Bracketology Position 1.28.25

[NT80]

2 hours ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Not to take the focus off the topic, but why in the fuuuuu has UNT not entered this realm. 

It has, since 1970.  In Ft. Worth, but part of the UNT System.   Also, a Law School, but part of UNT-Dallas.  

All detached, like the students in Denton.

https://www.unthsc.edu/

The University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth (HSC Fort Worth) began when the Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine (TCOM) accepted its first students in 1970. Founders were D.D. Beyer, DO; George Luibel, DO; and Carl Everett, DO. The first class of doctors of osteopathic medicine graduated in 1974.

 

[DeepGreen]

2 hours ago, untjim1995 said:

Face it, athletics at big time places are funded by engineering, business, science, and medicine.

Bingo!!!!!

[NorthTexasWeLove]

6 minutes ago, NT80 said:

It has, since 1970.  In Ft. Worth, but part of the UNT System.   Also, a Law School, but part of UNT-Dallas.  

All detached, like the students in Denton.

https://www.unthsc.edu/

The University of North Texas Health Science Center at Fort Worth (HSC Fort Worth) began when the Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine (TCOM) accepted its first students in 1970. Founders were D.D. Beyer, DO; George Luibel, DO; and Carl Everett, DO. The first class of doctors of osteopathic medicine graduated in 1974.

 

Need to bring that group home and get them a part of the UNT flagship campus. 

[NT80]

1 hour ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Because they won't even be .500 in league play. Which, in my opinion, should be one of the basic metrics of even being in consideration for an at large. 

And they may struggle to get to 20 wins, which is my second metric that should be met to be considered for an at large. 

We have 11 regular season games remaining.

Toughest games left are @ UAB, vs Tulane, @ USF, @ Temple.

We won't see Memphis again until the AAC Tourney.

[Censored by Laurie]

9 hours ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Because they won't even be .500 in league play. Which, in my opinion, should be one of the basic metrics of even being in consideration for an at large. 

And they may struggle to get to 20 wins, which is my second metric that should be met to be considered for an at large. 

I'm all for getting as many mid-major programs in the tournament as possible, but I'm not for punishing a quality program for playing a brutal schedule...there's reason why metrics like NET and tiering wins with the Quad system are in place to try to determine quality deeper than just overall/conference record. 

those top 10 SEC schools are almost certainly in, save for some end of year collapse, and deservedly so...all ten are currently at .500 in the league, and if they finish that way they'd be right around 20 wins for the year...so even hitting your benchmarks. I'd say at least 3 of those schools have a legit chance at a national title. 

the SEC bubble teams:
 - Texas - 14-6, 3-4 SEC, NET 32, 3-5 Quad 1, 2 ranked wins, 5 upcoming ranked games
 - Georgia - 15-6, 3-5 SEC, NET 35, 2-6 Quad 1, 3 ranked wins, 7 upcoming ranked games
 - Oklahoma - 15-5, 2-5 SEC, NET 46, 4-4 Quad 1, 2 ranked wins, 9 upcoming ranked games

UNT - 15-4, 6-1 AAC, NET 45, 0-3 Quad 1, 0 ranked wins, maybe 1 upcoming ranked game

maybe if the bottom falls out at OU they'll get bounced out, but otherwise they're all deserving

[NorthTexasWeLove]

1 hour ago, Censored by Laurie said:

I'm all for getting as many mid-major programs in the tournament as possible, but I'm not for punishing a quality program for playing a brutal schedule...there's reason why metrics like NET and tiering wins with the Quad system are in place to try to determine quality deeper than just overall/conference record. 

those top 10 SEC schools are almost certainly in, save for some end of year collapse, and deservedly so...all ten are currently at .500 in the league, and if they finish that way they'd be right around 20 wins for the year...so even hitting your benchmarks. I'd say at least 3 of those schools have a legit chance at a national title. 

the SEC bubble teams:
 - Texas - 14-6, 3-4 SEC, NET 32, 3-5 Quad 1, 2 ranked wins, 5 upcoming ranked games
 - Georgia - 15-6, 3-5 SEC, NET 35, 2-6 Quad 1, 3 ranked wins, 7 upcoming ranked games
 - Oklahoma - 15-5, 2-5 SEC, NET 46, 4-4 Quad 1, 2 ranked wins, 9 upcoming ranked games

UNT - 15-4, 6-1 AAC, NET 45, 0-3 Quad 1, 0 ranked wins, maybe 1 upcoming ranked game

maybe if the bottom falls out at OU they'll get bounced out, but otherwise they're all deserving

And if both come true then they earned their bid.  

Mid majors have to be almost perfect in league play to sniff an at large. I think it's reasonable for high majors to have to at least play .500 ball in league play. There must be minimal metrics. Otherwise, at large bids for mid majors are very close to being banished. It's what they want, and they usually get what they want. 

[UNTLifer]

17 hours ago, golfingomez said:

yeah, i didn't realize how crazy it was until i looked at the SEC standings.

If anyone has a good argument why we should get into the tournament over the teams above the red line, i'm all ears. At best, the argument is we are equal to those teams... and guess who's going to win the discussion on that come tourney time

Because we can beat every damn one of them!

[GMG_Dallas]

12 hours ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

And if both come true then they earned their bid.  

Mid majors have to be almost perfect in league play to sniff an at large. I think it's reasonable for high majors to have to at least play .500 ball in league play. There must be minimal metrics. Otherwise, at large bids for mid majors are very close to being banished. It's what they want, and they usually get what they want. 

I hear you overall but I don’t think this year's SEC is one to gripe about. All of their schools except South Carolina finished OOC play with no more than 2 losses. Tennessee, Florida, and Oklahoma finished OOC undefeated. I just can't justify leaving any of those teams out except for Arkansas and LSU who have been abysmal in league play.

[greenminer]

I think if there is so much weight on Quad record, there should be some kind of rule in place that everyone gets X opportunities to play Quad 1 games.

Frustrating as hell to be in our position, winning all the way to the end, with minimal-to-zero Quad 1 programs wanting to schedule us, then the committee holding it against us that we have no wins.  But please, let's reward a middle of the pack Major program that lucked into 2 more Quad 1 wins because they get 8+ opportunities and they caught a couple of them sleeping.