6 OOC left

[mdchick]

KENPOM:
UNLV: 176
Vermont: 79
@xavier: 26
Colgate: 131
Tennessee: 21
Iowa: 54

That’s tough

 

[justinhub2003]

I say 4-2

But I’d love to see 5-1

 

[mdchick]

Anything less than 3-3 no joke our chances of getting an at large bid is over

 

[skyblade]

I say 4-2

But I’d love to see 5-1

4-2 seems like optimism. I'm hoping for 4-2, but that requires us to play significantly better than we have up to this point in the season. I say 3-3, possibly worse if Cumberland isn't healthy.

 

[cincyalum2014]

I would say 3-3... I think we beat UNLV with a healthy Jarron by 10+... Without Jarron I think we still win but it will be in the single digit range.

Id say we beat a tough Vermont team at home but it will be extremely close.

Lose to X, Tennessee, and Iowa.... Maybe surprise and win one of those...

I think we beat Colgate comfortably.

 

[Queens_NYC]

UNLV and Colgate are resume-killers if we lose and definite must-wins.

Vermont and Iowa while a tier above UNLV and Colgate, are still very winnable games, especially considering Iowa doesn't have any good wins yet and Vermont will be playing us on 1 day's rest.

If we beat Tenn or X at this point, I'd be very surprised, and it means we are well on our way towards competing in the AAC. Hopefully we can build off of a solid home court advantage against UT and we catch Xavier on an off day at Cintas (like when they barely beat #147 Missouri State recently).

4-2 should be the expectation with anything less being quite disappointing.

 

[justinhub2003]

I think if beat Vermont it’s solely on how much we slow down lamb.

Brannen broke out the 1-3-1, which you can tell was something hasn’t worked on much, but I’ll be interested to see what kind of different looks this Teams throws out on defense.

Cronin’s defense had its flaws but it also helped hide its poor defenders a lot of the times. Brannen’s defense is geared toward a more traditional man to man, and because I don’t think we have a great perimeter wing defender, it’s exposed us against teams with good wings. We allowed a player to score between 19 and 32 points in the paradise jam games.

I think rolling out a well executed 1-3-1 could be a great change of pace and will be interested to see if it’s used more to confuse the defense.

 

[mdchick]

2-1 so far, xavier would have been a nice one, Colgate is good but it’s at home and is obviously a must win then split with tenn and Iowa go 4-2 and the 6 game stretch would be a success

 

[TheLivingLegend]

Uc needs to beat Tenn and Iowa. Start of the season has been a fail.

 

[justinhub2003]

We don’t win the next 3, then it doesn’t matter what happens in conference. We will be playing for an NIT birth.

I wonder if practicing too hard and too fast on too quick of a time scale is causing us to be injury prone, and less energetic at the ends of games.

 

[mdchick]

We don’t win the next 3, then it doesn’t matter what happens in conference. We will be playing for an NIT birth.

I wonder if practicing too hard and too fast on too quick of a time scale is causing us to be injury prone, and less energetic at the ends of games.

9 losses would be bubble zone, you have 10 losses with one to bowling green and playing in the American it’s not looking good

10 outside of bubble
9 bubble
8 in

 

[sedziobs]

I don't understand the point of playing good but not great teams at home. Teams in the 75-160 range are Q3 at home, which means they aren't a quality win and would be a bad loss. Drake, UNLV, Vermont, and Colgate are all in that category. I can see why Cronin didn't schedule good mid majors.

 

[TheLivingLegend]

I don't understand the point of playing good but not great teams at home. Teams in the 75-160 range are Q3 at home, which means they aren't a quality win and would be a bad loss. Drake, UNLV, Vermont, and Colgate are all in that category. I can see why Cronin didn't schedule good mid majors.

Better prep for tournament...... If we get there.

 

[skyblade]

Better prep for tournament...... If we get there.

I'm not really convinced that is true. Having depth would be very useful for the tournament. But with all these close games (plus Brannen not putting in guys even when we are up big), we end up with a very short bench.

 

[cincrulz11]

I don't understand the point of playing good but not great teams at home. Teams in the 75-160 range are Q3 at home, which means they aren't a quality win and would be a bad loss. Drake, UNLV, Vermont, and Colgate are all in that category. I can see why Cronin didn't schedule good mid majors.

do they not bump the sos? i always thoughts one of the reasons we were seeded a line or two lower than we thought was the ooc sos was so awful always.



you shouldn't really lose to 75-160 teams at home. if we beat colgate and sweep them this year, won't that help our resume a bit due to the boost in sos.



we'll need all the help we can get.

 

[sedziobs]

do they not bump the sos? i always thoughts one of the reasons we were seeded a line or two lower than we thought was the ooc sos was so awful always.

you shouldn't really lose to 75-160 teams at home. if we beat colgate and sweep them this year, won't that help our resume a bit due to the boost in sos.

we'll need all the help we can get.

I don't think SOS really matters. It's all about quadrant records. To me, the limited benefits we might get from winning those games is outweighed by downside risk of losing.

 

[cincrulz11]

I don't think SOS really matters. It's all about quadrant records. To me, the limited benefits we might get from winning those games is outweighed by downside risk of losing.

it is quadrants but doesn't it look better without a ton of quad 4's?



quad 3's aren't looked at favorable, but i think they're still a lot better than quad 4.




but we still really shouldn't be losing those games at home, and we haven't lost one yet.



i know the point you are making. with no value to either it doesn't make sense to risk harming yourself. but i gotta feel like theres a bit more value to the improvement of the team to play a bunch of teams that are ok over a bunch of teams that are horrendous.

 

[bearcat1518]

it is quadrants but doesn't it look better without a ton of quad 4's?



quad 3's aren't looked at favorable, but i think they're still a lot better than quad 4.




but we still really shouldn't be losing those games at home, and we haven't lost one yet.



i know the point you are making. with no value to either it doesn't make sense to risk harming yourself. but i gotta feel like theres a bit more value to the improvement of the team to play a bunch of teams that are ok over a bunch of teams that are horrendous.

Ugh....Quadrant wins are determined by RPI. And SOS is a factor in RPI...so of course SOS matters in all this! (Definition: The rating percentage index, commonly known as the RPI, is a quantity used to rank sports teams based upon a team's wins and losses and its strength of schedule).

As an example, Vermont was a Quadrant 2 win last season! Scheduling easy wins over Quadrant 2 teams is hugely valuable compared to Quadrant 3 and 4.

 

[sedziobs]

The NCAA uses NET now. I'm not convinced any of the teams we've beaten are going to end up Q2 (maybe Vermont). And I'm also not convinced that a bunch of Q3 wins is any better than a bunch of Q4 wins. I seriously doubt the committee ever gets that deep into a resume.

 

[cincyguy13]

I don't understand the point of playing good but not great teams at home. Teams in the 75-160 range are Q3 at home, which means they aren't a quality win and would be a bad loss. Drake, UNLV, Vermont, and Colgate are all in that category. I can see why Cronin didn't schedule good mid majors.

They are more interesting and they probably learn more. Personally, I can't stand watching us play the 300ish games. They are boring and I don't think anyone gets anything from them, except maybe confidence. Which I think would have helped this year. This is the one year some of those games may have help. Would have bought some time for everyone to buy in and get comfortable.