At Large Bid Reality

[GMG_Dallas]

53 minutes ago, NT80 said:

Then the system is flawed.  The point differential in wins (and losses) should also factor who you played, not just the final garbage time scoring of double vs single digits. The analytics can be skewed any way one wants to.  The "Quad" wins should be based on their Quad ranking when you played them, not at the end of the season, after they lost their key player and slipped in ranking.  Likewise a loss.  

Yeah I'm actually reading about it now. The first article I read was all over the place. Now I'm finding they changed how they do NET rating in 2020-2021. Looks like this is how it is now but I'll keep looking to see if it's changed since they don't take down their old info and just leave everything up like it's new. Only thing I can think of is UAB might have a much better efficiency than we do. We don't allow a lot of points but we do it by slowing down the game. Less possessions.  Are we still efficient or just shortening the game and playing smart? I'm doing research so I'll see what I find. As of right now, the most obvious outlier is UAB has one more Quad 1 win than we do.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2020-05-11/di-mens-basketball-committee-announces-change-net-2020-21

 

Edited February 12, 2022 by GMG_Dallas

[GMG_Dallas]

Not sure how accurate this website is but I'm not finding where NCAA tracks points per possession on offense and defense. https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/defensive-efficiency has both and shows the following rankings:

Points per possession:

UAB 25 on offense, 24 on defense.

UNT 79 on offense, 34 on defense.

While I don't like the numbers, they are what they are. We win by playing smart basketball. By the numbers, UAB has a better team, both on offense and defense.

[GrandGreen]

27 minutes ago, GMG_Dallas said:

Not sure how accurate this website is but I'm not finding where NCAA tracks points per possession on offense and defense. https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/defensive-efficiency has both and shows the following rankings:

Points per possession:

UAB 25 on offense, 24 on defense.

UNT 79 on offense, 34 on defense.

While I don't like the numbers, they are what they are. We win by playing smart basketball. By the numbers, UAB has a better team, both on offense and defense.

Then how did they get beat twice already in conference?

They have beat NT and are the highest rated team in CUSA, but after watching several of their games; I like NT's chances in the rematch. 

 

[GMG_Dallas]

6 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

Then how did they get beat twice already in conference?

They have beat NT and are the highest rated team in CUSA, but after watching several of their games; I like NT's chances in the rematch. 

 

I agree with you. I'm just telling you what the numbers say. The numbers show that UAB pummels bad teams (when they win). They score a lot, usually over 80, and restrict the opponent to around 60 points (except for the losses). Putting up 100, 97, 102, and having multiple 80+ games makes them look like offensive juggernauts until you look at who they put up those point totals against.

UNT doesn't play that way. We might hold a team to around 50 points but we're only putting up 60+ to win. If you just look at both teams' schedules and look at the scores, it's not hard to see why the numbers would show UAB to be better.

I think we'll do better in March when you need to beat good teams, no matter hoe much you win by, but only time will tell.

[Talon90]

16 hours ago, Matt from A700 said:

Yep, we've been in every game but Buffalo. That game was unwinnable.

We blew an 11-point lead against Buffalo with 8 minutes left in the game at home.

[Talon90]

I stand corrected from my original post.  T3 Bracketology now has UNT a 12 seed and UAB one of the first four out (Bubble).  Can't overstate how big the game in Birmingham will be next Saturday.  Take care of the Owls today!

GMG!

Bracketology Update 2/10 (t3bracketology.com) 

 

[greenminer]

3 hours ago, GMG_Dallas said:

I agree with you. I'm just telling you what the numbers say. The numbers show that UAB pummels bad teams (when they win). They score a lot, usually over 80, and restrict the opponent to around 60 points (except for the losses). Putting up 100, 97, 102, and having multiple 80+ games makes them look like offensive juggernauts until you look at who they put up those point totals against.

UNT doesn't play that way. We might hold a team to around 50 points but we're only putting up 60+ to win. If you just look at both teams' schedules and look at the scores, it's not hard to see why the numbers would show UAB to be better.

I think we'll do better in March when you need to beat good teams, no matter hoe much you win by, but only time will tell.

Offensive and defensive efficiencies might be much more telling.

[UNTcrazy727]

10 hours ago, GMG_Dallas said:

Not sure how accurate this website is but I'm not finding where NCAA tracks points per possession on offense and defense. https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/defensive-efficiency has both and shows the following rankings:

Points per possession:

UAB 25 on offense, 24 on defense.

UNT 79 on offense, 34 on defense.

While I don't like the numbers, they are what they are. We win by playing smart basketball. By the numbers, UAB has a better team, both on offense and defense.

KenPom efficiency rankings:

Offense: UAB- 37 UNT- 94

Defense: UAB- 63 UNT- 40

[GMG_Dallas]

12 minutes ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

KenPom efficiency rankings:

Offense: UAB- 37 UNT- 94

Defense: UAB- 63 UNT- 40

Yeah I don't know which website is more accurate. I find it interesting that NCAA uses these metrics for their NET rankings but doesn't have it as a searchable stat on their website unless I'm just looking in the wrong place.

One constant between these two websites though: UNT and UAB are closer defensively than they are offensively. 

Going by NCAA scoring averages:

Offense: UAB 9; UNT 289

Defense: UAB 57; UNT 2

It's not their efficiency but still tells a similar story. Don't hate me, just looking at the stats which is what makes up the NET ranking.

[Pavlovs Eagle]

College GameDay just now said "UAB could make a North Texas type of run" as they talked about teams on the bubble.  As much as I like hearing UNT mentioned on the GameDay type programs, that's not what I was hoping for.

[greenminer]

There has to be a way with the CODE button to embed the tables from SportsReference.com

Still trying to figure this out.

[Matt from A700]

8 hours ago, Talon90 said:

We blew an 11-point lead against Buffalo with 8 minutes left in the game at home.

No, definitely should have lost that one.

[greenminer]

Not talked about yet:

We're leaving for the AAC in a couple seasons.  The NCAA money is spread out across 5 seasons, isn't it (I might be remembering wrong)? Just wondering if we forfeit CUSA bid winnings when we move, and then start collecting AAC bid winnings.

[MDH]

9 hours ago, Talon90 said:

I stand corrected from my original post.  T3 Bracketology now has UNT a 12 seed and UAB one of the first four out (Bubble).  Can't overstate how big the game in Birmingham will be next Saturday.  Take care of the Owls today!

GMG!

Bracketology Update 2/10 (t3bracketology.com) 

 

We’re going to land higher than 12 if we win out or drop only one remaining. Boise shouldn’t be 5 seeds ahead of us. I could see us as high as a 10 if we keep this up.

[BillySee58]

15 minutes ago, MDH said:

We’re going to land higher than 12 if we win out or drop only one remaining. Boise shouldn’t be 5 seeds ahead of us. I could see us as high as a 10 if we keep this up.

Moving up from 12 is going to be really hard. Keep in mind that there are probably a good 10-12 teams ahead of us fighting for those last at large spots. In order to move up to the 11 seed line you have to hop all of those teams, not just 2 or 3.

Edited February 12, 2022 by BillySee58

[GMG_Dallas]

1 hour ago, BillySee58 said:

Moving up from 12 is going to be really hard. Keep in mind that there are probably a good 10-12 teams ahead of us fighting for those last at large spots. In order to move up to the 11 seed line you have to hop all of those teams, not just 2 or 3.

Yeah I think this goes hand-in-hand with C-USA getting an at-large. For one or both to happen, we need the conference leaders to handle business in their conference tourneys. Can't be having the 5th ranked MWC team, 7th ranked AAC team, 6th ranked WCC team, etc... winning their conference tournaments and stealing march madness spots via automatic qualifier. Going to need a lot of help for C-USA to get an at-large bid.