American Conference Tournament

[waterhead]

We could also get passed by a lower ranked team in a power conference that wins their tournament

 

[IABearcat]

Our loss to Butler won't help in this scenario

I think Purdue could be the most realistic to pass. Their best win is @Maryland, if Maryland flops in the conference tourney as well as Purdue and Iowa State beats OK St. Maryland and ISU could switch in RPI. Giving UC 2 top 25 RPI wins and Purdue 0.

 

[waterhead]

Most signs pointing to a 5. It would have to be a perfect scenario for us to get a 4

 

[cincyguy13]

If we win out maybe a 4. Remember most teams will lose this week. If they lose their first game and we get 3 more wins, there is a chance. Most likely a 5 tho

 

[Stats&Info]

I think WV is locked. Duke will probably get the benefit of doubt. Not sure about Purdue and Butler. Maybe we could pass them with a quick tourney loss and we win ours.

Butler has incredible wins over Arizona, Cincinnati and a sweep of Villanova. I have a hard time believing they fall off the 4 line. As for Purdue, they were the outright Big 10 champion by 2 full games. Thr committee will reward that with a top 4 seed, IMO.

For as much as ESPN would like you to believe, there is very little seeding changes that occur due to conference tournament results. 31 game sample outweights a 3 game stretch. (See Texas A&M being a higher seed that UK last year despite losing in the Conference Final).

 

[jacobkdoyle]

If we win 30 games and get a 5, that's bullsh*t.

 

[GarradJ21]

If Duke loses today, I think they are a 5 seed...

 

[justinhub2003]

In my opinion, we are a lock for a 5 seed no matter what happens.

Duke leads the country in top 50 wins, which I know sounds crazy but it's true.

If Houston holds at top 50, we have 5 top 50 wins. Which would be less an any other 4 seed I think. Committee clearly values top 50 wins over bad losses or overall record. If Houston drops to uconn, we're very much a low tier 5 seed with 3 top wins.

Every just needs to set the expectation at 5 seed because it's the most likely by far. If we do beat smu for the ship then sure, we can get a 4 but will need some help from Purdue, Florida or West Virginia

Then again Virginia could be poised to make a run and take the 4 seed as well.

In my opinion, worst case is last 5 seed where we play in west coast bracket

 

[eric3287]

If we win 30 games and get a 5, that's bullsh*t.

I was looking at this a few days ago. The only UC team I could find that finished the conference tournament was the 01-02 team that finished 30-3 and was a 1 seed. If this team finishes 30-4 and can top out at MAYBE a 4 seed, that's insane.

I've seen people say they wish we had played our way into a top 3 seed, and while I agree I'd love to be a top 3 seed, It would have been almost impossible to do given the way this year played out. The only 2 games you look back and say they should have won are Rhode Island and UCF. If you assume they lose to Duke, that's only 1 extra win. They'd be 28-3 instead of 27-4. I'm not sure that gets them into a top 3 seed even winning the conference tournament. So you look at the loss to SMU @ SMU. If they win that game, AND UCF, AND Rhode Island, they are 29-2 going into the conference tournament. That would be the best regular season finish in program history. So, essentially, UC's ONLY shot at a top 3 seed was to go 18-0 in conference and finish with the best regular season in program history. And maybe that would have got them a 3 seed.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I was looking at this a few days ago. The only UC team I could find that finished the conference tournament was the 01-02 team that finished 30-3 and was a 1 seed. If this team finishes 30-4 and can top out at MAYBE a 4 seed, that's insane.

I've seen people say they wish we had played our way into a top 3 seed, and while I agree I'd love to be a top 3 seed, It would have been almost impossible to do given the way this year played out. The only 2 games you look back and say they should have won are Rhode Island and UCF. If you assume they lose to Duke, that's only 1 extra win. They'd be 28-3 instead of 27-4. I'm not sure that gets them into a top 3 seed even winning the conference tournament. So you look at the loss to SMU @ SMU. If they win that game, AND UCF, AND Rhode Island, they are 29-2 going into the conference tournament. That would be the best regular season finish in program history. So, essentially, UC's ONLY shot at a top 3 seed was to go 18-0 in conference and finish with the best regular season in program history. And maybe that would have got them a 3 seed.

^This is pretty crazy to think about.


I was also looking at the SK 5 seed team...They were worse overall in KenPom, as well as worse in AdjO and AdjD. They also had 2 more losses entering the tourney and the same number of wins we have now. If the disrespect card is real, we sure have a chance to use it.

 

[justinhub2003]

^This is pretty crazy to think about.


I was also looking at the SK 5 seed team...They were worse overall in KenPom, as well as worse in AdjO and AdjD. They also had 2 more losses entering the tourney and the same number of wins we have now. If the disrespect card is real, we sure have a chance to use it.

I wish I could blame it on disrespect but I really blame it on a really shitty down year for the American. When sk team was a 5 seed, we had a good uconn, smu, Memphis and Louisville team in the conference. Like we were better then the new big east in my opinion that year. But this year, we just didn't get to rack up those quality wins or even losses.

The American being down and the power conferences being way up, really hurt us. Imagine our RPI if we played in the 13-14 American conference with same record. Be more like top 10 . But in reality, we perform like a 5 seed (kenpom #20 is perfect 5 seed) because how good every one else is

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I wish I could blame it on disrespect but I really blame it on a really shitty down year for the American. When sk team was a 5 seed, we had a good uconn, smu, Memphis and Louisville team in the conference. Like we were better then the new big east in my opinion that year. But this year, we just didn't get to rack up those quality wins or even losses.

The American being down and the power conferences being way up, really hurt us. Imagine our RPI if we played in the 13-14 American conference with same record. Be more like top 10 . But in reality, we perform like a 5 seed (kenpom #20 is perfect 5 seed) because how good every one else is

I'm not sure I buy that the other conferences are that much better. I'd have to look more into that year, but this year the ACC is good. That's about it. The Big 12 has 1 elite team, Big East has 1 elite team, SEC has 2 good teams, Big 10 has 1 good team, and over half the PAC 12 is absolute trash.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

This year there are 15 "P6" teams ranked ahead of us...In 2013-14, there were 21. Either we were way overseeded that year, or we aren't getting as much respect this year.

 

[cincyguy13]

This year there are 15 "P6" teams ranked ahead of us...In 2013-14, there were 21. Either we were way overseeded that year, or we aren't getting as much respect this year.

That team might have had a better year. Beat a lot of good teams if I remember right but I didn't think that team was as good as this one

 

[justinhub2003]

This year there are 15 "P6" teams ranked ahead of us...In 2013-14, there were 21. Either we were way overseeded that year, or we aren't getting as much respect this year.

The depth of the power 6 is much more though. Like sec will get 4 teams in, big east prob 6-7, ACC Wil get 9-11 , big 10 will get 5-7.... so it's more about depth of the power conference, than top heavy strength. I mean, is going 16-2 in the American is like going 9-9 in the ACC.

The American is killing our perception and our seeding. People hate our conference becsgse it's such ugly basketball.

Just had to bare through 5 minutes of game theory podcast where they said the American was the boringest league to watch and how they weren't high on cincy nor smu


That said . Matt norlander likes us http://www.cbssports.com/college-ba...e-bob-huggins-big-ncaa-tournament-run-likely/

 

[Stats&Info]

If we win 30 games and get a 5, that's bullsh*t.

Teams with 30+ wins pre-NCAA Tournament that were a 5 seed or worse:
2015 5 seed Northern Iowa (30-3)
2011 12 seed Utah State (30-3)
2011 13 seed Belmont (30-4)
2010 12 seed Murray State (30-4)
2009 12 seed Utah State (30-4)
2008 7 seed Butler (29-3) *** Only 30 regular season games played


So, it's certainly not common. Unfortunately for Cincinnati, the teams above them simply have better resumes and have less of a chance of falling below the 4 line.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

The depth of the power 6 is much more though. Like sec will get 4 teams in, big east prob 6-7, ACC Wil get 9-11 , big 10 will get 5-7.... so it's more about depth of the power conference, than top heavy strength. I mean, is going 16-2 in the American is like going 9-9 in the ACC.

The American is killing our perception and our seeding. People hate our conference becsgse it's such ugly basketball.

Just had to bare through 5 minutes of game theory podcast where they said the American was the boringest league to watch and how they weren't high on cincy nor smu


That said . Matt norlander likes us http://www.cbssports.com/college-ba...e-bob-huggins-big-ncaa-tournament-run-likely/

I don't get why teams ranked well below us in "P6" have such influence on our seeding. Didn't Iowa State tie for 2nd in Big 12? We won at their gym. And we played with Butler, and beat X when they were in a position to to finish Top 3 in B East. Just weird to me. And Gonzaga, why isn't the WCC held against them? They haven't played a single good team in months...but they'll get seeded 4 lines higher bc we lost a couple more game (that weren't even bad losses)? Isn't that why we're getting dinged when comparing to "P6"? I just feel like the committee isn't looking at teams individually, and instead lumping them into groups by conference. That's seems wrong to let lesser teams ride the coat tails of a league based on reputation.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Teams with 30+ wins pre-NCAA Tournament that were a 5 seed or worse:
2015 5 seed Northern Iowa (30-3)
2011 12 seed Utah State (30-3)
2011 13 seed Belmont (30-4)
2010 12 seed Murray State (30-4)
2009 12 seed Utah State (30-4)
2008 7 seed Butler (29-3) *** Only 30 regular season games played


So, it's certainly not common. Unfortunately for Cincinnati, the teams above them simply have better resumes and have less of a chance of falling below the 4 line.

Thanks for posting this. Exactly what I'm talking about. Somehow the AAC has become like the Atlantic Sun or something in the eyes of the committee.

 

[eric3287]

I don't get why teams ranked well below us in "P6" have such influence on our seeding. Didn't Iowa State tie for 2nd in Big 12? We won at their gym. And we played with Butler, and beat X when they were in a position to to finish Top 3 in B East. Just weird to me. And Gonzaga, why isn't the WCC held against them? They haven't played a single good team in months...but they'll get seeded 4 lines higher bc we lost a couple more game (that weren't even bad losses)? Isn't that why we're getting dinged when comparing to "P6"? I just feel like the committee isn't looking at teams individually, and instead lumping them into groups by conference. That's seems wrong to let lesser teams ride the coat tails of a league based on reputation.

It seems like outside of Cincinnati, the Iowa State game never happened. The weird thing is how the committee seems to be leaning toward rewarding losing over winning. Teams like Clemson, Georgia Tech, Texas Tech, TCU and Kansas State are being talked of as bubble teams when they don't even have a winning conference record. I'd rather see a 1st place mid-major like Valpo get an out-large than one of those middling "power conference" teams.

Part of the problem UC and SMU might have is that they were too good. I wonder what things might look like if, say, SMU dropped one to UCF and Houston and UC lost one to Houston. Then you have 15-3, 14-4, 14-4, 12-6 at the top of the conference. Ironically, that might get 3-4 AAC teams in and UC might still be thought of as a 5 seed.

 

[cincyguy13]

I don't get why teams ranked well below us in "P6" have such influence on our seeding. Didn't Iowa State tie for 2nd in Big 12? We won at their gym. And we played with Butler, and beat X when they were in a position to to finish Top 3 in B East. Just weird to me. And Gonzaga, why isn't the WCC held against them? They haven't played a single good team in months...but they'll get seeded 4 lines higher bc we lost a couple more game (that weren't even bad losses)? Isn't that why we're getting dinged when comparing to "P6"? I just feel like the committee isn't looking at teams individually, and instead lumping them into groups by conference. That's seems wrong to let lesser teams ride the coat tails of a league based on reputation.

Gonzaga beat Arizona and Florida. and have 3 less losses than us