Wichita State - in or out?

[Play Angry]

UNI's RPI is 70, Evansville's is 94. WSU's combined record against: 3-2. Want to throw in Utah and Seton Hall? 4-3. If New Mexico State wins the WAC Tournament (which will place them in the Top 100): 5-3. Throw in Tulsa because FVV at least played in that one, although visibly hobbled? Okay, 5-4.

See, I can use statistics to extrapolate the result I want as well.

[musiccitybulldog]

Even though I have watched the NCAA teams being announced a hundred million times. I don't ever really remember many explainations of exclusion other than better RPI or better OOC wins or a tie with more wins.
Maybe TheAsianSensation can shed more light on committee explanations of exclusion as he has an expert handle on all this.
Do they really give any credence to a player being out or is that just hopeful thinking?

[Redbirdgrad]

UNI's RPI is 70, Evansville's is 94. WSU's combined record against: 3-2. Want to throw in Utah and Seton Hall? 4-3. If New Mexico State wins the WAC Tournament (which will place them in the Top 100): 5-3. Throw in Tulsa because FVV at least played in that one, although visibly hobbled? Okay, 5-4.

See, I can use statistics to extrapolate the result I want as well.

You do realize that when you're comparing teams you're at the mercy of the stats the committee wants to use. I just told you that if I was on the committee I'd look for a team similar to those in that tourney. Northern Iowa is the closest. You didn't fare so well the last couple of times you played them.

Don't forget, I want Wichita in the tourney. It's good for the Valley. I just don't think this is a good year for them. Their resume isn't worthy.

Let me put it to you this way. If you're sitting at home on Selection Sunday and a team with Wichita State's resume gets put in ahead of yours... are you upset? Of course so. If Wichita gets added to this field, the biggest snubs that didn't make it will be compared in a graphic with Wichita and it'll be clear who should have been in the dance.

[TheAsianSensation]

Even though I have watched the NCAA teams being announced a hundred million times. I don't ever really remember many explainations of exclusion other than better RPI or better OOC wins or a tie with more wins.
Maybe TheAsianSensation can shed more light on committee explanations of exclusion as he has an expert handle on all this.
Do they really give any credence to a player being out or is that just hopeful thinking?

The committee is notorious about saying nothing about anything regarding selection. They love to speak in generalities. However, occasionally they'll go off-camera and talk to Katz or someone to give more detail. But they love to give canned answers about SoS and good wins.

Injuries are absolutely discussed in that room, though. They say as much. They also factor in transfers (too bad Frankamp wasn't better) and suspensions (they even on record saying they'll factor in Boeheim's suspension and potentially give Syracuse a bump for their post-suspension performance).

They know about VanVleet. How much that diminishes Wichita's losses will be up for debate. There's no "they bump up 1 spot for every game VanVleet missed" type of quotient here.

[Play Angry]

UNI's RPI is 70, Evansville's is 94. WSU's combined record against: 3-2. Want to throw in Utah and Seton Hall? 4-3. If New Mexico State wins the WAC Tournament (which will place them in the Top 100): 5-3. Throw in Tulsa because FVV at least played in that one, although visibly hobbled? Okay, 5-4.

See, I can use statistics to extrapolate the result I want as well.

You do realize that when you're comparing teams you're at the mercy of the stats the committee wants to use. I just told you that if I was on the committee I'd look for a team similar to those in that tourney. Northern Iowa is the closest. You didn't fare so well the last couple of times you played them.

Let me get this straight. You are saying: (1) the Committee will factor in the FVV injury in assessing WSU's OOC performance, (2) the Committee will look to WSU's performance against "similar" teams to extrapolate how WSU would have performed in the games where FVV was absent, (3) only the games against UNI (RPI: 70) will be used for that extrapolation, (4) games against Utah (RPI: 9), Seton Hall (RPI: 33), and New Mexico State (projected RPI: 84 with a WAC Tournament victory) would be excluded despite also being tournament teams because you feel like excluding them, and (5) games against Evansville (RPI: 94) would be excluded because they are not in the Tournament.

Gotcha, seems like exactly what the Committee will do. Good analysis.

[BirdmanBB]

It's all going to come down to lobbying behind closed doors. There are equal cases to be made and I think that's why there is a lot of confusion out there regarding the shox. It would be great for the valley to have 2 in, but I can't blame the committee for excluding them. Last I checked CBS had them out, but ESPN has them in. Should be interesting to see what happens. Should be an interesting selection day and no doubt there will be some sort of prepared statement regarding the Shox inclusion or exclusion.

[Redbirdgrad]

UNI's RPI is 70, Evansville's is 94. WSU's combined record against: 3-2. Want to throw in Utah and Seton Hall? 4-3. If New Mexico State wins the WAC Tournament (which will place them in the Top 100): 5-3. Throw in Tulsa because FVV at least played in that one, although visibly hobbled? Okay, 5-4.

See, I can use statistics to extrapolate the result I want as well.

You do realize that when you're comparing teams you're at the mercy of the stats the committee wants to use. I just told you that if I was on the committee I'd look for a team similar to those in that tourney. Northern Iowa is the closest. You didn't fare so well the last couple of times you played them.

Let me get this straight. You are saying: (1) the Committee will factor in the FVV injury in assessing WSU's OOC performance, (2) the Committee will look to WSU's performance against "similar" teams to extrapolate how WSU would have performed in the games where FVV was absent, (3) only the games against UNI (RPI: 70) will be used for that extrapolation, (4) games against Utah (RPI: 9), Seton Hall (RPI: 33), and New Mexico State (projected RPI: 84 with a WAC Tournament victory) would be excluded despite also being tournament teams because you feel like excluding them, and (5) games against Evansville (RPI: 94) would be excluded because they are not in the Tournament.

Gotcha, seems like exactly what the Committee will do. Good analysis.

I understand you're angry because your favorite team choked in the tournament. Sorry for your loss.

But yes, the Northern Iowa losses hurt way more than you're trying to brush aside.

Regarding Evansville, their RPI is in the 90s... A little too far off from the comparisons you're looking for during the games without FVV. Never said anything regarding being a tourney team or not. Don't put words in my mouth to try and bolster your argument.

Regarding New Mexico State. Their RPI is 120ish. Not sure if it's a good win or not. Projections don't often hold up, we will see.

As it currently sits, Utah is all Wichita has going for it. In my opinion that's not enough. But don't forget, I'm pulling for Wichita to get in. We are rooting for the same thing here. No need for the hostility.

[BirdsEyeView]

Joe Lunardi is normally pretty accurate on this stuff and he essentially still has the Shox as a lock.

I agree with some that the resume is a bit weak (your welcome from all members of the Valley), but I trust the guy whose only freaking job is predicting the NCAA tournament field.

[TheAsianSensation]

Among all possible scenarios for both Evansville (NIT) and Wichita St (NCAA), so far what has happened is probably in the 98th percentile of bad. If, last week, you had asked me to write a doomsday scenario for both teams....it'd basically be the one we have right now.

For Evansville, having NDSU win and Chattanooga lose would be the only two things that could have made their situation worse.

For Wichita, all the wrong teams are going to the at-large board. Valpo lost, Monmouth lost and absorbed the best possible loss in going to the board, Hofstra lost and absorbed the best possible loss in going to the board, and St Mary's lost and absorbed the best possible loss in going to the board.

[Play Angry]

You do realize that when you're comparing teams you're at the mercy of the stats the committee wants to use. I just told you that if I was on the committee I'd look for a team similar to those in that tourney. Northern Iowa is the closest. You didn't fare so well the last couple of times you played them.

Let me get this straight. You are saying: (1) the Committee will factor in the FVV injury in assessing WSU's OOC performance, (2) the Committee will look to WSU's performance against "similar" teams to extrapolate how WSU would have performed in the games where FVV was absent, (3) only the games against UNI (RPI: 70) will be used for that extrapolation, (4) games against Utah (RPI: 9), Seton Hall (RPI: 33), and New Mexico State (projected RPI: 84 with a WAC Tournament victory) would be excluded despite also being tournament teams because you feel like excluding them, and (5) games against Evansville (RPI: 94) would be excluded because they are not in the Tournament.

Gotcha, seems like exactly what the Committee will do. Good analysis.

I understand you're angry because your favorite team choked in the tournament. Sorry for your loss.

But yes, the Northern Iowa losses hurt way more than you're trying to brush aside.

Regarding Evansville, their RPI is in the 90s... A little too far off from the comparisons you're looking for during the games without FVV. Never said anything regarding being a tourney team or not. Don't put words in my mouth to try and bolster your argument.

Regarding New Mexico State. Their RPI is 120ish. Not sure if it's a good win or not. Projections don't often hold up, we will see.

As it currently sits, Utah is all Wichita has going for it. In my opinion that's not enough. But don't forget, I'm pulling for Wichita to get in. We are rooting for the same thing here. No need for the hostility.

Ah, lol at me for attempting to argue against obvious trolling.

Sincerely, I hope ISUr can join the bubble discussion one day. It has been way, way too long.