Wichita State Vs Illinois State

[Redbirds4Life]

how many bad losses

On what planet would that not matter? Because Illinois State has bad losses?

Bad losses do a couple things:
1.) They drop your RPI/rating/whatever.
2.) Well, it basically says it itself.. it's a BAD.. LOSS.

That would definitely be a reason a committee member could use to excuse Illinois State from an at-large, nevermind the zero Top 50 wins.

Ya, meant good losses in that post, my bad.

And before you start back and forth with another person, I am not arguing ISU to make it, cus if they go 17-1 and lose a close game in STL, probably still out. ISU doesn't get excused from Murray State, it sucks and we have to live with it.

To Clarify: My argument VS Wichita State - It doesn't matter if you have every loss inside the top 50, if you don't have any wins within the top 100, no at-large. It's just not going to happen. Both resumes are equally crappy. And if you win Saturday, you have 1 and its against a team the committee probably doesn't think super highly of. Sucks, but its reality.....

BTW, for the record, if WSU beats ISU, I would assume that would give ISU 1 top-50 win.

[Cdizzle]

I haven't read all that, though I'm not sure how it applies to my response either, other than trying to move on from the point I made without acknowledging it.

Since you brought the subject up though, I have mixed feelings on MoV.

It tied to the same argument Redbirdgrad had with Hurley on our site.

I think MoV only shows depth of a team to extend leads from your 8-12 players.

It can certainly show that. Though I think that it can show more than that, and also think team depth is not a negligible item.

Like I said, I have mixed feelings on it.

[Cdizzle]

how many bad losses

On what planet would that not matter? Because Illinois State has bad losses?

Bad losses do a couple things:
1.) They drop your RPI/rating/whatever.
2.) Well, it basically says it itself.. it's a BAD.. LOSS.

That would definitely be a reason a committee member could use to excuse Illinois State from an at-large, nevermind the zero Top 50 wins.

Ya, meant good losses in that post, my bad. I

And before you start back and forth with another person, I am not arguing ISU to make it, cus if they go 17-1 and lose a close game in STL, probably still out. ISU doesn't get excused from Murray State, it sucks and we have to live with it.

To Clarify: My argument VS Wichita State - It doesn't matter if you have every loss inside the top 50, if you don't have any wins within the top 100, no at-large. It's just not going to happen. Both resumes are equally crappy. And if you win Saturday, you have 1 and its against a team the committee probably doesn't think super highly of. Sucks, but its reality.....

BTW, for the record, if WSU beats ISU, I would assume that would give ISU 1 top-50 win.

I think a 29-5 WSU team probably gets in. I won't feel confident about it, but I think it probably gets in.

[Stickboy46]

On what planet would that not matter? Because Illinois State has bad losses?

Bad losses do a couple things:
1.) They drop your RPI/rating/whatever.
2.) Well, it basically says it itself.. it's a BAD.. LOSS.

That would definitely be a reason a committee member could use to excuse Illinois State from an at-large, nevermind the zero Top 50 wins.

Ya, meant good losses in that post, my bad. I

And before you start back and forth with another person, I am not arguing ISU to make it, cus if they go 17-1 and lose a close game in STL, probably still out. ISU doesn't get excused from Murray State, it sucks and we have to live with it.

To Clarify: My argument VS Wichita State - It doesn't matter if you have every loss inside the top 50, if you don't have any wins within the top 100, no at-large. It's just not going to happen. Both resumes are equally crappy. And if you win Saturday, you have 1 and its against a team the committee probably doesn't think super highly of. Sucks, but its reality.....

BTW, for the record, if WSU beats ISU, I would assume that would give ISU 1 top-50 win.

I think a 29-5 WSU team probably gets in. I won't feel confident about it, but I think it probably gets in.

The bubble seems pretty weak this year. We would be entirely dependent on not having very many upsets in the conference tourneys. 1 or 2 wins in a conf tourney for an average team is enough to get put in.

[Redbirds4Life]

I think a 29-5 WSU team probably gets in. I won't feel confident about it, but I think it probably gets in.

You may be right...I'm just going by what the committee says every year, who have you beaten....sadly Dirty Dan and Old Greg haven't beaten anyone except for themselves.

[Redbirds4Life]

The bubble seems pretty weak this year. We would be entirely dependent on not having very many upsets in the conference tourneys. 1 or 2 wins in a conf tourney for an average team is enough to get put in.

Bubble can change in a month, but yeah, right now it looks favorable for the MVC 2

[Stickboy46]

The bubble seems pretty weak this year. We would be entirely dependent on not having very many upsets in the conference tourneys. 1 or 2 wins in a conf tourney for an average team is enough to get put in.

Bubble can change in a month, but yeah, right now it looks favorable for the MVC 2

Yup, its a double edge sword too. A weak bubble also allows them to use 1 quality win (say a team picking off KU at home) to validate putting another power conference team in.

[TheObserver]

And the massey argument I won. Hurley knows it, and so do you. Please, PLEASE tell me where that went south for me...

You used a rating system to try to show that ISU was the better team.

But then forgot to mention that said rating system said ISU was not the better team.

I do not hold that Massey is right or wrong, but your logic was circular. You just quit drawing the circle when it fit your narrative.

I owned Hurley on his margin of victory matters argument . That was weak.

So you do have a name on the Redbird board? Interesting.

Margin of victory is a factor to a certain extent. A 1 point win over Maryland-Eastern Shore is a bit telling compared to a 25 point win over Duke. And it's not like WSU is running up the score either. They're just a deeper team. That, by itself, makes WSU better. If you don't think margin of victory should be a factor in analyzing teams, then I guess the RPI is for you. Which is an interesting contradiction for retire12, because he also believes the RPI is bad and flawed. I'm not sure what else he wants to use to determine selection because he's contradicting himself (again).

[TheObserver]

Vegas Line opens at WSU -10 apparently.

Wow, Vegas isn't respecting the Birds.

[TheObserver]

how many bad losses

On what planet would that not matter? Because Illinois State has bad losses?

Bad losses do a couple things:
1.) They drop your RPI/rating/whatever.
2.) Well, it basically says it itself.. it's a BAD.. LOSS.

That would definitely be a reason a committee member could use to excuse Illinois State from an at-large, nevermind the zero Top 50 wins.

Ya, meant good losses in that post, my bad.

And before you start back and forth with another person, I am not arguing ISU to make it, cus if they go 17-1 and lose a close game in STL, probably still out. ISU doesn't get excused from Murray State, it sucks and we have to live with it.

To Clarify: My argument VS Wichita State - It doesn't matter if you have every loss inside the top 50, if you don't have any wins within the top 100, no at-large. It's just not going to happen. Both resumes are equally crappy. And if you win Saturday, you have 1 and its against a team the committee probably doesn't think super highly of. Sucks, but its reality.....

BTW, for the record, if WSU beats ISU, I would assume that would give ISU 1 top-50 win.

I never said WSU was in a position to receive an at-large either. I was just bringing up the the point that bad losses still count. WSU has no quality wins. Illinois State has no quality wins (unless you count WSU, but a lot of Redbird fans don't think WSU is that good). Illinois State has a bad loss or two against them. WSU has no bad losses. Just about a wash to me. That's why the loser of this game is pretty much eliminated from any at-large discussions. The one thing WSU does have in their favor that's not on any analytical or metric sheets is name recognition and prior history. It's not supposed to be a factor but selection committee members are human and sometimes tend to lean on familiarity.