I just saw BU's SOS of 96. After it's all said and done, BU played a schedule that is a full 9 spots harder than ISU's.
Is 9 spots negligible?
Playing ISU 2 times pulled us down....
-
Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.
St. Louis Post writer says ISU "deserves a spot in NCAA tournament"
- Thread starter Da Coach
- Start date
Playing ISU 2 times pulled us down....
I just saw BU's SOS of 96. After it's all said and done, BU played a schedule that is a full 9 spots harder than ISU's.
Is 9 spots negligible?
You are correct on those numbers. I don't think Bradley has any business being in the NCAA tournament either.
cpacmel, that is the overall SOS, and the reason it looks close is because the 12 teams play essentially the same conference schedules (except BU plays ISU, and ISU plays BU twice), and in a good conference like the MVC, those games draw everyone closer in overall SOS.
The real fair comparison is looking at the non-conference Strength of Schedule, where there is a huge difference--
Here is Ken Pomeroy's site for 2008-2009. The non-conference SOS is in the far right column--
http://www.kenpom.com/conf.php?y=2009&c=MVC
BU= 177 (the lowest it's been for many years for BU)
ISU= 272- 2nd worst in the MVC
Here is last year's (2007-2008 )-
http://www.kenpom.com/conf.php?y=2008&c=MVC
BU= 89
ISU= 142
Here is 2006-2007-
http://www.kenpom.com/conf.php?y=2007&c=MVC
BU= 42
ISU= 236
And 2005-2006-
http://www.kenpom.com/conf.php?y=2006&c=MVC
BU= 74
ISU= 291
In fact, you have to go all the way back to 2003-2004 to find the last season where ISU had a better non-conference SOS than Bradley. Every year since then it hasn't been close.
The real fair comparison is looking at the non-conference Strength of Schedule, where there is a huge difference--
Here is Ken Pomeroy's site for 2008-2009. The non-conference SOS is in the far right column--
http://www.kenpom.com/conf.php?y=2009&c=MVC
BU= 177 (the lowest it's been for many years for BU)
ISU= 272- 2nd worst in the MVC
Here is last year's (2007-2008 )-
http://www.kenpom.com/conf.php?y=2008&c=MVC
BU= 89
ISU= 142
Here is 2006-2007-
http://www.kenpom.com/conf.php?y=2007&c=MVC
BU= 42
ISU= 236
And 2005-2006-
http://www.kenpom.com/conf.php?y=2006&c=MVC
BU= 74
ISU= 291
In fact, you have to go all the way back to 2003-2004 to find the last season where ISU had a better non-conference SOS than Bradley. Every year since then it hasn't been close.
Playing ISU 2 times pulled us down....
With our RPI being 47, I think it was quite the opposite Murph.
But I know your kidding. We were BU's only top 50 win. (1-6 overall) Does that mean we were your BEST WIN?
ISU was only 2-1 vs. the top 50.
And as Shaunguth already pointed out 7-6 vs. the top 100. BU was 2-10 vs. the top 100.
With our RPI being 47, I think it was quite the opposite Murph.
We were BU's only top 50 win. (1-6 overall) Does that mean we were your BEST WIN?
ISU was only 2-1 vs. the top 50.
And as Shaunguth already pointed out 7-6 vs. the top 100. BU was 2-10 vs. the top 100.
It's a good thing the writer didn't say "Bradley deserves a spot".
Cpacmel,
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that BU's resume is better... I don't know anyone who thinks BU has anything like a shot at the NCAA. I think we all think that our non-con schedule was better. I think most of us think ISU was the better team this year, and has a better resume. I think most of us also think that ISU doesn't have any shot at an NCAA bid... I also think that ISU may have indeed been our best win this year.
So, doesn't that mean we agree with you?
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that BU's resume is better... I don't know anyone who thinks BU has anything like a shot at the NCAA. I think we all think that our non-con schedule was better. I think most of us think ISU was the better team this year, and has a better resume. I think most of us also think that ISU doesn't have any shot at an NCAA bid... I also think that ISU may have indeed been our best win this year.
So, doesn't that mean we agree with you?
I have to disagree with that. A matter of fact, the only SOS # the committee looks at is a team's OVERALL SOS.
Now a team's schedule is grouped by wins vs. 1-50, 51-100, 101-200, and 200+ for the selection committee, but in their selection sheet the only SOS # is Overall.
Evansville's SOS is #57
Drake's SOS is #127
Good post TheFish. Though I think you would find people on here that would say that BU was better than ISU, despite the fact that ISU finished ahead of them in the standings and have a better RPI. (by 40 spots too)
My point really came down to scheduling. I just thought it was interesting that despite the fact that BU's schedule was described as "challenging" and ISU's schedule was described as "soft", the 2 team's overall SOS was virtually the same.
That is all. 8)
Well, I do think ISU's schedule was extremely soft. Bradley's schedule was decent with three excellent opponents, but not "strong" because after those three it was pretty weak. Bradley didn't perform over the course of the schedule. We beat none of the big guys and lost to a couple of teams that we shouldn't have.
We played okay in conference, but ISU did better. We split our series with ISU, so given ISU's better conference performance, nod goes to ISU. I think ISU had the talent to be quite a bit better, and I think a healthy BU might have very well been the better team. Doesn't really matter though, now.
We played okay in conference, but ISU did better. We split our series with ISU, so given ISU's better conference performance, nod goes to ISU. I think ISU had the talent to be quite a bit better, and I think a healthy BU might have very well been the better team. Doesn't really matter though, now.
I think St. Mary's might be in anyway, so I don't think tonight's game will matter there. George Mason is right on the fringe and may not get in short of the tourney championship anyway. Hard to gage where the committee is on Utah St. but hopefully they win along with Siena because they will both take away bids if they don't take care of business. Finally, three teams minimum will come out of the Mountain West anyway, so it does not matter much there either. Obviously Butler or a third team out of the A-10 could do some damage to Creighton's chances as well.
As far as ISU is concerned, I think they should get consideration. They are 2-1 against the top 50 (all Creighton) and have a very respectable against the top 100 as well. I would hate to see a team like ISU and especially Creighton get shafted by the likes of a South Carolina who has a 1-5 record against the top 50, or a Kentucky who while decent is not an NCAA caliber team in my opinion. What the fascination is regarding South Carolina by the media is beyond me, but they stick out like a sore thumb as an "ultimate" bubble team who really has no business in the tournament. If the committee does their job, a team like that will not be chosen, but as usual Selection Sunday ought to be fascinating in either a good way or a bad way!
R
RedbirdFan21
Guest
While there are still many defections (graduates) to come in the near future for Jank, the three players (besides Holtz) that we are graduating are all Jank's recruits (Holloway, Sampay and Champ). He has already shown he can bring in the talent to replace the talent porter brought in (Boo, Slack, Dom). While Jank will have a hell of a time replacing O and even Dinma, he has already shown the ability to off-set the loss of porter's recruits graduating... with the above mentioned recruits... those were juco's and transfers. Now we get to see the high school recruits he has got in action next year...
Nice post DC I agree 1000%... Seth Davis also lists the importance of non-conference sos in a January article that I just found.
He even mentioned ISU;-)
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/seth_davis/01/14/mailbag/
I think the main difference in schedules for BU and isu was BU's opportunity to get "signature" wins. If our resume had ended up better a win on the road over Michigan State or Florida, or at home against Butler would have looked real good in the eyes of the selection committee IMO. We had the opportunity, though we didn't capitalize. Wright State just doesnt have the same ring to it
MacabreMob
New member
I just want to voice my opinion.
1) Creighton will not be in the NCAA
2) ISU will not be in the NCAA
I'm not basing my opinion to flame anyone and I am not stating my opinion to flame anyone. It's just how I see it.
Now... if Davidson and/or Northwestern get At-Large bids and ISU and/or Creighton don't.... better look out... I'll be blowing up my tv, computer... anything in site as that would be flat out BS!
1) Creighton will not be in the NCAA
2) ISU will not be in the NCAA
I'm not basing my opinion to flame anyone and I am not stating my opinion to flame anyone. It's just how I see it.
Now... if Davidson and/or Northwestern get At-Large bids and ISU and/or Creighton don't.... better look out... I'll be blowing up my tv, computer... anything in site as that would be flat out BS!
The AW injury would be like you guys playing without Osiris, that is why! I also believe you are right that the RS is a blessing because even with him, it would have been tough to win the MVC and our likelihood of doing something in the NCAA remote, but in 2 years with AW I expect BU to be very special!:mrgreen:
He's way off base on this one. I don't know if he's trying to cover his behind after predicting ISU in last year, but again, how can you keep a team out based on one game, especially since Creighton has done more than enough to deserve a bid?
As I have stated already on other threads, ISU did not have any top 50 wins last year (0-3 against Drake), and finished in second place. Creighton this year is 3-2 against the top 50 and finished tied for first.
Sounds like good credentials to me!
2bradleyfans
New member
Creighton still has a ligitamit chance of getting an at large (they are on the bubble).
Although I think despite whatever the rules are, the commitee looks at "what have you done lately" and CU looked bad in St. Lou.
ISU (rather OE) looked like an NCAA team in St. Lou but didn't have the resume for an at large.
ISU has no one to blame but themselves. Had ISU just one good signature non-con win and they might be a "bubble" team.
Although I think despite whatever the rules are, the commitee looks at "what have you done lately" and CU looked bad in St. Lou.
ISU (rather OE) looked like an NCAA team in St. Lou but didn't have the resume for an at large.
ISU has no one to blame but themselves. Had ISU just one good signature non-con win and they might be a "bubble" team.