2025-2026 B1G Basketball Thread

[medinabuckeye1]

I consider my own team to be not all that great but Ohio State is light years ahead of the RedHawks.  With the Iowa win the Buckeyes are 4-10 in Q1 and 5-1 in Q2.  That is nine Q1/2 wins which is nine more than Miami had.  I'm beating on this point because it needs to sink in . . . Miami has literally ZERO impressive wins.  

Miami's best win was a home win over Akron by 3 points.  If Ohio State's best win was a home win over Akron by 3 points the Buckeyes would be something like 8-24 and not even remotely in the discussion for an at-large bid.  It is bad enough that we give charity bids to tallest midgets there is no reason to even discuss giving charity bids to midgets that aren't even the tallest.  

[betarhoalphadelta]

With 16 assists tonight, a BTT record, Braden Smith jumps to 1049 total. Second on the all-time list, but still trailing Bobby Hurley by 31 at 1076.

At his current assist/game rate, he would get there with 4 more games. With one more BTT game and one NCAAT game "guaranteed", he's got two games at least. So he needs to make it to this Saturday or to the 2nd weekend of the tourney to get to 4. 

But 16 in a single game certainly helps. 

[MaximumSam]

You are smarter than this. 

Here is some more math for you:

• #54 in NET
• #93 in KenPom
• #87 in Torvik (You usually cite this one)

Those are all BEFORE they LOST to a pathetic (#203 in NET/#195 in KenPom/#171 in Torvik) team. 

I think that really @betarhoalphadelta summarized my feelings very well here:They had a chance to get a charity bid that we specifically reserve for tallest midgets who spend the year beating up on patsies.  They FAILED at that.  Now they are thrown in with the rest of the non-Champions and their accomplishment of going 31-1 against the little sisters of the poor shouldn't even get them in the discussion because Indiana's accomplishment of going 18-14 required the Hoosiers to win 3 Q1 games and 3 more Q2 games.  The Redskins RedHawks only won two Q2 games and ZERO Q1 games. 

Oh, and lets talk about undefeated and "the math":  Indiana was UNDEFEATED in Q3 and Q4 games.  They went 5-0 in Q3 and 7-0 in Q4.  Miami was NOT undefeated in such games because their loss to UMASS will be either Q3 or Q4 depending on how much UMASS moves. 

You want to know who else is actually undefeated in Q3 and Q4 games unlike Miami who lost one of those?

• SMU is 11-0 in Q3 and Q4 and a bubble team
• Indiana is 12-0 in Q3 and Q4 and a bubble team that is NOT going to get in
• VCU is 20-0 in Q3 and Q4 and a bubble team
• VaTech is 11-0 in Q3 and Q4 and a bubble team

Here's some math for you.

• NONE of the bubble teams would have likely gone undefeated against Miami's schedule
• It is pretty unlikely that ANY team in a given year would go undefeated in the regular season
• If someone gave you odds of a particular team doing it in any given year, you could probably bet everything you own against it happening and feel pretty good doing it

So the idea that what Miami did is no big deal is obviously hogwash. Then it comes down to more esoteric things, like what do you value in sports. If you value the game and their results being important things that matter, then Miami is obviously in. If you watch a game and see the result and think: "well, that's less important than their WAB or their NET," then maybe they shouldn't. I know where I stand. All of these teams are midgets. It's just Miami did something special and the rest are also rans.

To me, winning is the most important thing. That's what it all comes down too. Yes, we have disparate schedules and we have tools to try figure that out, but if your tools lead you to throw out undefeated teams in favor of say, Auburn, then you should rely less on the tool.

[bayareabadger]

And Miami is more than welcome to play two or three teams with a pulse during their season.

They tried. Reached out to close to 20 power conference schools. No bites. A staffer at Illinois even wrote back and said they needed a few much worse opportunities before even considering Miami.

Even reached out to the flagship school in their own state. Did get a response. It was interesting because Miami was the second-place team in the MAC last year. Second-tallest midget and such. Somehow the sixth- and ninth-place teams from that conference made it on the schedule, a couple of Michigan schools. Curious that.

[Brutus Buckeye]

They should play Dayton, Cincinnati and Xavier every year. 

[medinabuckeye1]

Maybe I was giving you too much credit, maybe you aren't smarter than that?

Here's some math for you.

• NONE of the bubble teams would have likely gone undefeated against Miami's schedule

That isn't math/data, that is opinion.  

Here's some math for you.

• It is pretty unlikely that ANY team in a given year would go undefeated in the regular season

That isn't math/data, that is opinion.  

Here's some math for you.

• If someone gave you odds of a particular team doing it in any given year, you could probably bet everything you own against it happening and feel pretty good doing it

That isn't math/data, that is opinion.  

Do you understand the difference between data and opinion?  

So the idea that what Miami did is no big deal is obviously hogwash. 

No, it isn't.  Miami went 29-1 in Q3 and Q4 games.  SMU, Indiana, VCU, and VaTech went a combined 54-0 in Q3 and Q4 games.  

This is just comical:

• If someone gave you odds of a particular team doing it in any given year, you could probably bet everything you own against it happening and feel pretty good doing it

I just gave you four teams that all went undefeated in Q3/4 games.  Do you want more?  Here are a few more:

• Duke (also undefeated in Q2)
• Michigan "
• Arizona "
• Florida 
• Illinois "
• Houston "
• Iowa State "
• Purdue "
• Michigan State "
• Nebraska "
• Louisville "
• Virginia 
• TxTech
• Vanderbilt
• Alabama
• Arkansas "
• Kansas
• Tennessee
• St. Marys 
• North Carolina "
• BYU
• Kentucky
• Ohio State
• Miami, FL
• UCLA
• Clemson
• SMU
• Indiana
• aTm
• VCU
• Baylor
• UCF
• Oklahoma
• VaTech
• Mizzou

That is a whole lot of teams that went undefeated against the crap portion of their schedules.  That is data not opinion.  Those teams ALL did exactly what Miami, OH FAILED to do.  They beat all the crappy teams they faced.  Miami didn't.  

(I)f your tools lead you to throw out undefeated teams in favor of say, Auburn, then you should rely less on the tool.

Ah, nobody said this.  As @betarhoalphadelta already explained to you:

If you schedule terribly, maybe you need to win your conference tournament to get a spot. No matter how many Little Sisters of the Poor you beat up on. Because you can't argue "while they're 31-0!" when they wouldn't be close to 31-0 if they played anyone with a pulse.

And you also can't claim "they're undefeated so they should get in!" To be undefeated they'd have won their conference tournament and gotten in. They're not undefeated. They just lost. They were undefeated. And then they lost to a REALLY bad team. It's not enough to say they were undefeated in the regular season. Nothing matters until Selection Sunday. They're not undefeated on Selection Sunday.

Literally nobody in this thread is advocating excluding teams that are actually undefeated.  

Do you understand the meaning of the word undefeated?  
Here, I'll help you out or look at this link yourself:
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.88)]undefeated
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.64)]British  [/color]
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.64)]/ ˌʌndɪˈfiːtɪd /[/color][/font][/size][/color]
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.64)]adjective[/font][/size][/color]

• [color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.88)]not having been defeated
  [/font][/size][/color]
  

  [color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.88)][color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.88)]the undefeated champion
  [/color][/font][/size][/color]

You are the one making an emotional argument.  I am the one making an argument based on data.  You may not like that but your feelings don't change reality.  The math/data says this isn't even a close call.  Miami absolutely positively does NOT have a tournament quality resume and that isn't disputable.  Back to actual data:

Here is some more math for you:

• #54 in NET
• #93 in KenPom
• #87 in Torvik (You usually cite this one)

It is not even close.  

If you want to make an emotional argument for inclusion fine but at least be honest about what you are doing like @ELA was when he first raised this possibility:  

I know the metrics, but I have a hard time seeing a 1 loss Miami left out

He was observant enough to admit up front that it was a purely emotional argument because the data unequivocally says no.  I specifically quoted Torvik as a courtesy to you because based on your past posts that is apparently your favorite ratings site.  Please provide some modicum of courtesy to me in return and quit falsely claiming that there is a rational, mathematical or data-driven basis for your argument because there isn't.  

You are making an emotional argument and arguing against math and data.  At least have the decency to admit it instead of pretending data is on your side.  

[medinabuckeye1]

They tried. Reached out to close to 20 power conference schools. No bites. A staffer at Illinois even wrote back and said they needed a few much worse opportunities before even considering Miami.

Even reached out to the flagship school in their own state. Did get a response. It was interesting because Miami was the second-place team in the MAC last year. Second-tallest midget and such. Somehow the sixth- and ninth-place teams from that conference made it on the schedule, a couple of Michigan schools. Curious that.

Not my problem and not the last team in's problem.  

[medinabuckeye1]

For a change of pace to a topic that we probably all agree on:

Does anyone else just have trouble with the concept of a BTT Game in Chicago between East Coast Rutgers and West Coast UCLA?  

[bayareabadger]

Not my problem and not the last team in's problem. 

It seems a problem to the idea they’re welcome to do it. Which it seemed was your idea. 

The last team in’s problems usually involve losing a mess of games. Anyway, gonna be interesting to watch. 

[bayareabadger]

If you schedule terribly, maybe you need to win your conference tournament to get a spot. No matter how many Little Sisters of the Poor you beat up on. Because you can't argue "while they're 31-0!" when they wouldn't be close to 31-0 if they played anyone with a pulse.

This points to a certain curious place for certain top mid-majors. 

It wasn't like Miami said "we're gonna schedule no one and ride this undefeated thing!!!!" No one can plan for undefeated in conference and they tried with more than a dozen power conference schools. No one bit. And they can't get a big school's DOBO on the phone and say "YOU WILL PLAY US." The other schools have agency, and they often don't want the smoke, embarrassingly enough (credit to Painter for being braver than that)

The thing with teams like this is they're basically impossible to engineer. They're functional accidents, unplannable and not what the coaches or programs ever want. I tend to think if the bottom of the bubble real cruddy, fine to reward doing something that remains pretty difficult, especially with a dang Dayton spot. 

[medinabuckeye1]

It seems a problem to the idea they’re welcome to do it. Which it seemed was your idea.

I didn't actually say that they were welcome to but to be fair that was a reasonable inference.  My position is that I just don't care how or why they ended up where they ended up.  It makes no difference to me because, to me, this exercise isn't about being inclusive and giving everyone a chance.  That part of the NCAAT is adequately handled by the 30-some auto-bids.  This part (the at-large bids) is about picking the BEST teams period, full stop.  How they got there is immaterial to me.  

The last team in’s problems usually involve losing a mess of games to REALLY good opponents. Anyway, gonna be interesting to watch.

FIFY.  I added the bolded part.  In Lunardi's latest Auburn is the last team in and yeah they lost a mess of games.  They are 4-12 in Q1, 3-2 in Q2, 3-1 in Q3, and 6-0 in Q4.  So yes, they have a mess of losses but 14 of their 15 losses were in games tougher than any game on Miami's schedule.  

Auburn has one Q3/4 loss just like Miami but unlike Miami they have seven Q1/2 wins which is seven more than Miami has.  

Auburn has 15 losses and may well miss the tournament but my objection is that those were nearly all to very good teams and literally all of them were to teams better than the UMASS team that just knocked Miami out of the MAC Tournament.  Their losses (NET) were:

• #2 Michigan N
• #3 Arizona A
• #10 Purdue N
• #16 Vandy H
• #17 Bama A
• #17 Bama H
• #18 Arkansas H
• #20 Tennessee A
• #20 Tennessee N
• #31 Georgia A
• #43 aTm H
• #52 Oklahoma A
• #59 Mizzou A
• #92 Ole Miss H
• #111 MissSt A

Literally all of those are better than Miami's neutral court loss to #203 Massachusetts.  

[medinabuckeye1]

The thing with teams like this is they're basically impossible to engineer. They're functional accidents, unplannable and not what the coaches or programs ever want. I tend to think if the bottom of the bubble real cruddy, fine to reward doing something that remains pretty difficult, especially with a dang Dayton spot.

On this I completely agree and I even said upthread that:

(H)onestly if it was close and I was on the committee I'd vote to include them.  I wouldn't vote for it as-is because it is NOT close. 

I think your statement about a real cruddy bottom of the bubble is functionally the same thing as mine that I'd vote to include them if it was close.  Yeah, if the bubble is so incredibly weak that there is a plausible data-driven argument for including Miami legitimately then I'd probably let the emotional argument carry the day and include them over a similarly bad team that didn't have that on their side.  

The problem for Miami is that it just isn't close.  The data unequivocally says no.  There is no plausible data-driven argument for including them so they are left with ONLY the emotional argument.  

[MaximumSam]

  

You are making an emotional argument and arguing against math and data.  At least have the decency to admit it instead of pretending data is on your side. 

I'm sorry, but I had to laugh at that. Again, the numbers don't lie. Undefeated regular seasons are rare. It's special to see one! Of course it is emotional. Sports are emotional. No one watches sports and because they need to put in numbers in a spreadsheet (except perhaps Purdue grads).

But again, the math is against you. To get around the FACT that NONE of the bubble teams would likely had the same regular season record against Miami's schedule, you have to cherry pick the games. 

To get around the FACT that Miami's regular season was special, you have to pretend that it happens all the time.

The math here is one sided. How many teams have accomplished something that Miami did? I'm not going to do the equation, but less than .00001 percent? Compared to Auburn, which needed an overtime victory over #224th ranked Bethune-Cookman just to have a winning record. But I'm sure their NERD is better, so losing half their games is just fine.

[bayareabadger]

And Miami is more than welcome to play two or three teams with a pulse during their season.

I didn't actually say that they were welcome to

See, that's where I got that.