Sunday, February 28, 2021

Bubble Watch: everyone else, part 1

Houston (18-3) (13-3) NET 4 SoS 60
Vital signs:  2-1 vs. Q1, 4-1 vs. Q2, 6-3 R/N
Signature wins:  N-TTU, @SMU, Boise
Bad losses:  @ECU

Such is life in the AAC.  A lack of top-end wins will lock them out of the top 2 lines, I think.  And I don't see a way out of avoiding this fate.

Wichita St (11-4) (9-2) NET 66 SoS 24
Vital signs:  2-2 vs. Q1, 2-2 vs. Q2, 4-2 R/N
Signature wins:  Houston, @Ole Miss, and um
Bad losses:  none really...@Memphis?

They're one Houston win away from being a non-factor on the bubble.  I'm not a fan of those types of resumes that require a strong lean on one single result.  Two home losses to probable tourney teams (Ok St and Mizzou) are killers, because they haven't gotten many other quality win chances.  I don't know if this resume can hold on without another significant result.  They really need to find a way to get their SMU series played.  Badly.

SMU (11-4) (7-4) NET 46 SoS 107
Vital signs:  0-3 vs. Q1, 4-0 vs. Q2, 5-2 R/N
Signature wins:  @Dayton, Memphis....oof
Bad losses:  Cincy

No wins over probable tourney teams, right?  Can't put them in.  They really badly need their two games with Wichita rescheduled.  That could cost BOTH teams a tournament spot.

Memphis (13-6) (9-3) NET 61 SoS 132
Vital signs:  0-2 vs. Q1, 3-3 vs. Q2, 3-5 R/N
Signature wins:  lolno
Bad losses:  Tulsa, N-WKU, @Tulsa

Only mentioned because they have a home game with Houston in hand.  We'll see if they win that one.

Gonzaga (24-0) (15-0) NET 1 SoS 81
Vital signs:  7-0 vs. Q1, 5-0 vs. Q2, 12-0 R/N
Signature wins:  N-Iowa, N-Kansas, N-WVU, N-Virginia, swept BYU

A hilariously strong collection of neutral site wins.  #1 overall seed, and can probably even survive 2 losses and still hold onto it.

BYU (18-5) (10-3) NET 20 SoS 18
Vital signs:  3-3 vs. Q1, 5-2 vs. Q2, 9-3 R/N
Signature wins:  @SDSU, @Utah St, @St Mary's
Bad losses:  @Pepperdine

Pretty safely in.  Pretty strong resume, and a good job in the non-con to get a couple road/neutral wins that will carry weight.

St Bonaventure (13-3) (11-3) NET 28 SoS 75
Vital signs:  2-2 vs. Q1, 2-1 vs. Q2, 5-3 R/N
Signature wins:  @Richmond?  @Davidson?  VCU
Bad losses:  @Rhody?

Only two non-con games, so their entire resume is basically conference play.  Does winning the A-10 get them in?  A-10 is more or less the #9 conference in the country.  Conference champions of a top 10 conference in years past usually, but not always, are good enough to get at-large bids.  With 2 cupcake-ish games remaining, I highly recommend winning both of them.  13-3 looks a lit better than 12-4.

VCU (17-6) (10-4) NET 38 SoS 32
Vital signs:  2-4 vs. Q1, 6-0 vs. Q2, 7-4 R/N
Signature wins:  Bonaventure, N-USU, St Louis?
Bad losses:  Rhody, Mason

This isn't the greatest resume in the world.  The SoS numbers feel deceptive to me.  I think I'd put them in, but I'm not feeling strong about that prediction.

St Louis (12-5) (5-4) NET 49 SoS 230
Vital signs:  2-2 vs. Q1, 1-1 vs. Q2, 1-4 R/N
Signature wins:  Bonaventure, LSU, Richmond
Bad losses:  Dayton, @LaSalle

1 road win, in Q4.  Unplayable resume.

Richmond (12-6) (6-4) NET 53 SoS 39
Vital signs:  3-4 vs. Q1, 2-0 vs. Q2, 7-3 R/N
Signature wins:  N-Loyola, @Kentucky, @Davidson?
Bad losses:  LaSalle

A playable resume here though.  Road acumen, a couple signature wins, but a couple really, really dumb losses ruining everything.  This resume will be down to the wire.

San Diego St (18-4) (13-3) NET 18 SoS 25
Vital signs:  0-3 vs. Q1, 6-1 vs. Q2, 6-2 R/N
Signature wins:  Boise, UCLA, Colorado St
Bad losses:  none

The good news is no bad losses.  The bad news is no Q1 wins.  This means the seed upside is very, very limited.  I think the NET rating will help in their case.

Boise St (17-6) (14-5) NET 35 SoS 43
Vital signs:  2-4 vs. Q1, 2-2 vs. Q2, 7-6 R/N
Signature wins:  @BYU, @CSU, swept USU
Bad losses:  swept at Nevada

The lack of truly bad losses, plus juuust enough success on the road could be enough for them.  Worth noting 3 road losses were SDSU 2x and Houston, so they're better off than you think.  They're gonna need something more of value to add to the resume to make sure they make it, I fear.

Colorado St (14-4) (12-3) NET 45 SoS 73
Vital signs:  2-3 vs. Q1, 1-1 vs. Q2, 7-3 R/N
Signature wins:  @SDSU, @Utah St, Boise
Bad losses:  Boise

Heh, their worst loss doubles as their 3rd best win.  I think I like this resume slightly more than Boise's while acknowledging both are in the same situation.

Utah St (14-7) (12-4) NET 50 SOS 100
Vital signs:  2-4 vs. Q1, 1-1 vs. Q2, 7-5 R/N
Signature wins:  swept SDSU, CSU
Bad losses:  N-S Dakota St, @UNLV

Unlike the other teams above, USU took a couple dumb losses and it leaves them a half-step behind.  Will the committee take 4 MWC teams?  As much as it shouldn't matter, you know the committee will look at that sideways.  I'm worried.

No comments: