March 16Mar 16 Let me counter my own point regarding Q1/Q2/Q3/Q4 records: If NET ranking is the primary indicator of a team's worth, then UNC should be in ahead of Texas (36 vs 39). The NCAA hasn't said that NET is that metric, though. They do tout quadrant performance, and in THAT world we have it all over UNC. The problem with UNC is that they have a better record against a weaker schedule. So be it. EDIT: for clarity, UNC played 5 more games against Q3/Q4 opponents, AND THEY EVEN LOST ONE OF THEM. We lost none of our Q3/Q4 games, and it's a pretty fair assumption that we wouldn't have lost any of another 5. What would Texas' record look like with 5 fewer Q1/Q2 games and 5 more more Q3/Q4 games? A whole lot better, likely 24-10 or some such. BUT, we can't make that swap, because the SEC is way tougher than the ACC so we get fucked if "noncon" matters. Gah. It's so simple but some of you don't seem to understand the logic. Edited March 16Mar 16 by jimmyjazz
March 16Mar 16 I haven't seen UNC play lately... Based on recency bias, which team wins if we play them now... UNC or Texas ???
March 16Mar 16 9 minutes ago, MotownHorn said: So instead they send the message that you get rewarded for scheduling good teams and losing to them? It's not whether you win against good teams like we did, it's whether you simply play against good teams and get beat by them like UNC did? when the committee is parsing through the respective records of true bubble teams, all of whom have suspect records and easy cases as to why they shouldn’t be let in, then yeah, who you schedule matters. one of those posts above that showed record vs tourney teams showed that we had 20 opportunities to play against tourney teams, while the rest of the teams listed had like 10 games against tourney teams. unc wasn’t going to play a lot of tourney teams in their conference so they scheduled a bunch of final four contenders in their non con. Texas meanwhile did the exact opposite and sought the weakest non conference schedule possible, and ended the season with a 19-15 record and a .333% win percentage in conference play. i’ve seen you post that all we had to do was beat south carolina or georgia to not be on the bubble. i’d argue that replacing the SEVEN ooc teams ranked 228th or worse (an embarrassing FIVE of which were against teams ranked 308th or worse, FOUR of those being vs teams ranked 349th or worse) with teams ranked between 80-150 would have been more than enough to make the difference. there’s a reason that UNC is 11 spots ahead of us in kenpom (33 vs 44). 22-13 with a brutal non conference schedule vs 19-15 with *the worst non conference schedule i have ever seen*. it’s not about rewarding unc, it’s about not rewarding Texas.
March 16Mar 16 I hate when Texas is on the bubble. Like if we get in we will do anything. We have the shittiest coach in the tourney.
March 16Mar 16 32 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said: Who gives a fuck? UNC was 1-12 against Q1 teams. We were 7-10. Does that not tell you something? Gah this argument is insane. I don't give a damn if we get in but stop splitting a total body of work into conference and non-conference, it's stupid and illogical and oh so Texas. UNC beat 1 at large team in 10 opportunities and it was a game where one of UCLA's best players was injured. They only won it by 2 points. There's really no argument for UNC to make the tournament. Who cares if they played a tough non-conference schedule. They beat 1 good team all year with plenty of opportunities. It's a joke they're even in the discussion. Edited March 16Mar 16 by Rickylovesweed
March 16Mar 16 It's impossible to predict these things with human bias but if there aren't any bid thieves today i'm going with San Diego State, Texas, and Xavier as the last 3 teams in some order.
March 16Mar 16 if y’all watched any tv at all yesterday then you’d have had a lot of your questions about unc answered. the committee people who were all over the various networks spoke ad nauseam about predictive metrics and specifically cited kenpom where again, unc is no.33 and we are no.44. analytics play a huge role in the selection process these days, and like it or not, unc’s metrics are better than ours, even though we played in a superior conference. i mean what did we do that was so great? our amazing Q1 wins are a bunch of ugly ass home games vs the likes of a&m and missouri, two of our six conference wins paired with 12 league losses. that’s impressive? no. it’s really really easy to just zone in on unc’s Q1 record and say, “they’re disqualified”, but you could easily do the same thing by saying, “texas won 33% of their league games, they’re out.” if you widen the scope a little bit you can see that why this is a discussion.
March 16Mar 16 Some here, such as Derka and DD, are letting their wish to ensure RT is gone to color their bubble analysis. DD has in fact admitted to it. From purely a blind comparison, Texas is clearly ahead of other bubble teams.
March 16Mar 16 Just now, Derka said: if y’all watched any tv at all yesterday then you’d have had a lot of your questions about unc answered. the committee people who were all over the various networks spoke ad nauseam about predictive metrics and specifically cited kenpom where again, unc is no.33 and we are no.44. analytics play a huge role in the selection process these days, and like it or not, unc’s metrics are better than ours, even though we played in a superior conference. i mean what did we do that was so great? our amazing Q1 wins are a bunch of ugly ass home games vs the likes of a&m and missouri, two of our six conference wins paired with 12 league losses. that’s impressive? no. it’s really really easy to just zone in on unc’s Q1 record and say, “they’re disqualified”, but you could easily do the same thing by saying, “texas won 33% of their league games, they’re out.” if you widen the scope a little bit you can see that why this is a discussion. We beat 7 at large tournament teams and UNC beat 1. There's really no way to get beyond this argument. You cannot justify this disparity. Especially when the committee specifically says they prioritize Q1 wins. Just now, AeroHorn said: Some here, such as Derka and DD, are letting their wish to ensure RT is gone to color their bubble analysis. DD has in fact admitted to it. From purely a blind comparison, Texas is clearly ahead of other bubble teams. Bingo Edited March 16Mar 16 by Rickylovesweed
March 16Mar 16 1 minute ago, AeroHorn said: Some here, such as Derka and DD, are letting their wish to ensure RT is gone to color their bubble analysis. DD has in fact admitted to it. From purely a blind comparison, Texas is clearly ahead of other bubble teams. It’s very hard to say that definitively unless you’re on the committee. Bc they will do what they want, decide what is important this year and justify their decisions accordingly Pancho already said it - it’s a new committee every year and you can’t just say bc they did X or focused on Y last time, they’ll do it again this year Its a group of humans deciding
March 16Mar 16 24 minutes ago, Rockethorn1978 said: I hate when Texas is on the bubble. Like if we get in we will do anything. We have the shittiest coach in the tourney. We might get one dub tho. and just being in dance fun. Even if we suck
March 16Mar 16 Feels like there’s just 1 slot remaining and it’s down to 3 teams and we are one of the 3 (unless UAB beats Memphis today)
March 16Mar 16 11 minutes ago, Derka said: it’s really really easy to just zone in on unc’s Q1 record and say, “they’re disqualified”, but you could easily do the same thing by saying, “texas won 33% of their league games, they’re out.” if you widen the scope a little bit you can see that why this is a discussion. No, that's not logical. If you want to bring conference winning % into the discussion, you must include strength of conference. You aren't. You are just so damned determined to be rid of RT (as am I) that you are tilting your arguments in favor of anything that might keep Texas out regardless of what the competing bubble teams did.
March 16Mar 16 I think in a world where everything is equal Texas probably gets in based on resume. If I were the committee I just wouldn't want to send a 14th team from a conference that didn't play anyone OOC and who are propped up by winning 6 out of 18 of their conference games. Feels like a poor precedent.
March 16Mar 16 30 minutes ago, AeroHorn said: Some here, such as Derka and DD, are letting their wish to ensure RT is gone to color their bubble analysis. DD has in fact admitted to it. From purely a blind comparison, Texas is clearly ahead of other bubble teams. nope. i just posted that yesterday, on national tv, we had multiple tourney committee people explaining to all of us that predictive metrics, including kenpom, are now heavily factored into their decisions to let teams into the tourney. that has nothing to do with me, my feelings on RT, none of it. you guys can yell at the clouds all day until you’re blue in the face, but as long as you continue to ignore the actual committee members and choose to be willfully ignorant then you’re just living in an echo chamber with zero desire to hear anything that doesn’t align with your own biased takes.
March 16Mar 16 13 minutes ago, Teryor said: I think in a world where everything is equal Texas probably gets in based on resume. If I were the committee I just wouldn't want to send a 14th team from a conference that didn't play anyone OOC and who are propped up by winning 6 out of 18 of their conference games. Feels like a poor precedent. That's probably the most succinct way to summarize the "subjective" perspective. I don't necessarily disagree.
March 16Mar 16 41 minutes ago, AeroHorn said: Some here, such as Derka and DD, are letting their wish to ensure RT is gone to color their bubble analysis. DD has in fact admitted to it. From purely a blind comparison, Texas is clearly ahead of other bubble teams. Fair. Are you seeing analysts predicting Texas makes the tournament? I haven't seen or heard anything to that effect on the television box since we lost to Tennessee. Granted, it's mostly been ESPN.
March 16Mar 16 Just now, David Dennison said: Fair. Are you seeing analysts predicting Texas makes the tournament? I haven't seen or heard anything to that effect on the television box since we lost to Tennessee. Granted, it's mostly been ESPN. Yeah, Jon Rothstein mocked the idea of UNC getting in over Texas a couple days ago. On CBS. https://www.barstoolsports.com/blog/3540736/dont-you-dare-even-think-about-telling-jon-rothstein-unc-deserves-to-be-in-the-ncaa-tournament Edited March 16Mar 16 by Rickylovesweed
March 16Mar 16 55 minutes ago, Rickylovesweed said: It's impossible to predict these things with human bias but if there aren't any bid thieves today i'm going with San Diego State, Texas, and Xavier as the last 3 teams in some order. From your lips to Gods ears!
March 16Mar 16 12 minutes ago, David Dennison said: Fair. Are you seeing analysts predicting Texas makes the tournament? I haven't seen or heard anything to that effect on the television box since we lost to Tennessee. Granted, it's mostly been ESPN. Josh Pastner did exactly that this morning on ESPN.
March 16Mar 16 VCU beat George Mason so only 1 more potential bubble thief. Need Memphis to beat UAB.
March 16Mar 16 22 minutes ago, Rickylovesweed said: VCU beat George Mason so only 1 more potential bubble thief. Need Memphis to beat UAB. Yes I think if Memphis holds then we are in as an 11 seed playing in Dayton
March 16Mar 16 16 minutes ago, Pancho said: Yes I think if Memphis holds then we are in as an 11 seed playing in Dayton Who gets booted, Indiana or Xavier?
March 16Mar 16 Just now, David Dennison said: Who gets booted, Indiana or Xavier? Any at large team that's only beaten 1 or 2 other at large teams should not make the tournament. As long as Indiana or UNC don't make the tournament, I'm good. They've beaten nobody all year. Put Texas, Boise State, San Diego State, or Xavier in the tournament.
March 16Mar 16 Out of 111 bracket predictions on Bracket Matrix, Texas is in 45% of them. Bart Torvik similar resumes: Edited March 16Mar 16 by Sal
March 16Mar 16 texasstrong12, we know your feelings on UNC only beating one at-large team. Quit repeating yourself.
March 16Mar 16 Just now, shadow_operative2.0 said: texasstrong12, we know your feelings on UNC only beating one at-large team. Quit repeating yourself. Nah, I'll keep discussing what I want to discuss. I'm sure you will keep trying to dictate what people say on an online forum though. At least you aren't going on your drunk tirades anymore. Edited March 16Mar 16 by Rickylovesweed
March 16Mar 16 Do you think the other posters can't read? We have all seen your dozens of repetitive UNC posts.
March 16Mar 16 Just now, shadow_operative2.0 said: Do you think the other posters can't read? We have all seen your dozens of repetitive UNC posts. It's a forum where we're discussing the bubble. I'm sorry I offended you.
March 16Mar 16 4 hours ago, dcar00 said: I don't disagree. all we needed to do was beat South Carolina and we looked like complete dogshit. Or Georgia. Or Arkansas one of the two times. Or Ole Miss in a winnable game. Or @Vanderbilt in a winnable game. I hope we make the tournament because I enjoy it more if the Horns are in it, even if for one game. I don’t think we will, and it’s completely our own doing…
March 16Mar 16 Memphis up 13 on UAB with 3 minutes to play. Doesn't look like there will be another bid thief. Guess we will find out soon if we're in or out.
March 16Mar 16 No team with 7 quad 1 wins has ever missed the tournament. Still true. Edited March 16Mar 16 by Rickylovesweed
March 16Mar 16 On 3/13/2025 at 12:57 AM, ztejas said: i.e. you're much more uninformed. This isn't the 4 team CFP. They try and put the most deserving 68 in. Uninformed.
March 16Mar 16 Just now, KingBobo81 said: So do we all eat crow with UNC and Texas both making it? Nah, UNC should be at home. They literally had to make up a metric to justify them getting in.
March 16Mar 16 2 hours ago, Pancho said: Yes I think if Memphis holds then we are in as an 11 seed playing in Dayton nice call.
March 16Mar 16 7 hours ago, Rickylovesweed said: Assuming there aren't any bid thieves today it's essentially 3 spots for 6 teams. Q1 wins: Texas 7 Indiana 4 SDSU 3 Boise State 3 UNC 1 Xavier 1 Q1 + Q2 wins: Texas 10 UNC 9 Indiana 9 Xavier 9 Boise State 8 SDSU 8 Q3 + Q4 losses (i.e. bad losses): Texas 0 Indiana 0 Xavier 0 UNC 1 SDSU 1 Boise State 2 SoS per Kenpom and NET: Texas #19, #16 Indiana #28, #34 UNC #42, #42 Xavier #59, #60 SDSU #62, #64 Boise State #78, #79 NET ranking: UNC #36 Texas #39 Boise State #44 Xavier #45 SDSU #52 Indiana #54 We should be in over all of these teams. The committee got it right. We were ranked ahead of all the bubble teams. Still no clue how UNC got in but us getting is good enough.
March 16Mar 16 2 hours ago, Pancho said: Yes I think if Memphis holds then we are in as an 11 seed playing in Dayton
March 16Mar 16 Just now, Pancho said: And Texas WBB is what seed? The lotto numbers for next week are what now?
March 16Mar 16 42 minutes ago, TxTower said: How many times have we played Xavier in the tournament? I remember Lance Blanks (RIP) going off in win vs Xavier 102-89
March 16Mar 16 4 hours ago, Rickylovesweed said: We beat 7 at large tournament teams and UNC beat 1. There's really no way to get beyond this argument. You cannot justify this disparity. Especially when the committee specifically says they prioritize Q1 wins. Bingo But Texas didn't lose to better out of conference teams as UNC did. That's the whole dipshit argument in a sentence.
March 16Mar 16 43 minutes ago, Rickylovesweed said: The committee got it right. We were ranked ahead of all the bubble teams. Still no clue how UNC got in but us getting is good enough. I thought our Quad 2 record would be a big problem. we had the most Q2 losses of any at large and the only one with a sub .500 record against Q2 I think. maybe our NET ranking countered that.
March 16Mar 16 Just now, dcar00 said: I thought our Quad 2 record would be a big problem. we had the most Q2 losses of any at large and the only one with a sub .500 record against Q2 I think. maybe our NET ranking countered that. That's because our Quad 2 losses weren't bad. 4 of those 5 losses were against tournament teams. It's also another reason UNC should not have made the tournament. Everyone was hyping UNC's 8 Quad 2 wins and none of those were against tournament teams.
March 16Mar 16 22 minutes ago, LTtxfan said: I remember Lance Blanks (RIP) going off in win vs Xavier 102-89 The aftermath of that game was awesome. Such a fun night for a drunk fuck freshman. Edited March 16Mar 16 by Blotto
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.