# Of B10 NCAAT teams?

[Boiler Buck]

Purdue IL, NW, Nebraska....That's 4.

Beyond that after the B10 tourney we got a bunch of 13-14 loss teams below those 4 --do any deserve a dance? That's a bunch of losses. (Assuming none are tourney champs)

To me the only one playing halfway decent lately is OSU, maybe Iowa, but we have to use the whole season, I guess?

So which of these B10 mid pack teams makes the dance iyo?

 

[SqueakyClean]

MSU is probably still in. Their NET is still really high. If they lose the Thursday game of the BTT, they might be sweating a bit, but I think they would still make.

Now, you can (validly) argue that they don't deserve to be in, but the computer metrics love them.

 

[SqueakyClean]

Iowa's bubble probably just popped. They would have to win three BTT games to get back on the right side.

OSU has a slim chance, but probably needs 2 wins (one of those being Illinois).

 

[Boiler Buck]

MSU is probably still in. Their NET is still really high. If they lose the Thursday game of the BTT, they might be sweating a bit, but I think they would still make.

Now, you can (validly) argue that they don't deserve to be in, but the computer metrics love them.

Yes I know...don't understand the M$U metrics, but they must have gotten credit for losing gracefully, or pretty ribbons, I guess..lol.

Hard to believe a 14 loss team is worthy, but in the expanded field I guess that's possible?

 

[Boiler Buck]

Iowa's bubble probably just popped. They would have to win three BTT games to get back on the right side.

OSU has a slim chance, but probably needs 2 wins (one of those being Illinois).

Don't see OSU beating IL. So in the end you have a bunch of crappy 13-14 loss teams. 1-2 might squeeze in, the rest will complain, but they don't deserve to imo.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

MSU is probably still in. Their NET is still really high. If they lose the Thursday game of the BTT, they might be sweating a bit, but I think they would still make.

Now, you can (validly) argue that they don't deserve to be in, but the computer metrics love them.

Add Wisconsin, and I tend to agree here - possibly Ohio State and Iowa IF they got to the championship game and no other bid stealers out there. Everyone else would have to win the tournament.

Although I wouldn't be surprised with too many other results, I see Illinois coming out of the bottom half of the bracket. If I had to wager, I'd say Purdue gets out of the top half.....but....you never know for sure. They've had issues some years in the QF round.

 

[Gemini95]

PU, UI, NU, NU, WI and probably MSU. Nobody else gets in without winning the BTT. A couple conf tourney wins rarely moves the needle much with the committee.

 

[rgarlitz]

Wisconsin is in a similar boat to MSU, maybe a slightly better overall profile.

Both teams better win on Thursday, or it's going to be a long weekend. It's hard to believe Wisconsin was a 4-seed in the mid-February preview.

Iowa and Ohio State will play on Thursday. The loser is definitelt headed to the NIT. The winner probably is too, unless they're still playing on Sunday.

 

[rgarlitz]

Gut feel, 5 in the NCAA; 5 in the NIT:

Purdue--NCAA, a lot to play for next weekend with the NCAA overall #1 seed on the line.

Illinois--NCAA, playing for top-4 seed.

Nebraska--NCAA, playing to win the program's first-ever NCAA game.

Northwestern--NCAA, playing for the program's first-ever trip to Sweet 16.

Wisconsin--NCAA, Playing for pride.

MSU--NIT, Izzo's 25-year NCAA streak comes to an end.

Iowa--NIT, another Franish season in Iowa City.

OSU--NIT, weird, disjointed, disappointing season.

Indiana--NIT, same as OSU.

Minnesota--NIT, remarkable turnaround this year.

 

[icewind7]

7 teams

 

[Chi-Boiler]

Michigan State is interesting. The metrics are so damn strong it almost doesn't make sense. I'm trying to compare them to Indiana State and you just can't do it. And interestingly, if they lose to Minnesota, Minnesota isn't in the position that a win would put them in good shape. They would still need to get to the final to have a prayer. Michigan State's resume is better than Iowa and Indiana, but losing to both of them recently crushed them in the standings.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

Purdue IL, NW, Nebraska....That's 4.

Beyond that after the B10 tourney we got a bunch of 13-14 loss teams below those 4 --do any deserve a dance? That's a bunch of losses. (Assuming none are tourney champs)

To me the only one playing halfway decent lately is OSU, maybe Iowa, but we have to use the whole season, I guess?

So which of these B10 mid pack teams makes the dance iyo?

Gut feel, 5 in the NCAA; 5 in the NIT: 6 get in in BOLD

Purdue--NCAA, a lot to play for next weekend with the NCAA overall #1 seed on the line.

Illinois--NCAA, playing for top-4 seed.

Nebraska--NCAA, playing to win the program's first-ever NCAA game.

Northwestern--NCAA, playing for the program's first-ever trip to Sweet 16.

Wisconsin--NCAA, Playing for pride.

MSU--NIT, Izzo's 25-year NCAA streak comes to an end.

Iowa--NIT, another Franish season in Iowa City.

OSU--NIT, weird, disjointed, disappointing season.

Indiana--NIT, same as OSU.

Minnesota--NIT, remarkable turnaround this year.

MSU and IU get in with one win in the conf. tourney because they both travel very well. Wisky has to win two in the tourney to have a shot. Indinia won their last four even though three were at home.

 

[Poprudy]

MSU and IU get in with one win in the conf. tourney because they both travel very well. Wisky has to win two in the tourney to have a shot. Indinia won their last four even though three were at home.

IU needs to win the BTT their net is horrible. MSU is ranked like 70 spots above IU in the net and to me they're a bubble team. Which doesn't look good for IU

Yes, IU has won 4 straight which is good, but only one (Wisconsin) of those 4 teams are locks for the tournament and Wisconsin is on a downward trend.

 

[Gemini95]

IU has zero shot, z.e.r.o. zero shot unless they win the BTT. Wiscy is in already. MSU in for sure with 1 win.

 

[TopicTalk]

Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Michigan State are safely in.

Ohio State and Iowa can get in maybe with 2-3 wins.

Indiana and the rest will have to win the tournament to get in.

 

[Boiler Buck]

MSU and IU get in with one win in the conf. tourney because they both travel very well. Wisky has to win two in the tourney to have a shot. Indinia won their last four even though three were at home.

Traveling well is not a metric used by the committee. Lol

 

[Boiler Buck]

Michigan State is interesting. The metrics are so damn strong it almost doesn't make sense. I'm trying to compare them to Indiana State and you just can't do it. And interestingly, if they lose to Minnesota, Minnesota isn't in the position that a win would put them in good shape. They would still need to get to the final to have a prayer. Michigan State's resume is better than Iowa and Indiana, but losing to both of them recently crushed them in the standings.

I have heard M$U has the metrics. But like you, cannot figure out how? Beyond the Baylor win, HOME wins over IL, NW, ISU.

But lost to everyone else, assuming a B10 tourney loss....14 times. They are like Nova a few good wins and so, so many losses.

Maybe metric expert can fill us in how M$U's is so high???

 

[Gemini95]

Traveling well is not a metric used by the committee. Lol

Not to mention they don't even "travel well" to their own home games this year.

 

[rgarlitz]

MSU and IU get in with one win in the conf. tourney because they both travel very well. Wisky has to win two in the tourney to have a shot. Indinia won their last four even though three were at home.

That sounds like wishful thinking for Indiana. Even with a 4-game winning strike, the Hoosiers are still mired at #93 in the NET. They're just 8-12 against the top two quadrants. More than half their wins have come against the bottom two quadrants. That's not an NCAA resume.

OSU might have an outside chance with a deep run in Minneapolis. But, the Buckeyes are 39 spots higher in the NET.

 

[pubill]

IU has zero shot, z.e.r.o. zero shot unless they win the BTT. Wiscy is in already. MSU in for sure with 1 win.

I think if IU gets to BTT final it is in.

 

[boilerzz]

I think if IU gets to BTT final it is in.

Not a chance

 

[RDUBoiler]

For what it's worth, The Athletic still has Wisconsin as a lock and MSU as "projected to be in." They have seven Big teams getting in with Iowa and OSU on the bubble. I still think MSU has to show something in the BTT to get in.

 

[SqueakyClean]

Maybe metric expert can fill us in how M$U's is so high???

I think it comes down to three things.
1) They have played a tough schedule
2) Most of their wins are by 10+ points (especially early season)
3) Almost all of their losses are less than 10 points.

It's a way to game the system. For example, Storr's petty move of stealing the ball and scoring at the end of yhe game kept the score within 8, and in doing so, Wisconsin stayed at #22 (didn't drop). Which is good because that means that game was still a quad one win for Purdue.

 

[Dryfly88]

MSU and IU get in with one win in the conf. tourney because they both travel very well. Wisky has to win two in the tourney to have a shot. Indinia won their last four even though three were at home.

Do you have any idea what IU's NET ranking is? They have to win the BTT to get in, period. What does "travel well" have anything do with getting into the dance? Your record in the last few games has no bearing on getting in either. Wisconsin and MSU have a chance to get in without winning a game.

Other than those, you nailed it.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

I think it comes down to three things.
1) They have played a tough schedule
2) Most of their wins are by 10+ points (especially early season)
3) Almost all of their losses are less than 10 points.

It's a way to game the system. For example, Storr's petty move of stealing the ball and scoring at the end of yhe game kept the score within 8, and in doing so, Wisconsin stayed at #22 (didn't drop). Which is good because that means that game was still a quad one win for Purdue.

Wisconsin scored eight straight points in the last minute - two threes (3/22 up until those) before the Storr bad beat theft and score. As you point out, there are some holes or ways that it doesn't always add up.

Maybe they need a Quad 0 -

 

[Gemini95]

Do you have any idea what IU's NET ranking is? They have to win the BTT to get in, period. What does "travel well" have anything do with getting into the dance? Your record in the last few games has no bearing on getting in either. Wisconsin and MSU have a chance to get in without winning a game.

Other than those, you nailed it.

Wiscy is universally considered a 6-7 seed right now. His thinking that they need to do more than iu to even get in is one of the wildest takes I've seen on the innerwebs in quite some time.

 

[Boiler Buck]

I think it comes down to three things.
1) They have played a tough schedule
2) Most of their wins are by 10+ points (especially early season)
3) Almost all of their losses are less than 10 points.

It's a way to game the system. For example, Storr's petty move of stealing the ball and scoring at the end of yhe game kept the score within 8, and in doing so, Wisconsin stayed at #22 (didn't drop). Which is good because that means that game was still a quad one win for Purdue.

Thank you.
Hard to believe you get some credit for losing, if you lose under 10. Wow.

 

[Gemini95]

PU, UI, NU, NU, WI and probably MSU. Nobody else gets in without winning the BTT. A couple conf tourney wins rarely moves the needle much with the committee.

I will amend that Iowa maybe could get in if they get to the finals depending on other bubble teams and bid stealers.

 

[Wolegib]

The reality is 95% of the selections and brackets are filled on Saturday. The majority of your speculations are all based on a team winning or making the final of the BTT. We should know that on Saturday.

The BTT finale will probably be very anticlimactic and meaningless.

 

[Chi-Boiler]

I have heard M$U has the metrics. But like you, cannot figure out how? Beyond the Baylor win, HOME wins over IL, NW, ISU.

But lost to everyone else, assuming a B10 tourney loss....14 times. They are like Nova a few good wins and so, so many losses.

Maybe metric expert can fill us in how M$U's is so high???

What I know is that the metrics don't have anything to do with the schedule strength. That's already covered in other parts of the discussion. The metrics have to do with efficiency for the most part, and margin of victory is included in some of that.

 

[Chi-Boiler]

For what it's worth, The Athletic still has Wisconsin as a lock and MSU as "projected to be in." They have seven Big teams getting in with Iowa and OSU on the bubble. I still think MSU has to show something in the BTT to get in.

Who is the 7th?

 

[Boiler Buck]

Gut feel, 5 in the NCAA; 5 in the NIT:

Purdue--NCAA, a lot to play for next weekend with the NCAA overall #1 seed on the line.

Illinois--NCAA, playing for top-4 seed.

Nebraska--NCAA, playing to win the program's first-ever NCAA game.

Northwestern--NCAA, playing for the program's first-ever trip to Sweet 16.

Wisconsin--NCAA, Playing for pride.

MSU--NIT, Izzo's 25-year NCAA streak comes to an end.

Iowa--NIT, another Franish season in Iowa City.

OSU--NIT, weird, disjointed, disappointing season.

Indiana--NIT, same as OSU.

Minnesota--NIT, remarkable turnaround this year.

Agree with all this. Perhaps one exception. While both iu and OSU went through bad stretches & had coaching issues this year, iu is still just bad. The only difference is OSU is playing good ball under their new coach. Still both heading to nit unless they can win out.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

Who is the 7th?

It was 6 from what I have seen:

Big Ten​

Locks:

Purdue,

Wisconsin,

Illinois

Projected to be in:

Northwestern,

Nebraska,

Michigan State

On the bubble:

Iowa,

Ohio State

 

[SqueakyClean]

OSU has a better chance than Iowa. If OSU beats Iowa and Illinois, they've got a decent shot (depending on bid stealers).
Iowa would need to win OSU, Illinois, and Nebraska/IU to even be considered.

IU has no shot unless they win the tournament. Period. Their metrics are just that poor. OSU has good resume wins of Purdue (H), Alabama (N), and MSU (R) compared to Indiana. That is the biggest difference, and even OSU is a long shot at this point.

One of the committee's biggest tie-breakers for at-large bubble teams is "Who did you beat". OSU has a few good ones. Iowa and IU do not.

 

[tjreese]

Traveling well is not a metric used by the committee. Lol

Was it in the past before any inherent bias in the net algorithm could diminish the people bias? How would we know? They pair teams they don't draw them with any bias they hold intentional or not, there always is a bias or perspective. I know Purdue had some interesting games in the 80s

 

[Chi-Boiler]

Was it in the past before any inherent bias in the net algorithm could diminish the people bias? How would we know? They pair teams they don't draw them with any bias they hold intentional or not, there always is a bias or perspective. I know Purdue had some interesting games in the 80s

Yeah things have changed a lot. They used to not care as much about the seeding order when it came to locations. And there's still some of that, but not as blatant. I remember when 6-seeded Wisconsin was lined up to play 3-seed Pittsburgh in Milwaukee one year and there was outrage about it.

 

[tjreese]

Agree with all this. Perhaps one exception. While both iu and OSU went through bad stretches & had coaching issues this year, iu is still just bad. The only difference is OSU is playing good ball under their new coach. Still both heading to nit unless they can win out.

At what point could the selection group decide that some seeds were really tough and wanting to get the teams playing the best NOW a longer look. That has happened in the past. They will have a reason for the teams they decide, but it may be reasons many disagree with.

 

[tjreese]

Yeah things have changed a lot. They used to not care as much about the seeding order when it came to locations. And there's still some of that, but not as blatant. I remember when 6-seeded Wisconsin was lined up to play 3-seed Pittsburgh in Milwaukee one year and there was outrage about it.

The net and any internal bias in the calculations does not change and so it makes it more difficult for personal bias or desires to take place. That said, the group does NOT ask for opinions and can still do within reason what they want and explain their stance. When you get something that is still subjective lots of options exist and getting pushed over the edge can be playing well recently. Is playing well recently based upon the opponents play months before, the particular game so many ways things could be justified as needed. True, things are much better than years ago, but people still select the teams...

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

Was it in the past before any inherent bias in the net algorithm could diminish the people bias? How would we know? They pair teams they don't draw them with any bias they hold intentional or not, there always is a bias or perspective. I know Purdue had some interesting games in the 80s

I may surprise people with this sort of non-curmudgeonly take....haha.

The tournament committee generally does a pretty darn good job in selecting the field and the seeding. Although the NET ratings and the Quads are not perfect - think they're more representative of the objective criteria you'd want over our former tired old friend, the RPI. Also, expanding to 68 and the pod-system has evened things out more so geographically, so there's less of a tendency for one of the top-16 seeds to get a raw deal, so-to-speak.

Now, I do think it would be interesting to go back to the fixed bracket (w/o pods), and see how the top seeds perform, or if you reversed some of the rules for teams in the same conference.

'84 and '86 - yeah, Purdue got no favorable treatment playing Memphis and LSU on their respective home courts. Then, they really got dinged in '87 for one really bad (well, terrible) game to end the regular season. Now, to be fair - Purdue's last National Semi-Finals appearance - 6th-seeded Boilers played the first two rounds in Mackey Arena, IIRC. That Mideast Region was all set up for Kentucky/Indiana in Rupp Arena, but Duke and Purdue did not get the memo.

Now.....you still don't know the rest of the story......good day!

 

[Dryfly88]

The net and any internal bias in the calculations does not change and so it makes it more difficult for personal bias or desires to take place. That said, the group does NOT ask for opinions and can still do within reason what they want and explain their stance. When you get something that is still subjective lots of options exist and getting pushed over the edge can be playing well recently. Is playing well recently based upon the opponents play months before, the particular game so many ways things could be justified as needed. True, things are much better than years ago, but people still select the teams...

I may be off some here TJ, but I believe they used to look at your last 10 games and that was used as a criteria for selection if needed. That has been dropped and it is whole body of work.

Of course, in the end it a panel of humans picking the teams, but I agree with Tex, it is very much improved over what it used to be. In this case it actually helps that it has been become a very big business, there are so many people watching and analyzing the bracket, that they have to be more accurate and have reasons for what they do. They know they are going to get all kinds of scrutiny. It has forced the process to get better.