Can Northwestern Make The NCAA Tournament With A Losing Big Ten Record?
by Loretta8 on Jan 17, 2012 9:00 AM CST
in 2011-12 Northwestern Wildcats Basketball
Email
PrintAfter upsetting Michigan State, Northwestern is back into the NCAA tournament discussion, so it's worth wondering what sort of record NU would have to finish the season with in order to make it. The past two years, NU's non-conference schedule was so weak that they would likely have had to post a winning record in Big Ten play to even have a chance, but this year there are several factors working in NU's favor.
First off, the non-conference slate was much more challenging than in years past. According to the extremely useful site RPIForecast.com (which will be referenced throughout the article), Northwestern played the 29th most difficult non-conference schedule in the entire country. Games against national title contender Baylor and Missouri Valley favorite Creighton certainly helped, but what's boosted the strength of schedule more than anything is the lack of truly terrible teams. NU has traditionally played multiple RPI killers like Chicago State and SIU-Edwardsville, but this year only Texas-Pan American is expected to finish in the bottom 100 of the country in the season-ending RPI. Mississippi Valley State and Texas Southern are apparently the class of the SWAC, helping out NU's cause, and it doesn't hurt that Seton Hall is currently ranking a surprising 5th in the nation in the RPI.
Secondly, the Big Ten is by far the best conference in the country by any metric you look at. A ridiculous nine of the twelve teams in the league are currently in the top 50 of the RPI, and since the RPI is largely based on strength of schedule it's likely that most if not all of those teams will remain in the top 50 throughout the season. That will give Northwestern plenty of opportunities to add more quality wins to an already solid profile.
If Northwestern finishes the season 9-9 in conference play, RPIForecast projects they would end up with an RPI of about 33rd in the country, and its very rare to see BCS conference teams with an RPI that high left out. Additionally, in order to win seven more conference games, NU would need to get a minimum of three wins against RPI top 50 teams, and when you consider NU already has two RPI top 25 wins over Seton Hall and Michigan State, 9-9 would be more than enough to get into the tournament. In fact I think NU fans wouldn't even have much of a sweat on Selection Sunday in that case unless NU suffered a bad loss to one of the bottom 3 B1G teams in the first round of the conference tournament.
So if 9-9 gets NU in relatively comfortably, then it stands to reason they'd have a chance at 8-10. Per RPIForecast, 8-10 would put NU's RPI at around 42nd nationally, which is still pretty good. And NU would still have the two RPI 25 wins, and its possible they'd have no bad losses, assuming they take care of business in the four remaining games against Penn State, Iowa and Nebraska (much easier said than done, of course). In a year where the Pac-12 is historically bad and in danger of getting just one bid, the ACC is down and could get only three, and the Big East isn't its usual dominant self and figures to get a maximum of seven, the time is right for a team with a losing record in the nation's best conference to steal a bid. NU would likely need to avoid a first round Big Ten tournament loss, but I have to think they'd have a chance at the very least.
52 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
That picture is fantastic
I was looking for a picture for my power rankings post last night. I typed in Michigan State, since they stand atop the rankings. Curletti’s power jam was the first thing that came up, so I used it because it is great.
Manager at BT Powerhouse a Big Ten basketball blog
@babaoreally
by babaoreally on Jan 17, 2012 9:44 AM CST via Android app reply actions
Thoughts.
First off, I don’t want to ‘back-in’ to the tournament, I want to head in with at least a 10-8, and at worst 9-9 record. To make the tournament at 8-10 will feel lame and cheap to me. I worry that making the tournament is turning into making a bowl game where having a losing conference record of 2-6 can still produce a ‘bowl berth’ with a magic 4-0 in non-conf.
With that being said, Myron Medcalf of ESPN wrote this in yesterday’s Big Ten Power Rankings about NU.
9. Northwestern: The Wildcats’ upset victory against Michigan State on Saturday made me take a closer look at their losses. One-point loss to Illinois. Overtime loss to Michigan. Nothing to be ashamed of. The Wildcats are feisty. But they have to build on this win to gain more street cred in the Big Ten. The MSU win was impressive. It’s still tough, however, to know what to expect from this squad the rest of the way.
That is EXACTLY how I feel. This is where Chad’s point of close games actually mean something when it produces a win, NU still is in the heart of their tournament battling schedule, so we’ll find out if the MSU win was a fluke or if it meant something more.
Also, as strong as a Carmody hater as I’ve been, I’m with Sec. 112 on the praise that Carmody deserves for producing a SIGNIFICANTLY better defense recently.
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 17, 2012 9:48 AM CST reply actions
This is just somehting I dont understand
I don’t get why you wouldn’t be happy if NU accomplishes something in a non ideal manner. Do you also not look at big wins the same if the other team played like crap and not up to their potential. Is the win at Iowa 2 years ago tarnished because Stanzi didn’t play the whole game?
Part of me just realizes that a large portion of sports is being opportunistic, whether thats taking advantage of in game lucky bounces or in this case other conferences having a down year.
by JerseyShore@NU on Jan 17, 2012 10:03 AM CST up reply actions
I guess I am just confused
because you seemed to be a very black and white type of guy in football season (only really cared about W’s and L’s) so I dont get why this isnt NU made the tourney (Yay) or they didnt (F me)
by JerseyShore@NU on Jan 17, 2012 10:05 AM CST up reply actions
Great questions JS.
I want NU to succeed in an optimal manner, i.e. win more, be a no-brainer come selection Sunday, be a seven or higher seed. I think we all want NU to win more than less, but to address your question directly, eventhough making the tournament as a lower seed or even in the play game would be ‘making the tournament,’ I just want it be a team that isn’t 8-10 and 8th in the Big Ten.
I’ve said before that all NU bball fans have become so obsessed with making the tournament that we almost lose sight of being a good team and having that not be the only metric of success. I know it is easy to say since NU has never made the tourney, and of course it would be a HUGE accomplishment in any form or fashion, I just want it to be a lock and load type thing.
To make the football analogy, I LOVED Fitz when he made the Outback Bowl, b/c it was an above .500 conf record and a prominent bowl, whereas this year making a bowl with a 6-6 (3-5) record seemed lame to me.
Maybe I am devaluing the tournament too much, but when projections have eight Big East and eight Big Ten teams into the tournament, it makes me cringe.
Answer your question?
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 17, 2012 10:22 AM CST up reply actions
Also, no.
If another team has injured players or does not play as well, I don’t care, injuries and not playing upto your potential a part of sports. So, yes, I do just care about W/L, but I want to be rewarded by having more W’s than L’s.
Make sense?
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 17, 2012 10:23 AM CST up reply actions
I dont agree but I'll take it...
I guess I just value getting that spot in the tourney more than you do. I guess the way I look at it is getting in the tourney is the first step to making the run in the tourney that we all want to see. Whether that begins as a 11 seed or a 7 seed doesn’t really make a difference to me. Especially because the difference between a 7 or 11 seed is probably 1 win maybe 2…so I don’t think its a great barometer for how good a team is.
by JerseyShore@NU on Jan 17, 2012 10:39 AM CST up reply actions
Ok,
Yes, difference between 7 and 11 could be a game, but that could be said for everyone.
I do see your logic of hell, let’s get into the tournament regardless of seed and beat some teams, I really like that. I haven’t thought that far, rather focused on making the tournament as a solid team. But, good ambitions.
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 17, 2012 11:23 AM CST up reply actions
Thats what Im saying though
For everyone the difference between 7/11 isn’t a whole lot….so for that slew of teams just getting there, regardless of how, should be the first goal
by JerseyShore@NU on Jan 17, 2012 11:26 AM CST up reply actions
How is this "backing in"?
I fail to see that. By your arbitrary definition, yes, 8-10 is “backing in”. But that’s not the context that phrase is typically used in.
If we have an RPI in the top 42, as Loretta posits, I fail to see how the fact that we went 8-10 in a fantastic conference could be cheap when we were losing to teams better than us but significantly higher in that magical 37-team at-large pool. If we’re good enough to be considered in that conversation based on our wins, our RPI, and our ability to avoid the usual “what the fuck” loss, I don’t think it’s “cheap” at all.
Fair.
I think this is just a contextual/degree argument. You are probably right MN, 8-10 isn’t backing in, but I just want them to make the tournament with a winning Big Ten record.
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 17, 2012 10:26 AM CST up reply actions
I just want to end another negative streak
almost 50 years without a winning conference record. I’d love for that to end.
Also, given the number of minutes that Sobo, Drew and Shurna will have to play, it behooves us to get these wins NOW as opposed to later when the minutes have accrued and the stakes are even higher. I don’t like us in those late road games. And while I know our guys will play with heart, those late home games will be tough too (OSU and Mich).
nu alum
Guess who went 9-9 in conference last year-
the f’ing NCAA champs.
by Brad Silverman on Jan 17, 2012 11:54 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
was going to point this out
obviously special circumstance – the NCAA wouldn’t have had the chance to not allow UConn into the Tourney, as they won the Big East – but the Huskies were a tremendously talented team in an incredible conference, and underperformed in the conference season. I like to think they would’ve gotten a bid just on the strength of their resume without Kemba’s run, though.
by Rodger Sherman on Jan 17, 2012 12:00 PM CST up reply actions
I hope not
Sorry, but a pet peeve of mine is a major conference team getting in with a losing conference record. Would it really be that bad if we installed a rule htat you have to be .500 at minimum in your conference to get in?
Of course, I don’t blame you guys for this argument, nor celebrating wildly if you got in with a losing Big Ten record.
A futile crusade to prevent mass ignorance
HammerAndRails, SBNation's Boilermaker Blog
i dont really understand why that would upset you
the purpose of the selection committee is to find the 37 best teams that didnt get an auto bid. its quite possible that a large number of those 37 could be concentrated in the same arbitrary grouping of teams that schedule each other a lot. there arent very many teams in division 1 that could post a .500 better record in the Big Ten. the conference schedule is also only about 60% of the games a given team will play, the other 40% should be weighted equally. but since the conference record is always listed after a teams overall record, its given a lot of weight.
its the sister argument to saying two football teams from the same conference shouldnt play for the national title. if they’re the two best teams in the country, and the goal of the national championship is to match the two best teams in the country, then what exactly is the problem?
I think he is saying that...
no matter how difficult the Big Ten is, making the tournament when you lose more games than less doesn’t feel as good.
Your argument that the committe’s job is to find the best 37 teams is absolutely correct, and by that logic, hell twelve Big Ten teams could get in if they are within those parameters, but I just don’t like a reward for losing more games to your competition than wins.
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 17, 2012 10:25 AM CST up reply actions
thats actually not at all when tmill said
despite your best efforts to translate his opinion into yours
Well, I guess I'm extrapolating a bit too much.
I know he wants to make a rule, so I was trying to make into my opinion.
Boiler, care to chime in!?
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 17, 2012 11:22 AM CST up reply actions
I just have a pet peeves about teams getting in with losing conference records
I would much rather reward a team that does well in a smaller conference, but has an off day in their conference tournament, than a team that doesn’t maange to win at least half of its conference games.
A futile crusade to prevent mass ignorance
HammerAndRails, SBNation's Boilermaker Blog
by BoilerTMill on Jan 17, 2012 11:32 AM CST up reply actions
As much as I want to see the 'Cats play in the tourney...
I agree with you. It’s a tournament to establish the national title winner, and there’s just something wrong about a team that can’t even finish in the top half of its conference being given the chance to win a national title. It would be the same record that we have achieved over the past several years, the only difference being the fact that our competition (i.e. conference) is being perceived as better. At the end of a day, entry with a sub-.500 conference record diminishes the accomplishments of others throughout the regular season, and I just see it as fundamentally unfair that we would be given the same chance at a title as a Baylor, Kansas, or Ohio State.
That said, the tournament is what it is by design and the presence of middling teams became inevitable as the field has continued to expand. Given the rules today, yes, we could be in consideration with an 8-10 conference record. We don’t truly deserve to be, but neither do a lot of other teams that will be playing. Untill the field is contracted, we have just as much of an argument as any of the others.
GTom, thank you.
Agree w/everything you said. Also, I know it is heresy to say it, but a 68 team tournament is a joke. To be honest, even 64 is pushing it in some years, look at the Pac 12, they are projected to have two teams in, that conference is so god awful, they should just have one and be done with it, ditto w/ACC and many others.
I just hate (and am stating again) that the NCAA tournament is turning into going to a bowl game.
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 17, 2012 11:55 AM CST up reply actions
I'm going to go out on a limb and say the ACC deserves more than one bid
Manager at BT Powerhouse a Big Ten basketball blog
@babaoreally
by babaoreally on Jan 17, 2012 3:34 PM CST via Android app up reply actions
Clarification.
Pac – 12 should only have 1. ACC should only have three, Duke, UNC, and UVA. I meant to say the ACC is god awful and does not deserve a plethora of bids.
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 17, 2012 3:46 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Let's put it this way
if NU makes the conference with a losing record, how many times will idiots like Gus Johnson say, “Northwestern is making their first appearance in the Big Dance despite a losing conference record?”
I just want to see them do it with no questions.
For now, please, please, please, please … and please just hold serve against Minnesota, Nebraska, Iowa and PSU. (I don’t know if this is a proper phrase for Minnesota and Iowa.)
Such is life on the fence.
Gus Johnson: 'idiot'
He seems a bit sharper than Dickie V and some of the garbage that ESPN can put out there. But yes, agree with everything else.
I agree with you
and my proposed rule would even take away one of Purdue’s best runs. In 1999 we got in as the “last team in” with a losing conference record. Even I was surprised we made it, but once there we shocked #7 seed Texas and #2 seed Miami to run to the Sweet 16.
A futile crusade to prevent mass ignorance
HammerAndRails, SBNation's Boilermaker Blog
by BoilerTMill on Jan 18, 2012 10:18 AM CST up reply actions
this kind of thinking..
overemphasizing won-loss record and largely ignoring strength of schedule is how college football ended up ruining non-conference play. everyone plays an FCS cupcake and largely refuses to schedule other tough games because doing otherwise would hurt their chances of winning 6 games for bowl eligibility or posting a gaudy record in an attempt to get a BCS bid.
unlike football, the college basketball non-conference season is filled with great matchups between top programs, because the postseason system emphasizes strength of schedule and quality of win. if you started putting in minimum standards for win percentage, top teams would start scheduling entirely frauds in non-conference play to meet the minimum win quota.
This
I don’t care about whether a team beat the other teams in its conference. I care about whether it’s legitimately one of the 64ish best teams in the country, and therefore will hold its own in a tough tournament field. Actually determining that is difficult, and adding arbitrary rules about conference records just makes it harder to do.
why do you put so much weight on conference record?
conferences are largely arbitrary groupings of teams. what if the big ten had added missouri instead of nebraska? the big ten would be historically tough top to bottom inb basketball. what if instead of adding penn state in 1994 they added another big pennsylvania state school in pittsburgh? pitt is down this year but that would have made the conference much much more difficult over that time span in basketball.
lets say northwestern had beaten baylor and creighton and gone into big ten play undefeated. if they then finished big ten play at 8-10, at 20-10 overall and with wins over seton hall, baylor, creighton, michigan state and who knows who else coming up, thats unquestionably an NCAA caliber team. like its not even close, theyd probably get in the 5 to 7 seed range. but because they were under .500 against an arbitrary, extremely difficult portion of their schedule, they wouldnt deserve to be in? if uconn last year had lost one more game in an obscenely difficult big east, they wouldnt have been worthy to compete for the national title despite a dominant non-conference showing? uconn was 9-9 in the big east yet they got a freaking 3 seed, and deserved it. had they lost the maui title game to kentucky, then its fine to have them in at 9-9, but if they lose a regular season game to georgetown or marquette and are 8-10 in big east, then they dont deserve it?
i am truly baffled by this mindset. just baffled.
Slow it down.
What are the major metrics that the NCAA committee uses now to select the field of 68?
- Wins vs Top 50 RPI
- Wins vs Top 100 RPI
- Conf Record
- Conf Standing
- Overall Record
You bring up some great points, and I do agree w/you that there should not be any rule that states a team CANNOT go into the NCAA tournament with a subpar .500 record. But, say a team plays in a conference with ONLY top 50 teams, and their record is 0-18 with all one point losses to elite teams, and yet their nonconf was outstanding at say 11-0 with many top 50 RPI wins, should they get in?
I know this is a bizarre hypothetical, but I EMPHASIZE conference wins/standings more than out of conference Top 50 RPI wins, b/c to be a) the conference is your competition year in and year out, b) it is teams that know you and prepare for you, c) equal home and away matchups, and d) it is the games you are playing later in the season that is more an indication of your level of play recently.
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 18, 2012 12:21 PM CST up reply actions
I don't mean to baffle you, Loretta8!
I’m really just saying that too many teams get in, and if you finish at 7th or 8th place in your conference, you shouldn’t have a chance to play for a national title – simply because at least six teams have been proven to be better than you on a roughly comparable schedule over the course of a season. I think UConn is a case-in-point. Yes, they won the tournament, but were they really one of the best teams in the country that year, or did they just benefit from a unique one-and-done format with a few, arbitrary favorable matchups along-the-way? The tournament format is exciting and I do like the fact that smaller conference champions get their chance – I just sometimes wish that entry was a bit more exclusive in the “at-large” pool to reinforce the importance of the regular season.
i think a smaller tournament would be fine
id actually be in favor of getting rid of the auto bids for the conferences that clearly cant compete at a high level, and moving it down to 48 teams.
my point is just that conference record is an arbitrary part of the schedule. uconn last year was dominant in non-conference, then struggled a bit (by their lofty standards) in conference, then crushed starting in the big east tournament. conference play happened to coincide with their worst stretch of play, which was still pretty good. the 9-9 conference record doesn’t come close to summarizing how they played.
I'll agree to that.
I’m all for going down to 48.
I just don’t think conference record is arbitrary, they are the teams that prepare for you, know your strengths/weaknesses. Trust, there is a reason that people value it more.
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 18, 2012 2:58 PM CST up reply actions
Part of me wishes that we'll just sneak in
So that everyone would be going apeshit at Welsh-Ryan during the selection show.
But another part of me would like to see us finish with at least 10 wins and win the B1G tournament.
optimism surging
however: what I take away from this knowledge is the reminder that NU still has work to do. This is a tough-ass conference. Six wins from the remaining schedule is not a given. Seven will be difficult. NU has history in its sights if they put in work over the next month and a half, and that alone is enough to keep me up at night.
by Rodger Sherman on Jan 17, 2012 11:57 AM CST reply actions
It is awesome to see ...
…how much two close losses and a Top 10 win can change a season around so quickly. If NU capitalizes on a) improved defense, b) improved confidence, c) Curletti’s recent play, both offense and defense, and d) beating up on some middle tier Big Ten teams, we will be not only talking about the tournament, but heck, an extension for Carmody.
But, some bad losses makes this win look like the Nebraska football win, just a random upset with no long-term implications.
by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Jan 17, 2012 12:25 PM CST up reply actions
my brain locked up
at the mention of “extension for carmody”
by pfoley on Jan 17, 2012 1:03 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
Life on the fence
Teddy Greenstein may have said it earlier in the year. I forget who said it, but they were right when they said this team is going to spend the entire season firmly on the fence. If the last two weeks haven’t shown it, every game is pretty big this year.
by a card carrying FBC member no less!
But I would have to agree.
For all the hate that we’ve laid on Carmody all these years, if things pan out as NUAC2002 says, we’d have to consider him as the program’s best coach in the ‘modern era’ right? I mean, other than our coach in 1932, he might be the best ever?
….FATAL EXCEPTION AT 0xBCE02E92109….
….BRAIN SHUTTING DOWN…
by wcgrad on Jan 17, 2012 10:16 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
You read it here first
We finish 9-9, win one in the B1G Tourney, and go in as a 11th seed. Unfortunately, as one of the last at-large teams chosen, we wind up playing another 11 in Dayton in the First Four series. Which means I’m going to have a tiny window to get myself from Seattle to southwest Ohio for the most important game of my lifetime.
Here's why
As I understand it, First Four is the play-in game for the lowest-ranked No. 16s, along with the two last at-larges to get in. We could very well be one of those. If!
by SeattleCat on Jan 17, 2012 9:29 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
If you guys go 9-9 with a BTT win, you're in
Not as one of the two teams fighting for an at large bid. Every 9-9 B1G made it last year, including 19-15 Penn State, and they lost to Maine in the non con. I don’t see that changing this year.
The only B1G team that might not make it at 9-9 is Iowa, because they lost a couple non cons to bad teams.
Manager at BT Powerhouse a Big Ten basketball blog
@babaoreally
by babaoreally on Jan 17, 2012 10:59 PM CST via Android app up reply actions
Actually, I was wrong, which makes me even more likely to be right
“First Four” in Dayton is not the first four teams, it’s the first four games. So that means the four No. 16 seeds, plus the last four at-large teams to be chosen.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
