for half of the season and they proved it on the court.

Both teams finished 8-10 in the Big 12. Both lost their SEC Challenge game. Define "better."

Actually, don't. You've already tried, and it was nonsense.

 

[TINY]

Or those that have watched the entire season.

OSU was a better team for half of the season and they proved it on the court.

Of course I'm happy that we got in over them.
I just think it is odd that people act like we are a vastly superior team than them

Maybe I missed it, but I haven’t seen anyone state ou was vastly superior. An osu fan posted a thread stating they got screwed, when very clearly they did not get screwed. They finished with the same record in the big 12. Yes, they beat ou in the conf. Tournament so give them the slight edge for the second half of the season. The difference is ou was better against significantly tougher competition in the first half. That’s why ou made it and osu didn’t. Not because ou has Trae, not an fbi probe conspiracy, osu simply missed the cut because of its poor non conference schedule and in conference record.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Both teams finished 8-10 in the Big 12. Both lost their SEC Challenge game. Define "better."

Actually, don't. You've already tried, and it was nonsense.

Same record, better wins, and they beat us twice.

I don't know how anybody looking at this objectively could not see that OSU was the better team the second half of the season. It doesn't make you a bad OU fan to admit truth.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Maybe I missed it, but I haven’t seen anyone state ou was vastly superior. An osu fan posted a thread stating they got screwed, when very clearly they did not get screwed. They finished with the same record in the big 12. Yes, they beat ou in the conf. Tournament so give them the slight edge for the second half of the season. The difference is ou was better against significantly tougher competition in the first half. That’s why ou made it and osu didn’t. Not because ou has Trae, not an fbi probe conspiracy, osu simply missed the cut because of its poor non conference schedule and in conference record.

I just disagree.
I do think OU's nonconference wins were slightly better but not significantly better.
And I do think that if OU did not have Trae, and had the same record, we would not be in. Trae created a lot of attention of OU hoops and without it, I think it would have been easier to look at how terrible we have been playing and leave us out.
I don't think the FBI probe had much to do with it either

 

[TINY]

I just disagree.
I do think OU's nonconference wins were slightly better but not significantly better.
And I do think that if OU did not have Trae, and had the same record, we would not be in. Trae created a lot of attention of OU hoops and without it, I think it would have been easier to look at how terrible we have been playing and leave us out.
I don't think the FBI probe had much to do with it either

If that was the case then ou would be in the play in and osu would have been a first four out. As it is, ou was safely in the field and osu wasn’t even that close to making it. You can disagree but when you put the resumes side by side, ou’s was better and the committee of humans plus every computer came to the same conclusion.

 

[thebigabd]

Same record, better wins, and they beat us twice.

I don't know how anybody looking at this objectively could not see that OSU was the better team the second half of the season. It doesn't make you a bad OU fan to admit truth.

They are blind.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Same record, better wins, and they beat us twice.

I don't know how anybody looking at this objectively could not see that OSU was the better team the second half of the season. It doesn't make you a bad OU fan to admit truth.

And I don't see how anyone who follows the sport can continue focusing on who was better for the second half of the season, when that is an irrelevant factor.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

If that was the case then ou would be in the play in and osu would have been a first four out. As it is, ou was safely in the field and osu wasn’t even that close to making it. You can disagree but when you put the resumes side by side, ou’s was better and the committee of humans plus every computer came to the same conclusion.

That's fine.
I'm just saying that OSU was the better team for the second half of the season

 

[SoonerBounce13]

And I don't see how anyone who follows the sport can continue focusing on who was better for the second half of the season, when that is an irrelevant factor.

How is it irrelevant?

Personally, I like to see the teams I root for get better and improve through the year like OSU did rather than get worse like OU did. So to me, it is very relevant who is the better team at the end of the year and who wins the head to head matchups.


I'd much rather have a rough nonconference and be playing the best basketball at the end of the season than the other way around and I think the end of the year tournament should have the best teams. I don't think OU is a better team than OSU. Yes, overall, OU had a better year by some standards, but I don't feel they are a better team

 

[TINY]

How is it irrelevant?

Personally, I like to see the teams I root for get better and improve through the year like OSU did rather than get worse like OU did. So to me, it is very relevant who is the better team at the end of the year and who wins the head to head matchups.


I'd much rather have a rough nonconference and be playing the best basketball at the end of the season than the other way around and I think the end of the year tournament should have the best teams. I don't think OU is a better team than OSU. Yes, overall, OU had a better year by some standards, but I don't feel they are a better team

The discussion of the thread isn’t who is better today, it’s did osu get screwed by the selection committee. When one crunches the numbers it is clear that the answer to that question is unequivocally no, they did not get screwed. Everything u said can be true and osu can still not be worthy to get an invite to the dance.

 

[WichitaSooner]

How is it irrelevant?

Personally, I like to see the teams I root for get better and improve through the year like OSU did rather than get worse like OU did. So to me, it is very relevant who is the better team at the end of the year and who wins the head to head matchups.


I'd much rather have a rough nonconference and be playing the best basketball at the end of the season than the other way around and I think the end of the year tournament should have the best teams. I don't think OU is a better team than OSU. Yes, overall, OU had a better year by some standards, but I don't feel they are a better team

Because the topic is whether OSU "got screwed" by being left out of the tournament. When the committee makes clear that the end of the season doesn't count any more than the beginning, it is by definition irrelevant in assessing whether OSU or any team is playing better than OU right now. If the topic is whether I would prefer OU to be playing better right now, obviously the answer would be yes. But that's not what this thread is about.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Well I guess I missed the memo where the only things that can be discussed in a thread is strictly what the original topic is.

Sorry guys.

 

[thebigabd]

Because the topic is whether OSU "got screwed" by being left out of the tournament. When the committee makes clear that the end of the season doesn't count any more than the beginning, it is by definition irrelevant in assessing whether OSU or any team is playing better than OU right now. If the topic is whether I would prefer OU to be playing better right now, obviously the answer would be yes. But that's not what this thread is about.

It seems pretty clear to me that the committee favors what you did pre-conference more than post-conference. They say they matter the same, but their selections do not indicate that. Kinda like the USC coach said... might as well just stop playing in December. Rack up a few non-con wins, and you are good. Doesn't matter if you lose your last 10 games or whatever, you won some in November so you are solid.

 

[Zimwillett]

Or those that have watched the entire season.

OSU was a better team for half of the season and they proved it on the court.

Of course I'm happy that we got in over them.
I just think it is odd that people act like we are a vastly superior team than them

Well, first of all, I can speak for myself, and many others who are merely reacting to the notion that OSU got "screwed". I'm actually open to the argument that OU might be an undeserving at large bid. But I am NOT open to the idea that it should have been OSU in their place.

I don't know how many ways myself and others can prove that OSU did not have a tournament caliber resume based on the criteria the selection committee has historically used. Now you are free to advocate for different criteria (e.g. "eye test", more emphasis on late season results, less emphasis on RPI, etc.), but based on the criteria the committee has used in the past, and apparently again this year, OSU definitively did NOT get "screwed."