Dan Beebe was one of the 10 adminstrators on the NCAA selection committee

[Buffnik]

I think that we're way too focused on our SOS and not critical enough of our style of play. We really need to do something about that if we want to be considered more seriously by the tournament committee.

All season, watching games, I remember thinking 'this style of play just isn't going to get it done'.

Yep. The committee obviously thinks that teams playing to final scores in the 30s make for more exciting games and higher tv ratings.

 

[The Guest]

Yep. The committee obviously thinks that teams playing to final scores in the 30s make for more exciting games and higher tv ratings.

There are fundamentals to basketball, and the committee fully understands that. Gene Smith has watched the movie "Hoosiers" fourteen times and also owns a signed movie poster from Barbara Hershey.

 

[JimmyBuff]

Does everyone here realize that during the selection process Beebe must leave the room anytime a Big 12 team is discussed?

Yeah they say that but do u really believe that's what goes on? I don't.

Dan Beebe is a ****face.

 

[Mick Ronson]

What does it tell you?

that i've been saying our OOC made us vulnerable since November. time and time i posted it....that moving into the Pac we ought to look at what the SOS of Pac teams that make the NCAA are numerically and use that as a model moving forward. that because of SOS we had little margin for error (like losing at ISU the last week of the season). that, right or wrong there are criteria the NCAA uses...and when you have an rpi in the 60's, based in history not my "following the bubble closely this year" opinion, you have about a 20% to make it no matter what else. and that based on what happened....i was right.

you guys can wank off to the idea that Beelzebub Beebe stuck his pitchfork in our behind, but the fact is we were deficient in one of the criteria they look at. do i think we got hosed, yes. i'm not saying they were right, it's an explanation that i'm making. not some hot-headed semi-wish fulfillment persecution angle that posits the unknown as the source of all my misery. or some moral interpretation where CU is the scapegoat for the Great Texas Conspiracy.

there's a big difference between what i'm saying and most others: i'm talking about margin for error....most are looking for "a single cause".

 

[sackman]

that i've been saying our OOC made us vulnerable since November. time and time i posted it....that moving into the Pac we ought to look at what the SOS of Pac teams that make the NCAA are numerically and use that as a model moving forward. that because of SOS we had little margin for error (like losing at ISU the last week of the season). that, right or wrong there are criteria the NCAA uses...and when you have an rpi in the 60's, based in history not my "following the bubble closely this year" opinion, you have about a 20% to make it no matter what else. and that based on what happened....i was right.

you guys can wank off to the idea that Beelzebub Beebe stuck his pitchfork in our behind, but the fact is we were deficient in one of the criteria they look at. do i think we got hosed, yes. i'm not saying they were right, it's an explanation that i'm making. not some hot-headed semi-wish fulfillment persecution angle that posits the unknown as the source of all my misery. or some moral interpretation where CU is the scapegoat for the Great Texas Conspiracy.

there's a big difference between what i'm saying and most others: i'm talking about margin for error....most are looking for "a single cause".

And when four other teams have the same OOC issue, but get in anyway, that's just the breaks? Really?

 

[Buffnik]

that i've been saying our OOC made us vulnerable since November. time and time i posted it....that moving into the Pac we ought to look at what the SOS of Pac teams that make the NCAA are numerically and use that as a model moving forward. that because of SOS we had little margin for error (like losing at ISU the last week of the season). that, right or wrong there are criteria the NCAA uses...and when you have an rpi in the 60's, based in history not my "following the bubble closely this year" opinion, you have about a 20% to make it no matter what else. and that based on what happened....i was right.

you guys can wank off to the idea that Beelzebub Beebe stuck his pitchfork in our behind, but the fact is we were deficient in one of the criteria they look at. do i think we got hosed, yes. i'm not saying they were right, it's an explanation that i'm making. not some hot-headed semi-wish fulfillment persecution angle that posits the unknown as the source of all my misery. or some moral interpretation where CU is the scapegoat for the Great Texas Conspiracy.

there's a big difference between what i'm saying and most others: i'm talking about margin for error....most are looking for "a single cause".

You and I have been in agreement on the scheduling issue all year.

Our non-conference schedule made us vulnerable.

But this year, with the expanded field and weaker than usual bubble, it shouldn't have mattered. We got snubbed and it wasn't right.

 

[tante]

that i've been saying our OOC made us vulnerable since November. time and time i posted it....that moving into the Pac we ought to look at what the SOS of Pac teams that make the NCAA are numerically and use that as a model moving forward. that because of SOS we had little margin for error (like losing at ISU the last week of the season). that, right or wrong there are criteria the NCAA uses...and when you have an rpi in the 60's, based in history not my "following the bubble closely this year" opinion, you have about a 20% to make it no matter what else. and that based on what happened....i was right.

you guys can wank off to the idea that Beelzebub Beebe stuck his pitchfork in our behind, but the fact is we were deficient in one of the criteria they look at. do i think we got hosed, yes. i'm not saying they were right, it's an explanation that i'm making. not some hot-headed semi-wish fulfillment persecution angle that posits the unknown as the source of all my misery. or some moral interpretation where CU is the scapegoat for the Great Texas Conspiracy.

there's a big difference between what i'm saying and most others: i'm talking about margin for error....most are looking for "a single cause".

did we have the worst non-conference rpi of any at-large team?

 

[Buffnik]

did we have the worst non-conference rpi of any at-large team?

Our non-con SOS was among the 25 worst in the nation. As Mick said, that made us vulnerable. However, our overall SOS came in at #49. So we did end up playing a strong schedule. But this year the committee really over-valued games against good teams in the non-conference (win or lose). We'll need to step it up on future schedules to avoid this. Programs like Virginia Tech get left out for this reason every year and never seem to learn the lesson.

 

[Deleted member 807]

I think that we're way too focused on our SOS and not critical enough of our style of play. We really need to do something about that if we want to be considered more seriously by the tournament committee.

All season, watching games, I remember thinking 'this style of play just isn't going to get it done'.

The general lack of maori tribal tattoos, oriental characters, and other bad ass body body art and obvious piercings played against CU's style points. Cory and Alex should have played with 2 foot afros.

If Levi Knutson would have gotten inked up, shaved a Mohawk into his scalp, and renamed himself a menacing name like Stone Baulstamp, CU would be dancing.


Clean cut is just out of style.

 

[tante]

we are going to give Boyle a pass since he didn't make the schedule, but if he can't figure out how to get a ton of low 200 rpi's here at the CEC WITHOUT giving them a home game in return we are doomed. If we want to be a big time basketball school, we need to start scheduling like one and that means buy our way in.

 

[Mick Ronson]

that's just the breaks? Really?

don't put words in my mouth. i've been very clear. if your rpi is in the 60's, your chance of making the NCAA is very small. the last decade shows this. i don't see how this is so mysterious.

no where have i said the rpi is the best measure of a basketball team. it's what they use, though. %'s say i'm right now. and i was right in November. i'm not happy about it, but i won't be shoved into a position that 1. isn't mine and 2. makes very little sense.

 

[Buffnik]

we are going to give Boyle a pass since he didn't make the schedule, but if he can't figure out how to get a ton of low 200 rpi's here at the CEC WITHOUT giving them a home game in return we are doomed. If we want to be a big time basketball school, we need to start scheduling like one and that means buy our way in.

^^^This^^^

Tourney teams live on home games against RPI 100-200.

 

[cnbuff410]

don't put words in my mouth. i've been very clear. if your rpi is in the 60's, your chance of making the NCAA is very small. the last decade shows this. i don't see how this is so mysterious.

no where have i said the rpi is the best measure of a basketball team. it's what they use, though. %'s say i'm right now. and i was right in November. i'm not happy about it, but i won't be shoved into a position that 1. isn't mine and 2. makes very little sense.

This year is totally different from all previous years. So you still don't understand? How many 13+ loss teams get into the dance?

 

[Duff Man]

that i've been saying our OOC made us vulnerable since November. time and time i posted it....that moving into the Pac we ought to look at what the SOS of Pac teams that make the NCAA are numerically and use that as a model moving forward. that because of SOS we had little margin for error (like losing at ISU the last week of the season). that, right or wrong there are criteria the NCAA uses...and when you have an rpi in the 60's, based in history not my "following the bubble closely this year" opinion, you have about a 20% to make it no matter what else. and that based on what happened....i was right.

you guys can wank off to the idea that Beelzebub Beebe stuck his pitchfork in our behind, but the fact is we were deficient in one of the criteria they look at. do i think we got hosed, yes. i'm not saying they were right, it's an explanation that i'm making. not some hot-headed semi-wish fulfillment persecution angle that posits the unknown as the source of all my misery. or some moral interpretation where CU is the scapegoat for the Great Texas Conspiracy.

there's a big difference between what i'm saying and most others: i'm talking about margin for error....most are looking for "a single cause".

Sometimes you have to learn very hard lessons. You definitely have been harping on this for a long time. I'm pissed and think we got screwed, but the non-conference scheduling has to change. It has been a joke forever.

 

[whatthebuff]

I know our non conference SOS sucked, but how many bubble teams scheduled 4 road games plus 2 neutral site games? I think we beat Georgia, SF, and Harvard at home. We also may have been able to beat those teams if they came later in the schedule.

 

[Buffnik]

I know our non conference SOS sucked, but how many bubble teams scheduled 4 road games plus 2 neutral site games? I think we beat Georgia, SF, and Harvard at home. We also may have been able to beat those teams if they came later in the schedule.

You're right. The point that's being made is that our OOC SOS made us vulnerable. If I'm remembering correctly, we had the #323 OOC SOS and it directly led to a #65 final RPI. Those are bad numbers for getting an NCAA tournament bid. This year, it shouldn't have kept us out... but it was used to justify it. Just about any other year, though, it wouldn't even have us strongly in the bubble discussion. Therefore, we need to fix this as we move forward as a good basketball school.

 

[Mick Ronson]

You're right. The point that's being made is that our OOC SOS made us vulnerable. If I'm remembering correctly, we had the #323 OOC SOS and it directly led to a #65 final RPI. Those are bad numbers for getting an NCAA tournament bid. This year, it shouldn't have kept us out... but it was used to justify it. Just about any other year, though, it wouldn't even have us strongly in the bubble discussion. Therefore, we need to fix this as we move forward as a good basketball school.

100% correct. even being in the 50's is iffy.

 

[whatthebuff]

Definitely, it was the beginning of the end for us. I always made fun of Ricardo's pathetic schedules. I thought we were getting better with the Maui bracket last year. Next year we are in Puerto Rico with: Alabama (haha), Iona, Maryland, Purdue, Temple, and Wichita St. Seems like a great start.

 

[Mick Ronson]

Definitely, it was the beginning of the end for us. I always made fun of Ricardo's pathetic schedules. I thought we were getting better with the Maui bracket last year. Next year we are in Puerto Rico with: Alabama (haha), Iona, Maryland, Purdue, Temple, and Wichita St. Seems like a great start.

tournaments are fine, but you don't play all those teams. and if you lose the first one, you aren't playing the good ones either. kind of diminishing returns.

we need to overhaul our whole OOC scheduling mentality. when a coach who is winning 11-16 games a year is making the schedule, there are going to be creampuffs all down the line because he's trying to keep his job. when you are trying to make the NCAA, it's a whole different strategy.