Notre Dame Basketball: USA TODAY Considers Irish for Tournament Bid

Notre Dame didn’t make the projected dance, nor were they in the “first four out” but they weren’t left for dead, either.

Two weeks ago Notre Dame basketball was sitting at just 11-8 and 2-6 in a bad ACC. Despite a valiant effort at Florida State, things appeared headed for disaster.

Instead Notre Dame has taken advantage of the weak part of their schedule, won four straight ACC games and are now 15-8/6-6.

It’s not worthy of a banner but it’s been fun to see for those who have followed this team since late fall.

Perhaps the most-surprising part of this is that in their latest NCAA Tournament projection, the USA TODAY is, well, they’re saying there’s a chance!

Notre Dame didn’t make the projected dance, nor were they in the “first four out” but they weren’t left for dead, either.

Others considered for at-large bid (in no particular order): Richmond, Virginia Commonwealth, Syracuse, St. Johns, Minnesota, Notre Dame, Tulsa, SMU, TCU, Alabama, South Carolina, Oregon State, Saint Louis, Clemson, UNC-Greensboro, Utah, Furman,Texas, Utah State, Providence. 

That’s how Notre Dame’s tournament chances were worded.

“Considered for at-large bid”

I don’t think they make “One Shining Moment” montages for being considered for an at-large bid but compared to where things were even a couple short weeks ago, you’ll take it if you’re a Notre Dame fan.

And you’ll probably think to yourself about what might have been had things ended just a hair different against Indiana, Boston College, Syracuse II or Florida State.

Mike Brey and Notre Dame try and improve their consideration Tuesday night when they are in Virginia to take on the defending national champion Cavaliers.

Buckeyes on the Bubble: What does Ohio State need to get into the NCAA tournament?

With about a month left in the NCAA basketball season, what does Ohio State need to do to earn a bid for March Madness?

With a little over a month left in the NCAA basketball season, it’s time to start really tracking how Ohio State is shaping up to make the tournament. I will also be doing this for the women’s basketball team, and possibly the hockey teams as well. (The women’s hockey bubble, in particular, can be an incredibly tight race, and the men’s hockey team currently holds down the very last spot in the field).

As for men’s basketball, though, are the Buckeyes really in any trouble at all?

The short answer is a very firm no.

Ohio State has a losing record in the Big Ten, which is never a good sign for at-large bids. However, this year’s Big Ten is likely the deepest league in men’s basketball history, and should put 11 or 12 teams in the tournament. The Buckeyes only have two conference home losses, and played a strong nonconference schedule that included good wins over Cincinnati, Villanova, Kentucky, and a still-healthy North Carolina team.

The selection committee always claims not to look at a team’s conference record. And while history belies that somewhat, it is still very true, especially in cases like Ohio State’s. The Buckeyes might be 5-7 in the Big Ten, but they currently sit at No. 13 in BPI and No. 11 in KenPom. Those are not numbers that put a team on the bubble. Heck, those are numbers that earn a very high seed.

Even with the rough conference record, everyone recognizes Ohio State’s quality of resume. USAToday’s own bracketology, for example, has the Buckeyes as a six seed. ESPN has them on the seven-line. Those aren’t spots that should worry any team. Still, it would behoove the Buckeyes not to make that conference record look too ugly when all is said and done.

More importantly, even with an ugly conference record, the fact is that none of the Big Ten losses are bad losses. 11 of the conference’s teams are in the Top 40 of the NET rankings, which is what the NCAA looks at when determining resume quality. Indiana is also a very respectable No. 61. The only two Big Ten teams with poor rankings are Northwestern and Nebraska. Any Big Ten team that avoids losses to those two will have a strong tournament resume.

For the Buckeyes, that means things are pretty simple.

Beat Nebraska on February 27th and win two more Big Ten games, and the Ohio State should be safe. Win any more than that and we’re looking at a lock.

Week 13 CFP Bubble Watch: Georgia’s resume is legit

With just three weeks left in the college football season, let’s look at the resumes for those still in College Football Playoff contention.

Welcome back to the Bubble Watch. If you’ve been reading through my Eliminator articles, you’d know that I still count 12 teams with a shot at reaching the College Football Playoff. (And if you haven’t been reading them, please feel free to go back to them.)

Now that teams have played enough games, we can get a real look at every team’s resume. So, for the 12 teams still alive, I am going to present all of the resumes to you. We’re going to look at every resume so that we can compare what positives and negatives each team has. It’s the easiest and best way to understand what each team is bringing to the table in the College Football Playoff discussion.

How this works

Let’s go over what I’m looking at and why.

Quality of wins

For the purposes of determining quality wins, things like Top 10 and Top 25 are arbitrary numbers that do more harm than good. There is no reason the gap between No. 25 and No. 26 is considered significantly larger than the gap between No. 24 and No. 25. Therefore, to counteract this, I am being very lenient as to who is considered Top 10 or Top 25. Any team in the Top 25 of one of the major polls (CFP, AP, or Amway Coaches), or in a significant number of the accepted computer rankings, will be considered in the Top 25 for resume purposes. This leads to the awkwardness of having more than 25 “Top 25″ teams, but it presents a more accurate picture of the overall resume. Moreover, it just makes sense. The committee is aware of who is a good team and what counts as a win of decent quality, even if that team didn’t quite make it into the rankings.

I also split up every game each team has played into different groups. The groupings are important. First of all, I focus on Top 10 and Top 25 wins. These are, obviously, the quality wins. Next, I’m looking for teams in the Top 40. These are solid wins and deserve respect. The next group is teams somewhere between 41st and 80th in FBS. These are mediocre teams–they are games that any Playoff contender should win, but could in theory lose on an off day. Everyone outside the Top 80 is a complete cupcake game, and should be valued as a negative. To determine where each team is and who is outside the Top 80, I use a collection of computer rankings that focus on different things (e.g. Sagarin and Anderson) to get broad perspectives on who is a cupcake and who isn’t.

The selection committee has consistently mentioned “wins over teams with winning records” as an important metric over the past few years, so I’m going to show that to you. It is a less detailed way to view a win than looking at where each win is ranked, but the committee seems to care about it so we have to. I will not count a win over an FCS team as a +.500 win, regardless of record. Again, even though the metric is a stupid one–there are cupcakes with +.500 records (for example, Buffalo or Western Kentucky)–the committee cares about it, so we have to as well.

Offensive and defensive performance

I include the rankings in yards per play of each team. On one hand, the resume focuses on which teams you have beaten, so I stick to only identifying the quality of wins and losses and show you each contender’s remaining games. On the other hand, the committee “watches teams play,” which is really not a quantifiable statistic, but something that we can at least try to get a bearing on. Still, it’s hard to find an offensive or defensive metric that accurately represents all teams and styles of play.
Some metrics will over-value “air raid” type offenses while some will prefer more consistent, but less explosive, gameplans. The rank in offensive and defensive yards per play gives a basic metric of how efficient and/or consistent a team is on both sides of the ball.

SOS range

The SOS range is taken from numerous computer rankings. Ranges can be quite large, especially as different rankings favor different things. They do, however, give a decent picture of the possibilities of how strong the schedule actually is. Keep in mind, it’s still a little early in the season, so the different SOS methodologies could bring up radically different results. Ranges could still be wide in some cases, but in general they should narrow over the next few weeks.

Next… Teams that control their own destinies