Use some of the things the committee is supposed to look at to compare these teams. Rank them in order of most deserving of an NCAA bid. SOS numbers are from Pomeroy's website.


Team A:
Overall SOS: 131
Nonconference SOS: 284
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 2-2
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 3-5
Record. vs. Bad Teams: 16-4
Road Record vs. RPI Top 100: 1-4

Team B:
Overall SOS: 9
Nonconference SOS: 189
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 2-8
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 9-11
Record vs. Bad Teams: 9-1
Road Record vs. RPI Top 100: 4-4

Team C:
Overall SOS: 86
Nonconference SOS: 332
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 2-5
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 5-7
Record vs. Bad Teams: 13-3
Road Record vs. RPI Top 100: 1-3

Team D:
Overall SOS: 199
Nonconference SOS: 293
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 0-4
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 1-5
Record vs. Bad Teams: 22-2
Road Record vs. RPI Top 100: 0-2

Team E:
Overall SOS: 8
Nonconference SOS: 161
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 3-7
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 5-9
Record vs. Bad Teams: 12-2
Road Record vs. RPI Top 100: 1-5

Team F:
Overall SOS: 46
Nonconference SOS: 178
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 3-9
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 5-9
Record vs. Bad Teams: 14-0
Road Record vs. RPI Top 100: 2-3

Team G:
Overall SOS: 94
Nonconference SOS: 341
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 2-6
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 6-7
Record vs. Bad Teams: 12-3
Road Record vs. RPI Top 100: 0-4

Team H:
Overall SOS: 128
Nonconference SOS: 107
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 1-4
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 4-6
Record vs. Bad Teams: 19-1
Road Record vs. RPI Top 100: 1-3

Team I:
Overall SOS: 86
Nonconference SOS: 98
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 1-6
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 6-10
Record vs. Bad Teams: 11-1
Road Record vs. RPI Top 100: 1-6

You're not gonna give us overall records?

I prefer cc to make this kind of blind comparisons. He usually includes only half of the stats so it really makes you think.

SportsAndLady;693607 wrote:You're not gonna give us overall records?

Those numbers show all of their losses, and I don't care how many wins they have over the +100 RPI teams, so overall records are unnecessary.

Overall records are unnecessary...gotcha

lmao

SportsAndLady;693636 wrote:Overall records are unnecessary...gotcha

lmao

+1

There you go. Overall records are included for those who value that kind of thing.

You honestly think overall record isn't valued? Do you think the selection committee disregards it?

karen lotz;693685 wrote:You honestly think overall record isn't valued? Do you think the selection committee disregards it?

I'm sure some people value it. It doesn't tell me anything except that Team B who is 9-1 against bad teams would probably be 22-2 against them if they played Team D's schedule.

I'm not seeing the overall records still lol

SportsAndLady;693691 wrote:I'm not seeing the overall records still lol

Add the record vs. the top 100 to the record vs. bad teams. That is their total record.

SportsAndLady;693691 wrote:I'm not seeing the overall records still lol

Cleveland Buck;693597 wrote: Team A:
Overall SOS: 131
Nonconference SOS: 284
Record vs. RPI Top 50: 2-2
Record vs. RPI Top 100: 3-5
Record. vs. Bad Teams: 16-4
Road Record vs. RPI Top 100: 1-4

Addition? I would assume this team is 19-9.

WTF just put their fucking overall records on there, it's not that hard and its what every blind resume' has included

dtdtim;693706 wrote:Addition? I would assume this team is 19-9.

Now just show S&L how simple that was.

Yeah the guy who ASSUMES 3-5 and 16-4 together is 19-9 needs to teach me addition...right

I wonder if CB happened to see that Gene Smith interview...

karen lotz;693799 wrote:I wonder if CB happened to see that Gene Smith interview...

I didn't, why?

Overall wins not important???

Just as Gene Smith, a major player in the selection committee this year, says he looks at overall win totals first.

SMH

He was asked what was his main criteria on teams getting in the tournament. His reply was overall wins. Just thought that was odd that the Committee Chair uses that as his biggest criteria.

I didn't see his comments, but that sounds pretty stupid. Why play anyone then? I read a couple of articles by guys who participated in that mock selection they did and they talked about how important SOS, especially non conference SOS, road/neutral performance, and the RPI rating of your wins are to the selection committee.

Those teams all suck. I vote that none of them get in.

But team F would be my first choice.

1.F
2.B
3.E
4.C
5.H
6.I
7.A
8.D
9.G

Cleveland Buck;693918 wrote:I didn't see his comments, but that sounds pretty stupid. Why play anyone then? I read a couple of articles by guys who participated in that mock selection they did and they talked about how important SOS, especially non conference SOS, road/neutral performance, and the RPI rating of your wins are to the selection committee.

He said everyone on the committee has their own starting point and his is overall wins. He then looks at SOS, RPI etc. to further his evaluation.

In the future, no one wants to look at that many teams at 1 time. I attempted and got bored and started to stare at the wall. 3 teams is about what you should compare at the most.

SportsAndLady;693761 wrote:Yeah the guy who ASSUMES 3-5 and 16-4 together is 19-9 needs to teach me addition...right

??? I don't see the cleverness in this as both my addition and my use of the word 'assume' are both completely correct.

Since the overall record isn't specifically stated in the blind resume, any information about a team's overall record has to be an assumption. Pick up a dictionary. This type of logical action is called a supposition or correct assumption.

Is it possible for you to post on any thread without the end result of you coming off looking like a douche? I wasn't attacking you or mocking you in my post and, you have to admit, it seemed like you honestly didn't know the overall records.