College Basketball Thread 2024-25 Season (General)

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 731
  • Views: 14K
  • Sports 
aGDevil2k said:
Do y'all pull for him?

Just wondering. I mean I've got no animosity to most of the Duke transfers, and definitely not Jeremy Roach who graduated, but I just have no idea how a single one is doing this season. But I'm also lazy lol
Click to expand...
No animosity towards him. Don’t watch Arizona (never have). Wish him well - but, I wish most non-d00k/non-ncsulol players well. Don’t expect much from him (he’s wanted refs to bail him out on drives to the hoop his entire career - he’s always shied from contact). He’s not as athletic as he thinks he is. Has he become a decent defensive player?
 
When you look at blind resumes, Carolina had no business getting in. Even though I've stated all year that they would make it and I'm actually glad they did. The ACC disrespect is annoying.

I don't know how Louisville is an eight. They're criminally underseeded when you consider they have two wins over Clemson and made the finals of the ACC tournament. (I say that and wouldn't be shocked to see them lose to Creighton. The Blue Jays are good)

I don't understand how Kentucky is two lines better than a Clemson team who was higher in the polls and beat them.

This bracket is all over the place.
 
BlooVooDoo said:
Get you a team.
Click to expand...
People seem to believe there is only one variable.

I recall when 20 wins was a minimum.
Finishing .500 and 10th in ones conference were negatives.

1-12 vs 4-13. Neither are impressive.
We played more ranked teams in that group.
We had 2 home they had 5 quad 1 games.
Our NET is higher.
In the final ranking their best Q1 game is Michigana St. At 7(only top 10 in final rankings). We played 6 of the top 10.

Maybe they should discuss actual resumes and not some guys bonus?
 
dukeman92 said:
When you look at blind resumes, Carolina had no business getting in. Even though I've stated all year that they would make it and I'm actually glad they did. The ACC disrespect is annoying.

I don't know how Louisville is an eight. They're criminally underseeded when you consider they have two wins over Clemson and made the finals of the ACC tournament. (I say that and wouldn't be shocked to see them lose to Creighton. The Blue Jays are good)

I don't understand how Kentucky is two lines better than a Clemson team who was higher in the polls and beat them.

This bracket is all over the place.
Click to expand...
I disagree about the blind resume. Carolina's bad variable is Q1 wins. They are better than the first 4 out in most other variables.
 
When comparing the bubble teams strictly amongst themselves, to me it was clear that UNC had the "least flawed" resume of all of them. Obviously by their very nature, bubble teams have inherently flawed resumes, otherwise they wouldn't be bubble teams. The lone knock against UNC was the 1-12 Q1 record, because every single other efficiency metric had UNC has the best among the bubble teams. I'm thankful that the Q1 record wasn't the lone metric by which to keep us out, because it would ensure that in the future, UNC (nor anyone else) would ever schedule tough OOC games. Scheduling tough games should always be rewarded, IMO. Yes, it's true that you should have to beat some of them- I don't disagree with that at all, and in fact would have completely accepted the Q1 knock against us had we been left out of the field. But strictly when comparing resumes of bubble teams in comparison to one another, I think the committee made the right call in including UNC.
 
Calheel said:
Other than a few bubble teams, our rivals, and a few talking heads who decided that Quad 1 was the only metric that mattered, nobody gives a fuck about who the NCAA thinks is the 46th best team in the country.
Click to expand...
You have obviously not been on the College Basketball subreddit. There is a lot of weeping and gnashing of teeth on there about our inclusion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top