Jump to content

At Large Bid Reality


Talon90

Recommended Posts

As much as I hate to say it, CUSA does not appear not strong enough to get two teams in the NCAA Tournament.  I haven't seen any bracket predictions with more than one CUSA team listed and not one CUSA team listed on a tourney bubble.  

I am convinced like many of you that we have to win the CUSA Tournament to get in regardless of our number of wins.  Otherwise, it will be a great season with a probable NIT bid coming.

 

ntb.png

ntb2.png

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think with the nod from Sportscenter the other night, coupled with indication from local coverage that their respect is coming, there is a basis here for some momentum and optimism as we finish this final run.

Win out until CUSA title game, create tons of noise on social media (likes, tags, retweets, and shares), and see what happens.

Unfortunately, winning out the regular season is much easier said than done.  Lose to FAU and UAB, and IMO we have almost zero chance of an at-large bid even if we end up making the CUSA title game.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, greenminer said:

...Unfortunately, winning out the regular season is much easier said than done.  Lose to FAU and UAB, and IMO we have almost zero chance of an at-large bid even if we end up making the CUSA title game.

The NIT (16 teams) was all held at NT and Frisco last year.  It's probably back to NYC this year with Covid finally on the decline. I think if in Frisco we could outdraw our Frisco Bowl attendance, sadly.

  • Skeptical Eagle 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if we won out and then lost to UAB in the championship game, we have a good chance at an at-large bid.  I read that no team has ever received an at-large bid with a losing record in quad 1 and quad 2 games.  There are several teams ahead of us in the NET that have losing records in those games and some by quite a bit.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

UAB's NET rating is 39. The only team higher than UAB not in the recent SB Nation bracket is Washington State who is 0-2 in Quad 1 games. The lowest NET team in the bracket is Creighton at 75 but they have 4 Quad 1 wins. Looks like that's the biggest factor in at-large bids. UAB has no Quad 1 games left. We have 1 which is at UAB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need Wichita State to keep winning and to beat UAB. Wichita State is our only win that is Quad 1 but it's hanging on by a thread. Road games against teams ranked 1-75 are Quad 1 and Wichita State is currently ranked.... 75. UAB is our only Quad 1 game left on the schedule. Beat them and Wichita State gets some good wins and we'll look a lot better at 2-1 in those games.

Screenshot_20220211-112251_Chrome.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2022 at 9:59 PM, GMG_Dallas said:

UAB's NET rating is 39. The only team higher than UAB not in the recent SB Nation bracket is Washington State who is 0-2 in Quad 1 games. The lowest NET team in the bracket is Creighton at 75 but they have 4 Quad 1 wins. Looks like that's the biggest factor in at-large bids. UAB has no Quad 1 games left. We have 1 which is at UAB.

We might be a Quad 1 game for UAB.  That was the assumption the announcers were making last night during the UAB/SoMiss game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MDH said:

Winning out and losing in CCG gives us the best shot. Had we not dropped Buffalo and/or held on v. Miami we'd be sitting a lot more comfortable. 

Yeah, the Buffalo and Miami losses don't help, but I think overall it's simply the lack of Quad 1 wins that is hurting more than any of our losses--none of which are really that bad.  We have a huge opportunity for a Quad 1 win at UAB, and that could go a long way toward placing North Texas firmly in the at-large conversation. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Skeptical Eagle 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, keith said:

We might be a Quad 1 game for UAB.  That was the assumption the announcers were making last night during the UAB/SoMiss game.

By NCAA criteria, UAB at home against UNT won't be a Quad 1 game for them but it will for us just like when we were at home against them, it was a Quad 1 game for them but not us. I attached a screenshot of NCAA's NET ranking criteria to show the breakdown.

Screenshot_20220211-130652_Chrome.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Greendylan said:

Yeah, the Buffalo and Miami losses don't help, but I think overall it's simply the lack of Quad 1 wins that is hurting more than any of our losses--none of which are really that bad.  We have a huge opportunity for a Quad 1 win at UAB, and that could go a long way toward placing North Texas firmly in the at-large conversation. 

I think you're right. If Wichita State can right the ship a bit and stay in the top 75, and if we beat UAB, we'll be 2-1 in Quad 1 games. Now here's the fun part, if Louisiana Tech can go on a run and beat UAB and sneak into top 75, our road win against them would become a Quad 1 win. They're currently ranked 94.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best situation for 2 Bid CUSA is UAB winning out (yes I know that means we lost) and NT losing 1 game at max, then facing off in the championship game. If NT wins, that’s an automatic bid and with UAB having now 3 quad 1 wins but a loss in the championship, it would boost them into the possible first four.

In short… both teams lose 1 more game at MAX, play each other in the championship and battle it out to see who gets the automatic bid and pray the selection committee on the Sunday after is nice and doesn’t snub like they did MTSU in 2019)

UAB has a way better chance at an at large in almost every situation, but us winning at UAB would damage the chances of another bid since it would be a Q2 loss for them (big Q1 win for NT)

See like I want 2 bids, but nothing would be better than NT winning out in the regular season and winning the tournament, which if that happens an 11 seed is more and more realistic with a 27-4 record in the end.

  • Upvote 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GMG_Dallas said:

By NCAA criteria, UAB at home against UNT won't be a Quad 1 game for them but it will for us just like when we were at home against them, it was a Quad 1 game for them but not us. I attached a screenshot of NCAA's NET ranking criteria to show the breakdown.

Screenshot_20220211-130652_Chrome.jpg

That's right...I had top 50 stuck in my head and what the announcers were saying last night, but that's for neutral site games.  Not sure what they were thinking about either.  

Is the Quad win/loss count based on how the team was ranked at the time the game was played or is it based on how the team is ranked at the end of the season.  For example, we beat UAB on the road, but then they crap the bed the rest of the season and end up with a NET 90 ranking, do we still get credit for Quad 1 win or does it become a Quad 2 win?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2022 at 8:59 PM, GMG_Dallas said:

UAB's NET rating is 39. The only team higher than UAB not in the recent SB Nation bracket is Washington State who is 0-2 in Quad 1 games. The lowest NET team in the bracket is Creighton at 75 but they have 4 Quad 1 wins. Looks like that's the biggest factor in at-large bids. UAB has no Quad 1 games left. We have 1 which is at UAB.

I don't understand the NET love for UAB.  As of today (2/11) they are #42 with 5 losses (including Rice and to a very poor Marshall).  UNT is #52 with 4 losses, none to anyone as bad as Marshall.   I know the head-to-head loss, but there must be some historical bias in these ratings otherwise it doesn't make sense.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/rankings/net/

 

Edited by NT80
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not as up to date on this but I would think the helpful for us if there are no upsets in tournaments where a team ends up winning their tournament and get the auto bid that would have never been considered and they give an at-large to the teams they planned on winning. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, NT80 said:

I don't understand the NET love for UAB.  As of today (2/11) they are #42 with 5 losses (including Rice and to a very poor Marshall).  UNT is #52 with 4 losses, none to anyone as bad as Marshall.   I know the head-to-head loss, but there must be some historical bias in these ratings otherwise it doesn't make sense.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/rankings/net/

 

UAB is 2-1 in Quad 1 with one of those wins against us. We're 1-1. If we beat them in their house and move to 2-1 in Quad 1, we should see a good jump in the rankings. The link below shows good break downs of each teams record as it pertains to the Quad categories. 

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2022/net-teamsheets-plus

Edited by GMG_Dallas
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NorthTexasSportsNetwork said:

The best situation for 2 Bid CUSA is UAB winning out (yes I know that means we lost) and NT losing 1 game at max, then facing off in the championship game. If NT wins, that’s an automatic bid and with UAB having now 3 quad 1 wins but a loss in the championship, it would boost them into the possible first four.

In short… both teams lose 1 more game at MAX, play each other in the championship and battle it out to see who gets the automatic bid and pray the selection committee on the Sunday after is nice and doesn’t snub like they did MTSU in 2019)

UAB has a way better chance at an at large in almost every situation, but us winning at UAB would damage the chances of another bid since it would be a Q2 loss for them (big Q1 win for NT)

See like I want 2 bids, but nothing would be better than NT winning out in the regular season and winning the tournament, which if that happens an 11 seed is more and more realistic with a 27-4 record in the end.

I think UAB's loss to Marshall tanked their chances at an at-large birth. Mid-majors simply don't get at-large bids with losses that bad. Especially, when you don't have a marquee win to balance it out with.

IMO, we're in the same boat to receive an at-large...win out with a loss in the championship game. 

And if we do somehow win out there's no way we're seeded lower than 11. Hell, at 27-4 a 10 seed would be more likely than 12. 

Edited by UNTcrazy727
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GMG_Dallas said:

UAB is 2-1 in Quad 1 with one of those wins against us. We're 1-1. If we beat them in their house and move to 2-1 in Quad 1, we should see a good jump in the rankings. The link below shows good break downs of each teams record as it pertains to the Quad categories. 

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2022/net-teamsheets-plus

How about rating the losses?

UAB has five (5) losses against teams that average a NET of 127.

NT has four (4) losses against teams that average a NET of 59.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, NT80 said:

How about rating the losses?

UAB has five (5) losses against teams that average a NET of 127.

NT has four (4) losses against teams that average a NET of 59.

UAB also has 13 double digit wins. We have 9. That matters. As does efficiency like free throw shooting, rebounding, etc... Quad 1 wins count the most though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:

UAB also has 13 double digit wins. We have 9. That matters. As does efficiency like free throw shooting, rebounding, etc... Quad 1 wins count the most though.

Then the system is flawed.  The point differential in wins (and losses) should also factor who you played, not just the final garbage time scoring of double vs single digits. The analytics can be skewed any way one wants to.  The "Quad" wins should be based on their Quad ranking when you played them, not at the end of the season, after they lost their key player and slipped in ranking.  Likewise a loss.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, NT80 said:

Then the system is flawed.  The point differential in wins (and losses) should also factor who you played, not just the final garbage time scoring of double vs single digits. The analytics can be skewed any way one wants to.  The "Quad" wins should be based on their Quad ranking when you played them, not at the end of the season, after they lost their key player and slipped in ranking.  Likewise a loss.  

Well, they avoid ranking quad wins when you played them because what if a team is massively overvalued in a December OOC and then they go .500 in their league.  It goes to show they weren't REALLY a Quad 1 team.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.