PDA

View Full Version : The Official Utah Utes postseason thread



Pages : [1] 2

SoCalPat
02-11-2014, 10:52 PM
1. I will throat punch anyone who says they would prefer a deep NIT run over a one-and-done NCAA appearance. I'm starting to see that talk spring up elsewhere. I will also take a First Four loss ahead of a deep NIT run. I will throat punch anyone who says that does not count as an NCAA appearance.

2. As far as league play is concerned, 10th is better than finishing 8th or 9th, just like finishing 7th is better than finishing 5th or 6th. But finishing top 4 is gold. The ideal objective is to avoid Arizona for as long as possible, while getting as many wins as possible that bolster the resume (ie, avoiding Wazzu and USC). To further demonstrate my point, consider that the 10th place team in the league right now is Oregon. There is a massive gap between 10 and 11-12.

3. The USC game is the most important regular season game we've played in years. It is hard to imagine us doing what needs to be done to make at least the NIT with a loss, which almost certainly relegates us to the CBI. Win, and not only do we strengthen our relatively meager profile (which is all good -- lots of meager postseason profiles out there), but it might provide the needed spark for us to accomplish bigger things, like an at-large into the Dance.

SeattleUte
02-11-2014, 11:18 PM
JJ O'Brien, you could have been a contender....

Applejack
02-12-2014, 06:27 AM
1. I will throat punch anyone who says they would prefer a deep NIT run over a one-and-done NCAA appearance. I'm starting to see that talk spring up elsewhere. I will also take a First Four loss ahead of a deep NIT run. I will throat punch anyone who says that does not count as an NCAA appearance.

2. As far as league play is concerned, 10th is better than finishing 8th or 9th, just like finishing 7th is better than finishing 5th or 6th. But finishing top 4 is gold. The ideal objective is to avoid Arizona for as long as possible, while getting as many wins as possible that bolster the resume (ie, avoiding Wazzu and USC). To further demonstrate my point, consider that the 10th place team in the league right now is Oregon. There is a massive gap between 10 and 11-12.

3. The USC game is the most important regular season game we've played in years. It is hard to imagine us doing what needs to be done to make at least the NIT with a loss, which almost certainly relegates us to the CBI. Win, and not only do we strengthen our relatively meager profile (which is all good -- lots of meager postseason profiles out there), but it might provide the needed spark for us to accomplish bigger things, like an at-large into the Dance.

Is an at large bid realistic at this point? I would think that our SOS is so bad that we really need a shocker - like beating Arizona or beating UCLA on the road - to have a realistic shot at dancing.

SoCalPat
02-12-2014, 06:56 AM
Is an at large bid realistic at this point? I would think that our SOS is so bad that we really need a shocker - like beating Arizona or beating UCLA on the road - to have a realistic shot at dancing.

It's ever so slightly in play but it becomes a pipe dream if we lose. The NIT is likely a no go as well.

DrumNFeather
02-12-2014, 08:29 AM
It's ever so slightly in play but it becomes a pipe dream if we lose. The NIT is likely a no go as well.

If we are Arizona's second loss, and we hold serve at home and pick up 1-2 on the road, plus 2 wins in the conf tourney, that would probably put us on the #11 or #12 line...man, that'd be remarkable if Larry gets this team in the dance.

sancho
02-12-2014, 08:33 AM
1. I will throat punch anyone who says they would prefer a deep NIT run over a one-and-done NCAA appearance. I'm starting to see that talk spring up elsewhere. I will also take a First Four loss ahead of a deep NIT run. I will throat punch anyone who says that does not count as an NCAA appearance.


I will add a kick in the teeth to your throat punch. This is a no-brainer. I can't name even one team out of last year's NIT final four, but I can still remember most of the tournament teams.


we really need a shocker - like beating Arizona or beating UCLA

Neither of those is impossible. I'd say a bid is still ours for the taking. We would need one of the wins you mentioned, plus USC, ASU, CU, and a Cal/Stanford split. A very tall order, but possible. The committee's attitude would also matter. If they focus on quality wins/bad losses -- on actual performance -- instead of on RPI, our chacnes are better. It's silly that RPI still exists when we have so many more meaningful measuring tools, but it does. Joe Lunardi at ESPN still basically uses RPI to fill in his bracket. Come on Joe - contemporize!

sancho
02-12-2014, 08:34 AM
It's ever so slightly in play but it becomes a pipe dream if we lose. The NIT is likely a no go as well.

I disagree. If we lose to USC but beat UCLA or Arizona and hold at home vs ASU/CU, we are still going to the NIT.

Mormon Red Death
02-12-2014, 08:48 AM
JJ O'Brien, you could have been a contender....

??? He is currently starting on a 2-4 seed. I would say he is on a contender.

UtahsMrSports
02-12-2014, 09:35 AM
The thing no one is talking about........we could win the Pac12 tourney.

I realize that last year was somewhat fools gold (we ran into USC sans DD).

In last years tourney, we rode the shooting of JD for better (USC, Cal) or worse (Oregon). This year, we have more options and more talent.

With how this team has performed so far this year, outside of Arizona, I don't think there is any team that we couldn't beat on a nuetral floor with playing a regular, run of the mill game.

Now that said, we could lose in the first round just as easily.

DrumNFeather
02-12-2014, 10:54 AM
The thing no one is talking about........we could win the Pac12 tourney.

I realize that last year was somewhat fools gold (we ran into USC sans DD).

In last years tourney, we rode the shooting of JD for better (USC, Cal) or worse (Oregon). This year, we have more options and more talent.

With how this team has performed so far this year, outside of Arizona, I don't think there is any team that we couldn't beat on a nuetral floor with playing a regular, run of the mill game.

Now that said, we could lose in the first round just as easily.

That seems to be the big silver lining in all these close-ish road losses, that at home we beat 'em and on a neutral floor we could certainly get the win. Especially if we ran into a situation where someone knocks off Zona or UCLA on the other side of the bracket. Having a guy like Delon Wright is going to be huge in a one and done scenario, becuase I think your first round opponent can prepare for him, but beyond that, it'll be tough (understanding of course that most of these teams will have seen him once if not twice).

justaute
02-12-2014, 12:28 PM
At this point, Delon is a known quantity with consistent production. IMO, both the remaining season and P12 Tourney are heavily dependent on (1) which Loveridge shows up and (2) who will be the 3rd/4th step-up players. Glad to see Taylor is back on the upswing and Onwas is now picking up the defensive specialist. Nonetheless, on the offensive side, some combination of Taylor/Tucker/Ogbe needs to emerge/step-up.

311ute
02-12-2014, 01:37 PM
I agree 100% with point #1. Anyone who says they would prefer the NIT over the NCAA Tournament is crazy. The NCAA Tournament is the be all end all in college basketball. I would take a one-and-done in the Tourney over a deep NIT run any day.

I think 22 wins is the "magic number" that would get us an at-large bid. Especially if one of those wins is vs Arizona.

Here's our remaining opponents' RPIs:

@ USC (124)
@UCLA (17)
Arizona (2)
ASU (38)
Colorado (25)
Cal (50)
Stanford (42)

The realistic ways we get to 22 wins are the following:

4-3 over the last 7 games, then 2 wins in the tourney. (most likely of the 3)
5-2 over the last 7, 1 win the tourney.
3-4 over the last 7, 3 wins in the tourney.

As SoCalPat mentions, beating USC is a must, but at the same time the games vs. the higher RPI schools are very important as well. Our RPI would make a huge jump up if we could get 4 or 5 more top-50 wins before selection Sunday (we're currently 2-4 vs top-50).

The opportunity is there for this team to play its way into the discussion for an at-large bid, now they just have to go and do it. 6 of our last 7 regular season games (and then possibly more in the Pac-12 Tourney) are vs top-50 RPI teams.

U-Ute
02-12-2014, 01:55 PM
To play Devil's Advocate for a moment:

From a perception standpoint, it is a no brainer, but what benefit do you get out of playing in a one-and-done NCAA tournament game vs the extra practices and experience playing for multiple weeks in an NIT run and an eye towards next year?

*putting on my Johnny Bench throat guard*

concerned
02-12-2014, 02:18 PM
I disagree. If we lose to USC but beat UCLA or Arizona and hold at home vs ASU/CU, we are still going to the NIT.

I could see us getting an NIT bid, because a first round game against the Y would create media interest and revenue for the tournament.

SoCalPat
02-12-2014, 03:56 PM
To play Devil's Advocate for a moment:

From a perception standpoint, it is a no brainer, but what benefit do you get out of playing in a one-and-done NCAA tournament game vs the extra practices and experience playing for multiple weeks in an NIT run and an eye towards next year?

*putting on my Johnny Bench throat guard*

South Carolina won the NIT in back-to-back years in 2005 and 2006. Missed the tournament the following year, coach resigned two years later.

Don't know if it's still the case, but teams were once allowed to practice up until the final day of the NCAA Tournament.

SoCalPat
02-12-2014, 03:58 PM
I think 22 wins is the "magic number" that would get us an at-large bid. Especially if one of those wins is vs Arizona.

Don't know about 22, but 23 would definitely do it. We'd have too many wins vs. top 50 RPI teams.

U-Ute
02-12-2014, 04:35 PM
South Carolina won the NIT in back-to-back years in 2005 and 2006. Missed the tournament the following year, coach resigned two years later.

Don't know if it's still the case, but teams were once allowed to practice up until the final day of the NCAA Tournament.

I'm not saying making the NIT always moves you forward, but I think any extended tournament play would be better than losing in the play-in game. Especially for a young team.

It would be a different story if this team was older.

SoCalPat
02-12-2014, 05:14 PM
I'm not saying making the NIT always moves you forward, but I think any extended tournament play would be better than losing in the play-in game. Especially for a young team.

It would be a different story if this team was older.

Except you have no idea if your NIT opponent cares as much as you do. You know you're going to get everything your opponent has in a First Four game. Also, how many people said this year we needed the weak non-conference schedule to build wins/confidence. We can see that all we built was false confidence. Advocating NIT over NCAAs is no different than advocating for the weak non-conference schedule. What you gain from the former in both instances is a mirage.

The scrutiny under which teams are placed in the Dance, even if for just one game, is infinitely greater than what one would ever receive in the NIT. That's what you want for a young team.

Utah
02-12-2014, 09:12 PM
Except you have no idea if your NIT opponent cares as much as you do. You know you're going to get everything your opponent has in a First Four game. Also, how many people said this year we needed the weak non-conference schedule to build wins/confidence. We can see that all we built was false confidence. Advocating NIT over NCAAs is no different than advocating for the weak non-conference schedule. What you gain from the former in both instances is a mirage.

The scrutiny under which teams are placed in the Dance, even if for just one game, is infinitely greater than what one would ever receive in the NIT. That's what you want for a young team.

NIT is nowhere as good as the tourney this year. Imagine the experience this team would get and how that would help this team out next year. We bring back all 5 starters, add a top 150 kid who is essentially redshirting this year, add another 150 kid and a very, very good PG.

If Delon and Loveridge keep getting better, if Bachinski and Olsen improve like Washburn did, we could compete for the PAC-12 next year and more.

A tourney appearance would be HUGE for this team for next year.

Utah
02-12-2014, 09:13 PM
And SoCalPat, before you try to argue with me, I was agreeing with you.

SoCalPat
02-13-2014, 08:59 AM
And SoCalPat, before you try to argue with me, I was agreeing with you.

Emphatically so. Agreement here on our ends is pretty much grounds to shut this debate down about which is better.

LA Ute
02-13-2014, 09:33 AM
Emphatically so. Agreement here on our ends is pretty much grounds to shut this debate down about which is better.


And SoCalPat, before you try to argue with me, I was agreeing with you.

http://www.mychinamoto.com/forums/images/smilies/modern/kumbaya.gif

DrumNFeather
02-13-2014, 10:06 AM
Cal eeks out a win on the road @ Wazzu to get to 7-4, Stanford falls @ Washington to slip to 6-5. A split there is at least looking more like a possibility.

Utah
02-13-2014, 10:12 AM
Emphatically so. Agreement here on our ends is pretty much grounds to shut this debate down about which is better.

LOL. I want to meet you someday. I think we would enjoy each other.

sancho
02-13-2014, 10:20 AM
Cal eeks out a win on the road @ Wazzu to get to 7-4, Stanford falls @ Washington to slip to 6-5. A split there is at least looking more like a possibility.

The more I see Stanford, the more I worry about them. They are one of the only teams we face in the Pac-12 with a polished power forward (CU was one of the others, and Scott was pretty good against us). I've seen a lot of good, smooth moves from Powell this season. Stanford, like Utah, should have a few more impressive wins this year. They really let a few slip away with poor play in crunch time.

Plus, I worry because you know all those guys are, like, super smart.

SoCalPat
02-13-2014, 10:24 AM
Cal eeks out a win on the road @ Wazzu to get to 7-4, Stanford falls @ Washington to slip to 6-5. A split there is at least looking more like a possibility.

Having Cal lose would have been significant for us, because I don't think they win at UW.

DrumNFeather
02-13-2014, 10:39 AM
Might as well start doing this. Standings heading into tonight:

1. Arizona (10-1)
2. UCLA (7-3)
3. ASU (7-4)
4. Colorado (7-4)
5. Cal (7-4)
6. Stanford (6-5)
7. Washington (6-6)
8. Utah (5-6)
9. OSU (5-6)
10. Oregon (3-8)
11. WSU (2-10)
12. USC (1-9)

Games Tonight:

CU @ UCLA
Utah @ USC

Utah
02-13-2014, 10:51 AM
Might as well start doing this. Standings heading into tonight:

1. Arizona (10-1)
2. UCLA (7-3)
3. ASU (7-4)
4. Colorado (7-4)
5. Cal (7-4)
6. Stanford (6-5)
7. Washington (6-6)
8. Utah (5-6)
9. OSU (5-6)
10. Oregon (3-8)
11. WSU (2-10)
12. USC (1-9)

Games Tonight:

CU @ UCLA
Utah @ USC

Big night for us. If, IF we win, that will put us at 6-6, tied with Washington. Who wins the tie breaker?

That would also put us 1/2 game back from Stanford, and if UCLA can beat Colorado, 1 game back from Colorado with a game against Colorado in SLC (so, we would have the opportunity to end up tied with Colorado).

Also, we have remaining games against:

USC
UCLA
Arizona
ASU
Colorado
Stanford
Cal

Arizona plays ASU, Cal and Stanford.

So, we still have a shot at the #3 spot in the PAC-12 tourney. A pretty long shot, but we aren't out of it yet, and our play shouldn't immediately rule us out of those games.

If we win out, I think the PAC-12 tourney becomes irrelevant. If we finished #3 or #4 in the PAC-12, with 23 wins, we are in.

Will that happen? Probably not. BUT, the reality is, we hold our fate in our own hands. We are by no means out of the tourney yet, we haven't played poorly (our worst game was a loss to Arizona. We have lost the other 6 games by 19 points, or 3 points per game. Every other loss is a winnable game), and we could easily go out and win 6 of our last 7.

It's great being in the PAC-12, it's great having every game matter right now, it's great having Coach K as our coach, and it's great talking about this.

Now, all Utah needs to do is start by winning tonight.

sancho
02-13-2014, 10:59 AM
Lunardi (Mr RPI) has 6 from the pac-12 in today's bracket projection. And none of those are his last four in.

DrumNFeather
02-13-2014, 11:19 AM
Big night for us. If, IF we win, that will put us at 6-6, tied with Washington. Who wins the tie breaker?

That would also put us 1/2 game back from Stanford, and if UCLA can beat Colorado, 1 game back from Colorado with a game against Colorado in SLC (so, we would have the opportunity to end up tied with Colorado).

Also, we have remaining games against:

USC
UCLA
Arizona
ASU
Colorado
Stanford
Cal

Arizona plays ASU, Cal and Stanford.

So, we still have a shot at the #3 spot in the PAC-12 tourney. A pretty long shot, but we aren't out of it yet, and our play shouldn't immediately rule us out of those games.

If we win out, I think the PAC-12 tourney becomes irrelevant. If we finished #3 or #4 in the PAC-12, with 23 wins, we are in.

Will that happen? Probably not. BUT, the reality is, we hold our fate in our own hands. We are by no means out of the tourney yet, we haven't played poorly (our worst game was a loss to Arizona. We have lost the other 6 games by 19 points, or 3 points per game. Every other loss is a winnable game), and we could easily go out and win 6 of our last 7.

It's great being in the PAC-12, it's great having every game matter right now, it's great having Coach K as our coach, and it's great talking about this.

Now, all Utah needs to do is start by winning tonight.

I may be thinking back to our MWC days, but I think it goes head to head, and then record against the teams in the conference in order.

DrumNFeather
02-13-2014, 11:20 AM
Lunardi (Mr RPI) has 6 from the pac-12 in today's bracket projection. And none of those are his last four in.

Based on our remaining schedule, we truly do control our own destiny. We play each of the top 6 teams in the league and USC, that is a remarkable opportunity for our squad.

Applejack
02-13-2014, 11:22 AM
Based on our remaining schedule, we truly do control our own destiny. We play each of the top 6 teams in the league and USC, that is a remarkable opportunity for our squad.

I wish I had the confidence of others on this site. It's hard for me to think big when we are still looking for road win #1 on the year. I love this team, but they aren't NCAA quality just yet. I hope they surprise us, but I'm not holding my breath.

sancho
02-13-2014, 11:24 AM
I wish I had the confidence of others on this site. It's hard for me to think big when we are still looking for road win #1 on the year. I love this team, but they aren't NCAA quality just yet. I hope they surprise us, but I'm not holding my breath.

Yes, but as long as there is a chance at the tournament, I will hold tightly to it. If I'm gonna daydream about Utah basketball, I might as well go big.

DrumNFeather
02-13-2014, 11:40 AM
I wish I had the confidence of others on this site. It's hard for me to think big when we are still looking for road win #1 on the year. I love this team, but they aren't NCAA quality just yet. I hope they surprise us, but I'm not holding my breath.


Yes, but as long as there is a chance at the tournament, I will hold tightly to it. If I'm gonna daydream about Utah basketball, I might as well go big.

I'm right there with you. One road win in three years of conference play, and stretches of just mind blowing poor play. On the other hand, one of the things Big Rick was so good at was getting his teams to peak at the right time...so hopefully that's what Larry is building here, a team full of guys who all seem to be improving in their roles, and a stud scorer. If so, it's a formula for a shot at the post season.

Applejack
02-13-2014, 11:42 AM
I'm right there with you. One road win in three years of conference play, and stretches of just mind blowing poor play. On the other hand, one of the things Big Rick was so good at was getting his teams to peak at the right time...so hopefully that's what Larry is building here, a team full of guys who all seem to be improving in their roles, and a stud scorer. If so, it's a formula for a shot at the post season.

I think I'm just easy to please. While I would love to watch Selection Sunday for the first time in ages, I would also be thrilled to google "Does the CBI have a cash prize?"

UtahsMrSports
02-13-2014, 11:44 AM
I will get crushed for saying this, but to me, i am just excited that it is the middle of february, and we are talking about which post season tournament we will be going to. Since the 2009 run, each year at this time, we have been hopelessly, hilariously out of the running for any sort of postseason tournament. This year, we are going. And it is really exciting.

Applejack
02-13-2014, 11:46 AM
I will get crushed for saying this, but to me, i am just excited that it is the middle of february, and we are talking about which post season tournament we will be going to. Since the 2009 run, each year at this time, we have been hopelessly, hilariously out of the running for any sort of postseason tournament. This year, we are going. And it is really exciting.

:cheers:

LA Ute
02-13-2014, 12:15 PM
I wish I had the confidence of others on this site. It's hard for me to think big when we are still looking for road win #1 on the year. I love this team, but they aren't NCAA quality just yet. I hope they surprise us, but I'm not holding my breath.

The problem is that this team keeps showing us tantalizing glimpses of what they can be. If they were just terrible we could sit back and watch the games and see what happens, with occasional pleasant surprises (see last year). But noooo! They're just good enough that we keep hoping (reasonably enough) that they will finally break through and do some amazing things and maybe even do that consistently.

1039

SoCalPat
02-13-2014, 12:46 PM
I may be thinking back to our MWC days, but I think it goes head to head, and then record against the teams in the conference in order.

Correct, but in the event of multi-team ties, I believe it can go from H-t-H, then against teams in conference order to eliminate one team, then it reverts back to H-t-H.

DrumNFeather
02-14-2014, 06:49 AM
Quick update after last night, a minor shift in the standings:

1. Arizona (10-1)
2. UCLA (8-3)
3. ASU (7-4)
4. Cal (7-4)
5. Colorado (7-5)
6. Stanford (6-5)
7. Utah (6-6)
8. Washington (6-6)
9. OSU (5-6)
10. Oregon (3-8)
11. WSU (2-10)
12. USC (1-9)

Games This Weekend:

Arizona @ ASU (Fri)
Cal @ Washington (Sat)
Stanford @ Washington St. (Sat)
Utah @ UCLA (Sat)
Colorado @ USC (Sun)
Oregon St. @ Oregon (Sun)

Applejack
02-14-2014, 07:16 AM
Quick update after last night, a minor shift in the standings:

1. Arizona (10-1)
2. UCLA (8-3)
3. ASU (7-4)
4. Cal (7-4)
5. Colorado (7-5)
6. Stanford (6-5)
7. Utah (6-6)
8. Washington (6-6)
9. OSU (5-6)
10. Oregon (3-8)
11. WSU (2-10)
12. USC (1-9)

Games This Weekend:

Arizona @ ASU (Fri)
Cal @ Washington (Sat)
Stanford @ Washington St. (Sat)
Utah @ UCLA (Sat)
Colorado @ USC (Sun)
Oregon St. @ Oregon (Sun)

Things are going to be really jumbled in the middle of this conference. Essentially everyone from ASU to Oregon (check out their schedule remaining schedule - it's a cakewalk) could end up anywhere between 3-10.

Utah
02-14-2014, 07:34 AM
Big win for Utah. One down. Six more to go.

DrumNFeather
02-14-2014, 09:11 PM
ASU absolutely chokes down the stretch, Arizona forces OT.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

DrumNFeather
02-14-2014, 09:52 PM
ASU absolutely chokes down the stretch, Arizona forces OT.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Wild finish. ASU gets a steal and a dunk with full on hanging on the rim and no tech. Fans rush the floor with time remaining and again no tech. Bottom line, ASU 8-4 and Arizona 10-2. If we split with them, this win helps our resume.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

sancho
02-14-2014, 10:33 PM
Wild finish. ASU gets a steal and a dunk with full on hanging on the rim and no tech. Fans rush the floor with time remaining and again no tech. Bottom line, ASU 8-4 and Arizona 10-2. If we split with them, this win helps our resume.


Bach with game winning blocks in back-to-back games. How can they not call a tech on Carson there? What a bonehead.

SoCalPat
02-14-2014, 10:35 PM
Wild finish. ASU gets a steal and a dunk with full on hanging on the rim and no tech. Fans rush the floor with time remaining and again no tech. Bottom line, ASU 8-4 and Arizona 10-2. If we split with them, this win helps our resume.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Beating ASU would've helped us regardless. ASU winning tonight sucks. A loss would've created a 7-team free for all for two top 4 seeds. Now ASU is in great shape and holds a lot of tiebreakers, more so than Cal. But if we win tomorrow, were in that top 4 mix as well.

DrumNFeather
02-15-2014, 06:14 AM
Bach with game winning blocks in back-to-back games. How can they not call a tech on Carson there? What a bonehead.

The whole end of that game was a debacle.

Applejack
02-15-2014, 06:50 AM
I have to say, I'm impressed with ASU. I watched them early in the year and thought they looked pretty weak. They are trying to claw their way into the "elite" group of Pac teams.

DrumNFeather
02-15-2014, 06:59 AM
I have to say, I'm impressed with ASU. I watched them early in the year and thought they looked pretty weak. They are trying to claw their way into the "elite" group of Pac teams.

Feels like they aren't terribly deep, but they certainly have improved. That is one we need to get next week at home.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

DrumNFeather
02-15-2014, 07:08 AM
ESPN just showed a graphic stating that Arizona has better than 70% chance to win the rest of their games, except for Utah, which they have a 48% chance. Interesting.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Dawminator
02-15-2014, 02:40 PM
In 20 minutes, Utah is going to be playing the biggest game since the first round of the 2009 NCAA tourney. A win here would be pretty big.

SoCalPat
02-15-2014, 07:08 PM
Three games out of 4th and two games out of 5th with six to play. If you gave me 7th right now -- which is where we're at, tied with Washington -- I would jump all over it. I honestly don't think finishing 5th or 6th helps us at all.

Jarid in Cedar
02-15-2014, 10:34 PM
Three games out of 4th and two games out of 5th with six to play. If you gave me 7th right now -- which is where we're at, tied with Washington -- I would jump all over it. I honestly don't think finishing 5th or 6th helps us at all.

6th would be preferable,imo. Assuming the standing remain fairly static, finishing 6th would get you Wazzu in the first round, vs getting Oregon if we finish 7th. And if we advance, then you would get Cal or ASU as the 3 vs 6 seed vs. getting UCLA as the 2 vs 7 seed. IMO, landing in the 6th slot gives us a viable path to the semis.

SeattleUte
02-16-2014, 01:11 PM
Now they need to win the next three home games and split the last two road games. That's doable. In fact they need to just go out and do it. No handwringing. Just do it.

sancho
02-16-2014, 01:50 PM
Now they need to win the next three home games and split the last two road games. That's doable. In fact they need to just go out and do it. No handwringing. Just do it.

I'm still clinging to hope too, but I think the five teams we are playing are all better than us. It would take a good string of luck to beat 4 of them.

The picture:

Win 5 - lock to get in.

Win 4 - probably in, definitely in with a tournament win

Win 3 - not in without a tournament run all the way to the final

LA Ute
02-16-2014, 03:29 PM
I'm still clinging to hope too, but I think the five teams we are playing are all better than us. It would take a good string of luck to beat 4 of them.

The picture:

Win 5 - lock to get in.

Win 4 - probably in, definitely in with a tournament win

Win 3 - not in without a tournament run all the way to the final

I hope we make the Dance and I think it is doable if this team gets not and plays consistently. Still, making the NIT and advancing a bit would be a decent season for this program. That's all most of us hoped for prior to this season. The team exceeded our expectations by playing well against good teams. Next year's the time to expect a lot more.

Applejack
02-16-2014, 03:33 PM
I hope we make the Dance and I think it is doable if this team gets not and plays consistently. Still, making the NIT and advancing a bit would be a decent season for this program. That's all most of us hoped for prior to this season. The team exceeded our expectations by playing well against good teams. Next year's the time to expect a lot more.

I'm looking forward to the three home games. We have exceeded my wildest expectations for being a tough out at home. Now we get one of the top teams in the country (who is suddenly beatable without their starting 5), an underappreciated ASU team, and a tough Colorado team. I like our chances in all of them, but 3-0 is probably asking too much.

I'm not holding my breath on the NoCal road trip. We just aren't good enough to win on the road without a meltdown by the opponents.

SeattleUte
02-16-2014, 05:15 PM
I'm looking forward to the three home games. We have exceeded my wildest expectations for being a tough out at home. Now we get one of the top teams in the country (who is suddenly beatable without their starting 5), an underappreciated ASU team, and a tough Colorado team. I like our chances in all of them, but 3-0 is probably asking too much.

I'm not holding my breath on the NoCal road trip. We just aren't good enough to win on the road without a meltdown by the opponents.

I'm not going to tell you again. Pesimism will not be tolerated.

Applejack
02-16-2014, 07:41 PM
I'm not going to tell you again. Pesimism will not be tolerated.

If you think that's pessimistic, just wait until football season!

sancho
02-17-2014, 08:37 AM
I'm not going to tell you again. Pesimism will not be tolerated.

Here's the real pessimism: we should be underdogs in each of our remaining games. It's not unreasonable to think that we finish 0-6 and miss the NIT and CBI too.

Scratch
02-17-2014, 09:58 AM
Here's the real pessimism: we should be underdogs in each of our remaining games. It's not unreasonable to think that we finish 0-6 and miss the NIT and CBI too.

Zero chance Colorado's favored in SLC, and I'd be surprised if ASU's favored.

sancho
02-17-2014, 10:11 AM
Zero chance Colorado's favored in SLC, and I'd be surprised if ASU's favored.

If we lose 4 in a row, you don't think CU would be the favorite? Anyway, the point is that 0-6 is not an unrealistic worst case scenario to close the season.

But enough pessimism. I think we handle the angry wildcats on Wed.

SeattleUte
02-17-2014, 11:32 AM
Somebody said SI says 52% chance we beat AZ.

SoCalPat
02-18-2014, 08:52 AM
There are a bajillion ways to look at what this week's games does for our postseason hopes, but at 8 losses, we need to start looking at how many more losses we can afford. I think 11 losses is the tipping point. The key obviously is to play as many games as possible before we hit that 11th loss.

Right now, we have 17 D-1 wins. Lets err on the side of caution and say we need 22.

We have five games left in the regular season and one guaranteed in the Pac-12 tournament. So if we go 5-1, that should get us in. However, the only way we can play six games is to lose in the first round in Vegas. Since going 5-0 would put us at 11-7 in league and would practically guarantee a finish of 5th or 6th, that would mean a matchup with Wazzu or USC in the first round, and a loss to one of those teams sends us to the NIT.

I think it's safe to say the absolute minimum for this team to have any shot at being called on Selection Sunday is to go 3-2 in the regular season, 2-1 in Vegas. At 22-11, we're at both thresholds for consideration, and its not all about our resume but how we fare against other teams with similar resumes. (This is where our non-con SOS could be fatal).

I'm going to assume the Pac-12 is a six-bid league regardless of what happens in Vegas. I think we can overcome whatever resume shortcomings we have vs. Washington and OSU on our own. Oregon, despite its league mark, is still 44th in RPI. Stanford is 48th. Those are two teams we need to collapse. We can really help ourselves out by beating Stanford, finishing 7th and beating Oregon in the first round in Vegas. That scenario alone will get us into the NIT.

DrumNFeather
02-18-2014, 09:52 AM
Standings heading into this week, and schedule:

1) Arizona (10-2)
2) UCLA (9-3)
3) ASU (8-4)
4) Cal (8-4)
5) Colorado (8-5)
6) Stanford (7-5)
7) Utah (6-7)
8) Washington (6-7)
9) OSU (5-7)
10) Oregon (4-8)
11) Wazzu (2-11)
12) USC (1-11)

Wed 2/19

Washington @ Oregon
Arizona @ Utah
ASU @ Colorado
UCLA @ Cal

Thurs 2/20

Wazzu @ Oregon St.
USC @ Stanford

Saturday 2/22

Washington @ Oregon St.
UCLA @ Stanford
Arizona @ Colorado

Sunday 2/23

ASU @ Utah
USC @ Cal
Wazzu @ Oregon

sancho
02-18-2014, 10:00 AM
Standings heading into this week, and schedule:


So...Ute fan rooting guide:

Wed: Go Utes, Go Devils, Go Bruins...Ducks or Huskies? I don't know.

Thurs: Go WSU, Go Trojans

Sat: Go Beavs, Bruins, Wildcats

Sun: Go Utes, Trojans, Wazzu

SoCalPat
02-18-2014, 10:36 AM
Wed: Go Utes, Go Devils, Go Bruins...Ducks or Huskies? I don't know.

I don't know either. Utah has the toughest two games this week, but is playing at home. It's not unlikely at all that both OSU and Oregon leapfrog us in the standings this weekend.

DrumNFeather
02-20-2014, 08:07 AM
Updated:
Standings heading into this week, and schedule:

1) Arizona (11-2)
2) UCLA (10-3)
3) Colorado (9-5)
4) ASU (8-5)
5) Stanford (8-5)
6) Cal (8-5)
7)OSU (6-7)
8) Utah (6-8)
9) Washington (6-8)
10) Oregon (5-8)
11) Wazzu (2-12)
12) USC (1-12)

Wed 2/19

Washington 71 @ Oregon 78
Arizona 67 @ Utah 63
ASU 52 @ Colorado 61
UCLA 86 @ Cal 66

Thurs 2/20

Wazzu 57 @ Oregon St. 68
USC 59 @ Stanford 80

Saturday 2/22

Washington @ Oregon St.
UCLA @ Stanford
Arizona @ Colorado

Sunday 2/23

ASU @ Utah
USC @ Cal
Wazzu @ Oregon

DrumNFeather
02-21-2014, 06:59 AM
Updated the update. Oregon St. moves up to 7th with its win, and Stanford and Cal swap places at 8-5. Big weekend looms.

SoCalPat
02-21-2014, 09:49 AM
Washington has a huge edge in scheduling down the stretch, playing Wazzu and USC (and UCLA) at home. We're huge Oregon State fans Saturday. If we lose to ASU, hard to imagine finishing ahead of Washington, which is very likely to finish 8-10 in league. If UW wins Saturday, then we're going to need to win one in the Bay Area to keep pace.

I'm not so worried about the Oregon schools catching/passing us, because they still have the SoCal roadie followed up by an Arizona homestand. We're huge USC fans next week.

sancho
02-21-2014, 09:50 AM
We're huge USC fans next week.

Fight on!

SoCalPat
02-22-2014, 10:55 PM
Bad night. Washington routs Oregon State and unless it wets the bed at home vs. USC or Wazzu, will finish no worse than 9-9. I've all but conceded 7th place to the Huskies.

We seem destined for the 8-9 game against Oregon. Ducks will claim the 8th seed in Vegas, either outright or (most likely) with the tiebreaker against Utah, and Utah will do likewise with Oregon State for 9th. As of right now, winner of the 8-9 game gets Arizona, winner of the 7-10 game gets UCLA.

sancho
02-23-2014, 07:10 AM
Bad night. Washington routs Oregon State and unless it wets the bed at home vs. USC or Wazzu, will finish no worse than 9-9. I've all but conceded 7th place to the Huskies.

We seem destined for the 8-9 game against Oregon. Ducks will claim the 8th seed in Vegas, either outright or (most likely) with the tiebreaker against Utah, and Utah will do likewise with Oregon State for 9th. As of right now, winner of the 8-9 game gets Arizona, winner of the 7-10 game gets UCLA.

Hard to believe that UW will finish ahead of Oregon and Utah. The Huskies just haven't looked that good. But we had our chance to knock them down. Sigh.

I would like to have another shot at Arizona in Vegas. But Oregon will be a tough opening round. They, like us, are better than their record indicates. They've been so close against all the good teams in the conference. And that first round game will be a must-win for the Duck's tournament hopes.

Applejack
02-24-2014, 06:52 AM
Hard to believe that UW will finish ahead of Oregon and Utah. The Huskies just haven't looked that good. But we had our chance to knock them down. Sigh.

I would like to have another shot at Arizona in Vegas. But Oregon will be a tough opening round. They, like us, are better than their record indicates. They've been so close against all the good teams in the conference. And that first round game will be a must-win for the Duck's tournament hopes.

So what are our realistic NCAA hopes at this point? We are a lock for the NIT (based on our play and rumblings that I have heard through the grapevine), but it sure would be fun to be dancing this year.

Right now we are 3-6 vs. Top 50 RPI teams (1-3 vs Top 25). That's a decent record, actually. Versus the top 100, however, we are 4-8, which is not good (damn you Boise St and Washington). Other than that it is all fluff, other than the Washington State stumble.

I think Saturday's game against the Buffs is a must win--they are 26th in RPI, struggling right now, and we are at home. Stanford is 40 in RPI and Cal is about 50th. I would love to get one of those games. That would put us at 20-10 and 9-9 in the Pac. We'd need a little tourney magic (two wins, at least) and some selection committee respect for beating the crap out of St. Kathy's, but there's a chance, no?

DrumNFeather
02-24-2014, 07:09 AM
So what are our realistic NCAA hopes at this point? We are a lock for the NIT (based on our play and rumblings that I have heard through the grapevine), but it sure would be fun to be dancing this year.

Right now we are 3-6 vs. Top 50 RPI teams (1-3 vs Top 25). That's a decent record, actually. Versus the top 100, however, we are 4-8, which is not good (damn you Boise St and Washington). Other than that it is all fluff, other than the Washington State stumble.

I think Saturday's game against the Buffs is a must win--they are 26th in RPI, struggling right now, and we are at home. Stanford is 40 in RPI and Cal is about 50th. I would love to get one of those games. That would put us at 20-10 and 9-9 in the Pac. We'd need a little tourney magic (two wins, at least) and some selection committee respect for beating the crap out of St. Kathy's, but there's a chance, no?

I think that at this point we're talking a w vs. CU, a split next week, and a minimum of two wins in the conference tourney. All that probably puts us on the bubble, and then it is a matter of hoping that the bid theifs are at a minimum.

sancho
02-24-2014, 07:14 AM
I think Saturday's game against the Buffs is a must win--they are 26th in RPI, struggling right now, and we are at home. Stanford is 40 in RPI and Cal is about 50th. I would love to get one of those games. That would put us at 20-10 and 9-9 in the Pac. We'd need a little tourney magic (two wins, at least) and some selection committee respect for beating the crap out of St. Kathy's, but there's a chance, no?

SoCal's magic number was 22, and I believe that. So we need to win out and then get one in the tournament or grab 2 of 3 and then get two in Vegas. The road trip will be tough. Cal has not been playing well lately, but they are obviously a tough team. Stanford just had a great game vs UCLA.

Quality wins: 3 (+3 chances on regular schedule, +2 chances in Vegas)
Bad losses: 1 (+1 chance in Vegas)

Compare that to BYU, who people are now calling a lock, and we are not that far off:

Quality wins: 3 (+1 chance in Vegas)
Bad losses: 4 (+2 chances)

One other large hurdle (other than the obvious hurdle of needing to beat good teams on the road) is that there is an unofficial cap of 6 teams from the Pac-12. We would need CU, Cal, Stanford, or ASU to drop out. I don't see them taking 7 from the Pac-12, and I don't see them taking us over one of the four just listed.

DrumNFeather
02-24-2014, 07:28 AM
Here we go...updated standings and the remaining schedule over the next two weeks:

1) Arizona (13-2)
2) UCLA (10-4)
3) Arizona St. (9-6)
4) Colorado (9-6)
5) Stanford (9-6)
6) Cal (9-6)
7) Utah (7-8)
8) Washington (7-8)
9) Oregon (6-8)
10) Oregon St. (6-8)
11) Washington St. (2-13)
12) USC (1-13)

Wed 2/26

Cal 59 @ Arizona 87
Stanford 64 @ ASU 76

Thurs 2/27

Oregon @ UCLA
Oregon St. @ USC

Fri 2/28

Washington St. @ Washington

Saturday 3/1

Colorado @ Utah
Cal @ Arizona St.
Oregon @ USC

Sun 3/2

Oregon St. @ UCLA
Stanford @ Arizona

Tuesday 3/4

Arizona St. @ Oregon

Wed 3/5

Colorado @ Stanford
Utah @ Cal
Arizona @ Oregon St.

Thursday 3/6

UCLA @ Washington
USC @ Washington St.

Saturday 3/8

Utah @ Stanford
Colorado @ Cal
Arizona @ Oregon
Arizona St. @ Oregon St.
USC @ Washington
UCLA @ Washington St.

DrumNFeather
02-24-2014, 07:31 AM
Strictly looking at the remaining schedules, if there is a team that could potentially be knocked out of being that 6th team, it might be ASU. With how they played on this road trip, it is at least possible that they go 0-2 on the Oregon road trip. A late season loss to OSU could be a resume killer for them. Now, they do host Stanford and Cal, so those are certainly both opportunities for wins, but it isn't out of the question for them to go 1-3 or 0-4 down the stretch. CU is obviously another...but we would basically have to beat them head to head and hope that they get swept while we pick up a win on the NorCal road trip.

sancho
02-24-2014, 07:35 AM
This week:



Wed 2/26

Cal @ Arizona - Go wildcats!
Stanford @ ASU - I aint rooting for the tree.

Thurs 2/27

Oregon @ UCLA - Go Bruins
Oregon St. @ USC - Go Trojans

Fri 2/28

Washington St. @ Washington - Go WSU

Saturday 3/1

Colorado @ Utah - Utah by 5!
Cal @ Arizona St. - Does this one really matter? Go Bears?
Oregon @ USC - Go Trojans

Sun 3/2

Oregon St. @ UCLA - Go Bruins
Stanford @ Arizona - Go Cats

Mormon Red Death
02-24-2014, 08:18 AM
Here we go...updated standings and the remaining schedule over the next two weeks:

1) Arizona (12-2)
2) UCLA (10-4)
3) Stanford (9-5)
4) Cal (9-5)
5) Colorado (9-6)
6) Arizona St. (8-6)
7) Utah (7-8)
8) Washington (7-8)
9) Oregon (6-8)
10) Oregon St. (6-8)
11) Washington St. (2-13)
12) USC (1-13)

Wed 2/26

Cal @ Arizona
Stanford @ ASU

Thurs 2/27

Oregon @ UCLA
Oregon St. @ USC

Fri 2/28

Washington St. @ Washington

Saturday 3/1

Colorado @ Utah
Cal @ Arizona St.
Oregon @ USC

Sun 3/2

Oregon St. @ UCLA
Stanford @ Arizona

Tuesday 3/4

Arizona St. @ Oregon

Wed 3/5

Colorado @ Stanford
Utah @ Cal
Arizona @ Oregon St.

Thursday 3/6

UCLA @ Washington
USC @ Washington St.

Saturday 3/8

Utah @ Stanford
Colorado @ Cal
Arizona @ Oregon
Arizona St. @ Oregon St.
USC @ Washington
UCLA @ Washington St.

Utah could still end up 4th. Obviously they win their remaining games and end up 10-8. bay area schools both get swept in Arizona this week and they both beat Colorado the next. Utah would have the tiebreaker Here is how it could happen:







Arizona (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/12/arizona-wildcats)


16-2


UCLA (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/26/ucla-bruins)
14-4


Arizona State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/9/arizona-state-sun-devils)
11-7


Utah (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/254/utah-utes)
10-8


Stanford (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/24/stanford-cardinal)
10-8


California (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/25/california-golden-bears)
10-8


Colorado (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/38/colorado-buffaloes)
9-9


Washington (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/264/washington-huskies)
9-9


Oregon (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/2483/oregon-ducks)
8-10


Oregon State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/204/oregon-state-beavers)
7-11


Washington State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/265/washington-state-cougars)
3-15


USC (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/30/usc-trojans)
1-17

Mormon Red Death
02-24-2014, 08:32 AM
If for some reason ASU swept the bay schools and then got swept by the Oregon schools I still think ASU finishes third due to them winnign a tiebreaker (they beat AZ) they would have swept Cal and split with Utah and stanford.

SoCalPat
02-24-2014, 09:30 AM
Strictly looking at the remaining schedules, if there is a team that could potentially be knocked out of being that 6th team, it might be ASU. With how they played on this road trip, it is at least possible that they go 0-2 on the Oregon road trip. A late season loss to OSU could be a resume killer for them. Now, they do host Stanford and Cal, so those are certainly both opportunities for wins, but it isn't out of the question for them to go 1-3 or 0-4 down the stretch. CU is obviously another...but we would basically have to beat them head to head and hope that they get swept while we pick up a win on the NorCal road trip.

I think CU is a much stronger candidate to fall out of the NCAAs. Three games on the road, and if they lose that first Pac-12 game (likely against Wazzu or USC, admittedly a longshot), they'll have lost five straight to end the season. Even if they win one in Vegas, then get throttled by another bubble team, I don't think their resume is that good to survive that on Selection Sunday.

DrumNFeather
02-26-2014, 08:39 PM
Cal on its way to losing to the Cats.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

DrumNFeather
02-27-2014, 07:17 AM
Quite the logjam of 9-6 teams right now.

SoCalPat
02-27-2014, 08:21 AM
Lunardi has Oregon in his First Four out. If they win at UCLA tonight, do we embrace the possibility of 7 Pac-12 schools in the Dance?

Applejack
02-27-2014, 08:24 AM
Lunardi has Oregon in his First Four out. If they win at UCLA tonight, do we embrace the possibility of 7 Pac-12 schools in the Dance?

Not unless we are one of them!

sancho
02-27-2014, 08:38 AM
Lunardi has Oregon in his First Four out. If they win at UCLA tonight, do we embrace the possibility of 7 Pac-12 schools in the Dance?

We aren't even on Lunardi's radar due to RPI.

Utah
02-27-2014, 09:36 AM
We aren't even on Lunardi's radar due to RPI.

Is there an "official" criteria for selecting at-large teams? Or is it just anything goes?

UtahsMrSports
02-27-2014, 10:09 AM
Is there an "official" criteria for selecting at-large teams? Or is it just anything goes?

They look at

-RPI
-Record versus top 50 rpi
-Good wins
-Bad losses

from that resume, you are compared to other candidates and evaluated.

concerned
02-27-2014, 10:17 AM
They look at

-RPI
-Record versus top 50 rpi
-Good wins
-Bad losses

from that resume, you are compared to other candidates and evaluated.

Plus how you are trending at the end of the year

sancho
02-27-2014, 10:37 AM
They look at

-RPI
-Record versus top 50 rpi


In some enlightened parallel dimension, they are using KenPom/Sagarin for this instead.

The committee defenders always point out that RPI is only one criteria and that they mostly use it to look at records vs top 50 and top 100. But why use it at all when you are aware of better measuring sticks? We are counting as a 50-100 loss for UCLA, BYU, and ASU. That will be used against them in seeding. If they used Sagarin instead, those losses would not count as strikes.

Utah
02-27-2014, 11:56 AM
They look at

-RPI
-Record versus top 50 rpi
-Good wins
-Bad losses

from that resume, you are compared to other candidates and evaluated.


Plus how you are trending at the end of the year

Then we should be in.

We have good wins, we are 3-6 vs top 50 (BYU is 3-5), we are trending very well at the end of the year, etc.

My point is this: The PAC-12 is tough enough, especially when you consider all the bubble teams from mid-major conferences, that if we are looked on FAIRLY (ie, why are we penalized with a weak non-conf SOS but mid-majors aren't penalized for weak conf schedules) then we are in. BUT, we won't be, and that is why no one is talking about us as a bubble team.

Fair is only fair if it looks good. So, it isn't fair to compare PAC-12 conference vs Missouri Valley Conference, but it is fair to compare PAC-12 non conf vs Miss Valley non conf. That isn't fair.

Also, if you compare Wichita State top 50 vs Utah, Utah is 3-6, WS is 2-0 (they beat BYU and St. Louis, two mid-majors). Utah has played a much tougher schedule, yet gets penalized for it.

Anyways, my whole point is that Utah will be treated unfairly because they didn't schedule up in the preseason but they play an extremely hard conf schedule, yet teams like BYU/Wichita St will get rewarded for a weak conf and decent non conf.

I'm huge anti-mid-major. Do it every week. It's real, I've seen it first hand. Utah, with Schulz as their QB, is a 0-1 loss team in the MWC last year in football. In the PAC-12? 7 losses.

U-Ute
02-27-2014, 12:45 PM
They look at

-RPI
-Record versus top 50 rpi
-Good wins
-Bad losses

from that resume, you are compared to other candidates and evaluated.

A couple of other factors

Record of last 10 games
Any injury situation (was a key player out during losses? Are they coming back?)


I think if Utah wins 2 of the last 3 and wins 2 games in the tournament, they may be on the bubble.

SoCalPat
02-27-2014, 01:32 PM
Then we should be in.

We have good wins, we are 3-6 vs top 50 (BYU is 3-5), we are trending very well at the end of the year, etc.

My point is this: The PAC-12 is tough enough, especially when you consider all the bubble teams from mid-major conferences, that if we are looked on FAIRLY (ie, why are we penalized with a weak non-conf SOS but mid-majors aren't penalized for weak conf schedules) then we are in. BUT, we won't be, and that is why no one is talking about us as a bubble team.

Fair is only fair if it looks good. So, it isn't fair to compare PAC-12 conference vs Missouri Valley Conference, but it is fair to compare PAC-12 non conf vs Miss Valley non conf. That isn't fair.

Also, if you compare Wichita State top 50 vs Utah, Utah is 3-6, WS is 2-0 (they beat BYU and St. Louis, two mid-majors). Utah has played a much tougher schedule, yet gets penalized for it.

Anyways, my whole point is that Utah will be treated unfairly because they didn't schedule up in the preseason but they play an extremely hard conf schedule, yet teams like BYU/Wichita St will get rewarded for a weak conf and decent non conf.

I'm huge anti-mid-major. Do it every week. It's real, I've seen it first hand. Utah, with Schulz as their QB, is a 0-1 loss team in the MWC last year in football. In the PAC-12? 7 losses.

First off, the "mid-majors" make the NCAA Tournament what it is. There is zero comparison here between football and hoops.

Wichita State and Utah, according to realtimerpi.com, have played identical schedules (Utah 107 SOS, WSU 106 SOS). Bringing in WSU in debating whether or not Utah's resume stacks up as an NCAA Tournament team is absurd. They're 30-0 (29-0 vs. D1) currently and made the Final Four last year. And they're not squeaking past teams -- they're killing them. They've long since earned their chops. Utah isn't getting penalized for playing a tougher schedule (as noted, it's not), they're getting penalized for not winning enough games.

Utah took a pass on the non-conference schedule. We can't argue against that. As I've noted before, Utah played six teams worse in RPI than ANY team BYU played. And when you're a power conference team, you're going to get judged on how you schedule in the non-con. It's an indisputable fact. And our non-conference SOS is way past 300. Week-in, week-out doesn't apply just past Jan. 1. We don't have to schedule like Kansas did this year, but we knew what we were getting into when we scheduled like we did. We have no room to complain. Short of winning 5 of our next 6, or 6 out of 7, we're an NIT team this year. Fortunately, the schedule gets a major boost next year and we shouldn't have this discussion.

SoCalPat
02-27-2014, 01:36 PM
They look at

-RPI
-Record versus top 50 rpi
-Good wins
-Bad losses

from that resume, you are compared to other candidates and evaluated.

They also look at non-conference SOS, although the degree to which the committee takes it into account seems to vary from year to year.

If you play in a power conference, you can't take a pass on the non-con and expect the committee to ignore it.

If you play in a mid-major conference, you have to schedule up in the non-con and can't expect the committee to focus on your gaudy conference record. Utah State under Stu is Exhibit A in this regard.

sancho
02-27-2014, 01:41 PM
Utah isn't getting penalized for playing a tougher schedule (as noted, it's not), they're getting penalized for not winning enough games.


Yes, it's not the schedule or even the bad non-conf schedule. It's not pulling out 1-2 of the close losses to BSU, WSU, UW, UA, CU, Oregon or ASU. We had our share of chances, but instead we are sitting at 7th in the conference.

That said, I'm still clinging to hope!

SeattleUte
02-27-2014, 02:11 PM
Pat's I told you so moments are unbearable. Especially when he's right!

Mormon Red Death
02-27-2014, 02:53 PM
Dustin (Tucson, AZ)

I know that Oregon is on the outside looking in but I've been looking at Utah's numbers and besides the abysmal SOS its not too bad. Could they be the 7th PAC 12 team to make the tourney? They have done better against top competition than Oregon although have faced less of it. Not to mention all of their loses have come by 4 or less except when they played at UCLA, which is understandable. I can understand why Oregon gets attention after the big start, but since then they haven't done anything of note.
Joe Lunardi (2:08 PM)


Utah has little or no chance for an at-large, having played literally the worst (No. 349) non-conference schedule in the country.

LA Ute
02-27-2014, 03:06 PM
Pat's I told you so moments are unbearable. Especially when he's right!

He was right about the schedule, that's for sure. We will all stipulate that the OOC schedule was a horrible idea, is costing the Utes now big-time, and that Kodiak really blew the decision. Now that we've settled that, can we move on? :D

concerned
02-27-2014, 03:11 PM
He was right about the schedule, that's for sure. We will all stipulate that the OOC schedule was a horrible idea, is costing the Utes now big-time, and that Kodiak really blew the decision. Now that we've settled that, can we move on? :D


Whoever thought the preseason schedule was a good idea? Everybody I know thought it was an embarrassment and thought it reflected a lack of confidence in the team by the staff. But some of it was not intentional--St. Katharine's was a panic pickup for another game that fell thorough; so were a couple of others.

Utah
02-27-2014, 03:14 PM
Utah took a pass on the non-conference schedule. We can't argue against that. As I've noted before, Utah played six teams worse in RPI than ANY team BYU played. And when you're a power conference team, you're going to get judged on how you schedule in the non-con. It's an indisputable fact. And our non-conference SOS is way past 300. Week-in, week-out doesn't apply just past Jan. 1. We don't have to schedule like Kansas did this year, but we knew what we were getting into when we scheduled like we did. We have no room to complain. Short of winning 5 of our next 6, or 6 out of 7, we're an NIT team this year. Fortunately, the schedule gets a major boost next year and we shouldn't have this discussion.

We have had this debate 100 times. This I HATE this argument. So, because BYU played a team ranked #150 and lost, they are better than a Utah team that played a team ranked #200 and beat? I don't get that logic at all. Yeah, Utah played six teams worse than any team BYU played. That doesn't mean the teams lower down on BYU's list were any good.

Let's look at Utah and BYU's record against "bad" teams:

Teams ranked #100-200 BYU is 8-4. Utah is 5-1. BUT, because Utah played (hypothetically) teams ranked 105, 110, 115, 199, 200, 198 and BYU played teams 125, 126, 128, 129, 130, etc but lost to those teams, BYU is better.

Again, if BYU is a bubble team, then Utah is in. Utah is a better team.

BUT, we aren't looking for the best teams here. We aren't looking at what is "fair". We are looking at what is "fair" so far as to not be mean to the smaller conferences.

Utah gets screwed over for being in a tough conference while Wichita St gets promoted for being in a weak conference (and I understand Utah benefited from this with the 2008 football team. There is no way we go undefeated in a BCS conference that year).

The fact that WSU has the same SOS as Utah and WSU is a final four team and Utah isn't even being mentioned as a bubble team, when Utah has played MORE teams that are better than WSU shows that we aren't worried about "fair". We are worried about making sure WSU isn't penalized for being in a crappy conference and that we don't give the "big, bad, BCS team" an unfair advantage.

U-Ute
02-27-2014, 03:18 PM
I'm just happy that we are able to frown upon our lousy schedule. Two years ago we had much bigger concerns.

SoCalPat
02-27-2014, 03:26 PM
He was right about the schedule, that's for sure. We will all stipulate that the OOC schedule was a horrible idea, is costing the Utes now big-time, and that Kodiak really blew the decision. Now that we've settled that, can we move on? :D

I've tried to be consistent in that when I hammer the non-con schedule, I've noted that it's not going to be like that next year.

Additionally, when you first-guess a coach and you're right, you get to wield the hammer a little longer.

SoCalPat
02-27-2014, 03:33 PM
We have had this debate 100 times. This I HATE this argument. So, because BYU played a team ranked #150 and lost, they are better than a Utah team that played a team ranked #200 and beat? I don't get that logic at all. Yeah, Utah played six teams worse than any team BYU played. That doesn't mean the teams lower down on BYU's list were any good.

Let's look at Utah and BYU's record against "bad" teams: ...

BYU's losses to sub-100 RPI teams all came on the road, in league games they couldn't back out of. Not only was every team we played worse than the worst team BYU played, but we faced all of those bad teams at home.

A third of our schedule has already been noted as the worst in D-1. Putting Utah in as an at-large would give license to every team in America to follow our scheduling model from this past year, something I think we can all agree on is not good for the sport. This discussion is over.

sancho
02-27-2014, 03:38 PM
Dustin (Tucson, AZ)


Joe Lunardi (2:08 PM)

Utah has little or no chance for an at-large, having played literally the worst (No. 349) non-conference schedule in the country.

I've been reading Lunardi's Bracketology for years, and of all college bball writers, he's the most stuck in the past. He continues to make projections based almost entirely on RPI.

So, yes, it's ultimately our fault for not playing the system correctly. If we had scheduled slightly better crappy teams, our RPI would be in the 40s right now.

But, it's also the NCAA's fault for having such a ridiculous system. Does it really matter that we beat teams in the 300s instead of teams in the 200s? Of course not. We would handle either group with ease. So why does it matter so much to the NCAA committee?

Utah
02-27-2014, 03:41 PM
Dustin (Tucson, AZ)



I know that Oregon is on the outside looking in but I've been looking at Utah's numbers and besides the abysmal SOS its not too bad. Could they be the 7th PAC 12 team to make the tourney? They have done better against top competition than Oregon although have faced less of it. Not to mention all of their loses have come by 4 or less except when they played at UCLA, which is understandable. I can understand why Oregon gets attention after the big start, but since then they haven't done anything of note.
Joe Lunardi (2:08 PM)




Utah has little or no chance for an at-large, having played literally the worst (No. 349) non-conference schedule in the country.

Again, then we aren't looking for the top 64 teams. Utah is being penalized for having a good conference schedule and an easy non-conference schedule when a TON of mid-majors aren't being penalized for having an easy conference schedule and a difficult non-conference schedule.

Now, the tournament takes the "top" 64 teams, correct? So, if they are looking at taking the top 64 teams, then shouldn't the top 64 teams all be able to beat teams ranked 100 or higher? I would think, yes. So let's look at Utah vs top 50 teams (games they should compete in) and against teams ranked 100+ (games they should win almost every time). Then we will compare that to other "tournament" teams that are sooooo much better than Utah that they are a lock to be in or at least on the bubble.

Utah has played 9 top 50 games. They are 3-6 in those games. Utah has played 13 100+ games. They are 12-1.
Gonzaga has played 4 top 50 games. They are 1-3. Gonzaga has played in 17 100+ games. They are 17-2.
Davidson has played 5 top 50 games. They are 0-5. Davidson has played 20 100+ games. They are 15-5.
George Washington has played 6 top 50 games. They are 2-4. They have played 11 100+ games. They are 11-0.
North Dakota State has played 2 top 50 games. They are 0-2. They have played 19 100+ games. They are 16-3.
San Diego State has played 4 top 50 games. They are 2-2. They have played 16 100+ games. They are 15-1.
Stephen F. Austin has played 1 top 50 game. They are 0-1. They have played 24 100+ games. They are 23-1.
Ohio State has played 8 top 50 games. They are 4-4. They have played 12 100+ games. They are 11-1.
BYU has played 8 top 50 games. They are 3-5. They have played 16 100+ games. They are 12-4.
Virginia has played 6 top 50 games. They are 3-3. They have played 15 100+ games. They are 15-0.
Mercer has played 2 top 50 games. They are 0-2. They have played 22 100+ games. They are 18-4.
Oklahoma has played 12 top 50 games. They are 7-5. They have played 13 100+ games. They are 12-1.
Colorado has played 11 top 50 games. They are 4-7. They have played 13 100+ games. They are 13-0.
Creighton has played 8 top 50 games. They are 6-2. They have played 12 100+ games. They are 12-0.


Show me that Utah doesn't belong in that group. And that is just one quarter of the 64 teams. Utah didn't play a significant number of terrible games. They didn't play more bad teams than everyone else. Their problem is, that instead of beating Florida Gulf Coast, Rhode Island, Utah Valley, Portland, Bryant University, Northern Colorado, North Texas, they beat the gooeyducks. So, why does Utah get penalized for beating bad teams but BYU gets rewarded for losing to those same bad teams?

Because we want to look fair, and not actually be fair.

Utah
02-27-2014, 03:43 PM
I've been reading Lunardi's Bracketology for years, and of all college bball writers, he's the most stuck in the past. He continues to make projections based almost entirely on RPI.

So, yes, it's ultimately our fault for not playing the system correctly. If we had scheduled slightly better crappy teams, our RPI would be in the 40s right now.

But, it's also the NCAA's fault for having such a ridiculous system. Does it really matter that we beat teams in the 300s instead of teams in the 200s? Of course not. We would handle either group with ease. So why does it matter so much to the NCAA committee?

You say it so much better than me.

Utah
02-27-2014, 03:44 PM
Again, then we aren't looking for the top 64 teams. Utah is being penalized for having a good conference schedule and an easy non-conference schedule when a TON of mid-majors aren't being penalized for having an easy conference schedule and a difficult non-conference schedule.

Now, the tournament takes the "top" 64 teams, correct? So, if they are looking at taking the top 64 teams, then shouldn't the top 64 teams all be able to beat teams ranked 100 or higher? I would think, yes. So let's look at Utah vs top 50 teams (games they should compete in) and against teams ranked 100+ (games they should win almost every time). Then we will compare that to other "tournament" teams that are sooooo much better than Utah that they are a lock to be in or at least on the bubble.

Utah has played 9 top 50 games. They are 3-6 in those games. Utah has played 13 100+ games. They are 12-1.
Gonzaga has played 4 top 50 games. They are 1-3. Gonzaga has played in 17 100+ games. They are 17-2.
Davidson has played 5 top 50 games. They are 0-5. Davidson has played 20 100+ games. They are 15-5.
George Washington has played 6 top 50 games. They are 2-4. They have played 11 100+ games. They are 11-0.
North Dakota State has played 2 top 50 games. They are 0-2. They have played 19 100+ games. They are 16-3.
San Diego State has played 4 top 50 games. They are 2-2. They have played 16 100+ games. They are 15-1.
Stephen F. Austin has played 1 top 50 game. They are 0-1. They have played 24 100+ games. They are 23-1.
Ohio State has played 8 top 50 games. They are 4-4. They have played 12 100+ games. They are 11-1.
BYU has played 8 top 50 games. They are 3-5. They have played 16 100+ games. They are 12-4.
Virginia has played 6 top 50 games. They are 3-3. They have played 15 100+ games. They are 15-0.
Mercer has played 2 top 50 games. They are 0-2. They have played 22 100+ games. They are 18-4.
Oklahoma has played 12 top 50 games. They are 7-5. They have played 13 100+ games. They are 12-1.
Colorado has played 11 top 50 games. They are 4-7. They have played 13 100+ games. They are 13-0.
Creighton has played 8 top 50 games. They are 6-2. They have played 12 100+ games. They are 12-0.


Show me that Utah doesn't belong in that group. And that is just one quarter of the 64 teams. Utah didn't play a significant number of terrible games. They didn't play more bad teams than everyone else. Their problem is, that instead of beating Florida Gulf Coast, Rhode Island, Utah Valley, Portland, Bryant University, Northern Colorado, North Texas, they beat the gooeyducks. So, why does Utah get penalized for beating bad teams but BYU gets rewarded for losing to those same bad teams?

Because we want to look fair, and not actually be fair.

Utah has played the most top 50 teams in that bracket. And has played one of the least amount of 100+ games (11 teams played 13 or more 100+ games).

Yet those teams are all in and Utah isn't even on the bubble. It's a joke.

SoCalPat
02-27-2014, 03:47 PM
I've been reading Lunardi's Bracketology for years, and of all college bball writers, he's the most stuck in the past. He continues to make projections based almost entirely on RPI.

So, yes, it's ultimately our fault for not playing the system correctly. If we had scheduled slightly better crappy teams, our RPI would be in the 40s right now.

But, it's also the NCAA's fault for having such a ridiculous system. Does it really matter that we beat teams in the 300s instead of teams in the 200s? Of course not. We would handle either group with ease. So why does it matter so much to the NCAA committee?

Actually, we could probably keep the schedule we have, take 2-3 games and put them on the road and accomplish that objective all the same. RPI rewards teams for winning on the road.

Utah
02-27-2014, 03:54 PM
Against top 50 teams, Utah has a .333 winning percentage. That is the same or better than:

Gonzaga (.250), Davidson (.000), George Washington (.333), North Dakota State (.000), Stephen F. Austin (.000), and Mercer (.000).

Remember, I only looked at 25% of teams that are projected to be in the tournament.

Now, I'm not saying Utah should be a lock to be in, but I am saying they should be in the discussion.

sancho
02-27-2014, 04:02 PM
Actually, we could probably keep the schedule we have, take 2-3 games and put them on the road and accomplish that objective all the same. RPI rewards teams for winning on the road.

Yes, there are many ways to play the RPI game. As long as teams are required to play the silly game, we need to do the same. That's the system.

In the meantime, smart basketball people in the media should fight against the goofiness of this system. Bilas does a nice job by using Sagarin instead of RPI in all his conversations. Dinosaurs like Lunardi are not going to change until they have to. They have an easy weekly column that is more or less generated by a simple formula.

concerned
02-27-2014, 04:07 PM
Yes, there are many ways to play the RPI game. As long as teams are required to play the silly game, we need to do the same. That's the system.

In the meantime, smart basketball people in the media should fight against the goofiness of this system. Bilas does a nice job by using Sagarin instead of RPI in all his conversations. Dinosaurs like Lunardi are not going to change until they have to. They have an easy weekly column that is more or less generated by a simple formula.

The basic problem this year is that we are better than we thought we would be--thankfully. If Larry K at the beginning of the year thought we would be on the bubble of the tournament, he would have scheduled a tougher preseason schedule. I am sure he did not think it would be an issue, and he was scheduling for a different purposes (to change the culture). Next year will be very different; so will every year after that, I assume.

sancho
02-27-2014, 04:36 PM
Now, I'm not saying Utah should be a lock to be in, but I am saying they should be in the discussion.

Again, reasonable ranking systems would agree with you. Sagarin and Kenpom both would look favorably on Utah as a bubble team.

Most teams have similar rankings in RPI, Kenpom, and Sagarin. But there are a handful of teams that are either far better or worse in RPI than in the other two. According to Sagarin, no team is being underrated by RPI more than Utah.

FountainOfUte
02-27-2014, 05:05 PM
A couple thoughts:
- The NCAA tournament doesnt take the "top 64" teams. It's more like the "top 35 that didn't get an auto bid." I'm not sure we're one of those teams this year. It's sad, because we're so, so close and could have changed our own fortunes with a couple more wins -- crapy non-conf notwithstanding.
- If it comes down to us and a mid-major, I think the subjective attitude of the committee (whether conscious or not) is that "the big boy will have plenty more chances to get in, let the little guy have his shot today." Utah's in a conference where half of its members will get in most years. We get sympathy from no one (nor should we).

Utah
02-27-2014, 06:37 PM
A couple thoughts:
- The NCAA tournament doesnt take the "top 64" teams. It's more like the "top 35 that didn't get an auto bid." I'm not sure we're one of those teams this year. It's sad, because we're so, so close and could have changed our own fortunes with a couple more wins -- crapy non-conf notwithstanding.
- If it comes down to us and a mid-major, I think the subjective attitude of the committee (whether conscious or not) is that "the big boy will have plenty more chances to get in, let the little guy have his shot today." Utah's in a conference where half of its members will get in most years. We get sympathy from no one (nor should we).

I agree with/don't have a problem with what you said.

My whole point is, we should be in the discussion. Our resume is just as good as BYU's, Gonzaga's, etc yet we get no mention. And that's dumb.

Utah
02-27-2014, 06:46 PM
Actually, I changed my mind. I think it's ridiculous a mid major gets in "just because". The better team should get in.

More major conference teams should get in. They have a harder road to the tourney. The bring more $$$ to the tourney. That's the whole point of auto bids. To give smaller teams a chance to get in.

It's not fair that Utah, who plays 9+ top 50 teams is left out and someone gets in as an at large with only 2 top 50 games.

SoCalPat
02-27-2014, 07:31 PM
UCLA suspends Jordan Adams and Kyle Anderson for tonight's game against Oregon. What a break for the Ducks

DrumNFeather
02-27-2014, 10:13 PM
If tonight's scores hold, Arizona clinches the top seed, and the free for all for spots 2-10 begins. Not a great night for our Utes.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

DrumNFeather
02-28-2014, 06:35 AM
IF the Utes are NIT bound, which seems likely, I hope the selection committee has a sense of humor and gives us a home game vs. Ole Miss.

SoCalPat
02-28-2014, 07:32 AM
IF the Utes are NIT bound, which seems likely, I hope the selection committee has a sense of humor and gives us a home game vs. Ole Miss.

I would so love to see that happen.

Utah
02-28-2014, 07:48 AM
IF the Utes are NIT bound, which seems likely, I hope the selection committee has a sense of humor and gives us a home game vs. Ole Miss.

Awesome.

Mormon Red Death
03-02-2014, 11:40 AM
Utah could still end up 4th. Obviously they win their remaining games and end up 10-8. bay area schools both get swept in Arizona this week and they both beat Colorado the next. Utah would have the tiebreaker Here is how it could happen:







Arizona (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/12/arizona-wildcats)
16-2


UCLA (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/26/ucla-bruins)
13-5


Arizona State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/9/arizona-state-sun-devils)
11-7


Utah (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/254/utah-utes)
10-8


Stanford (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/24/stanford-cardinal)
10-8


California (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/25/california-golden-bears)
10-8


Colorado (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/38/colorado-buffaloes)
9-9


Washington (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/264/washington-huskies)
9-9


Oregon (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/2483/oregon-ducks)
9-9


Oregon State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/204/oregon-state-beavers)
7-11


Washington State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/265/washington-state-cougars)
3-15


USC (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/30/usc-trojans)
1-17




So things could still go as I have above. We have to hope that the AZ schools both win at Oregon and that one of the bay schools beats Colorado. We of course have to win both of our road games which obviously has been a tall order for this team this year.

DrumNFeather
03-02-2014, 11:54 AM
So things could still go as I have above. We have to hope that the AZ schools both win at Oregon and that one of the bay schools beats Colorado. We of course have to win both of our road games which obviously has been a tall order for this team this year.

It would be interesting to see if the committee would snub us if we managed to finish 4th and then won a couple of tournament games.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

sancho
03-02-2014, 01:23 PM
So things could still go as I have above. We have to hope that the AZ schools both win at Oregon and that one of the bay schools beats Colorado. We of course have to win both of our road games which obviously has been a tall order for this team this year.

The window is anywhere from 4th to 10th, with the greater odds towers the wrong end of that range.

Cal needs their next game badly after being throttled twice in AZ. Stanford will be senior night for the most senior laden team in the conference. Tough road trip.

Mormon Red Death
03-02-2014, 01:38 PM
It would be interesting to see if the committee would snub us if we managed to finish 4th and then won a couple of tournament games.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

In your scenario we end up 4th but beat the azholes and lose to either Ucla or asu in the final. No way we get snubbed if that happens.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk 2

Jarid in Cedar
03-02-2014, 07:20 PM
Utah could still end up 4th. Obviously they win their remaining games and end up 10-8. bay area schools both get swept in Arizona this week and they both beat Colorado the next. Utah would have the tiebreaker Here is how it could happen:







Arizona (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/12/arizona-wildcats)

16-2


UCLA (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/26/ucla-bruins)
14-4


Arizona State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/9/arizona-state-sun-devils)
11-7


Utah (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/254/utah-utes)
10-8


Stanford (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/24/stanford-cardinal)
10-8


California (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/25/california-golden-bears)
10-8


Colorado (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/38/colorado-buffaloes)
9-9


Washington (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/264/washington-huskies)
9-9


Oregon (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/2483/oregon-ducks)
8-10


Oregon State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/204/oregon-state-beavers)
7-11


Washington State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/265/washington-state-cougars)
3-15


USC (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/30/usc-trojans)
1-17





We could end up 3rd in your scenario if ASU gets swept by Oregon/OSU(not out of the realm of possibility). If that happened, then 4 teams would be 10-8. The tie breaker is the aggregate record against the other teams you are tied with. Here is how that would break down;


3rd Seed-Utah(Record against the other 3 teams 3-1)
4th Seed-ASU(4-2 record)
5th Seed-Stanford(2-3 record)
6th Seed-Cal(record 1-4)

For this scenario to play out:

Utah needs a sweep
Cal and Stanford need to beat CU and lose to us
ASU needs to be swept in Oregon
Oregon needs to lose to Arizona and beat ASU

So it is written, so it shall be done.

sancho
03-02-2014, 07:32 PM
I think 5-6 would almost be better for us than 4. That way we could pad the win total by one before playing a good team.

Mormon Red Death
03-02-2014, 08:24 PM
We could end up 3rd in your scenario if ASU gets swept by Oregon/OSU(not out of the realm of possibility). If that happened, then 4 teams would be 10-8. The tie breaker is the aggregate record against the other teams you are tied with. Here is how that would break down;


3rd Seed-Utah(Record against the other 3 teams 3-1)
4th Seed-ASU(4-2 record)
5th Seed-Stanford(2-3 record)
6th Seed-Cal(record 1-4)

For this scenario to play out:

Utah needs a sweep
Cal and Stanford need to beat CU and lose to us
ASU needs to be swept in Oregon
Oregon needs to lose to Arizona and beat ASU

So it is written, so it shall be done.



Arizona (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/12/arizona-wildcats)
14-2
27-2


UCLA (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/26/ucla-bruins)
10-5
21-7


Arizona State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/9/arizona-state-sun-devils)
10-6
21-8


Colorado (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/38/colorado-buffaloes)
9-7
20-9


Stanford (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/24/stanford-cardinal)
9-7
18-10


California (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/25/california-golden-bears)
9-7
18-11


Oregon (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/2483/oregon-ducks)
8-8
20-8


Utah (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/254/utah-utes)
8-8
19-9


Washington (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/264/washington-huskies)
8-8
16-13


Oregon State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/204/oregon-state-beavers)
7-8
15-12


Washington State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/265/washington-state-cougars)
2-14
9-19


USC (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/30/usc-trojans)
1-15
10-19



current standdings

DrumNFeather
03-03-2014, 07:18 AM
Arizona (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/12/arizona-wildcats)
14-2
27-2


UCLA (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/26/ucla-bruins)
10-5
21-7


Arizona State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/9/arizona-state-sun-devils)
10-6
21-8


Colorado (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/38/colorado-buffaloes)
9-7
20-9


Stanford (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/24/stanford-cardinal)
9-7
18-10


California (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/25/california-golden-bears)
9-7
18-11


Oregon (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/2483/oregon-ducks)
8-8
20-8


Utah (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/254/utah-utes)
8-8
19-9


Washington (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/264/washington-huskies)
8-8
16-13


Oregon State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/204/oregon-state-beavers)
7-8
15-12


Washington State (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/265/washington-state-cougars)
2-14
9-19


USC (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/30/usc-trojans)
1-15
10-19



current standdings

Schedule this week:

Tuesday 3/4

ASU @ Oregon

Wed 3/5

CU @ Stanford
Utah @ Cal
Arizona @ OSU

Thur 3/6

UCLA @ Washington
USC @ Washington St.

Sat 3/9

CU @ Cal
Utah @ Stanford
Arizona @ Oregon
ASU @ OSU
UCLA @ Washington St.
USC @ Washington

DrumNFeather
03-03-2014, 07:22 AM
Our RPI currently sits at 80, so there is certainly some work to do there. I'd be interested to see what two wins this week would do to it.

LA Ute
03-03-2014, 10:04 PM
Krysko comments on the season's end and post-season prospects in an interview with Andy Katz and Seth Greenberg -- starts at about 30:00.

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=10545790

LA Ute
03-04-2014, 08:39 AM
This could go in the "Rebuild Project" thread too. From Pat Forde's "Forde Minutes (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/forde-minutes--which-teams-are-still-alive-in-the-hunt-for-the-final-no--1-seed-061537716-ncaab.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter):"


The Minutes perused Ken Pomeroy’s current (through Sunday) power ratings for every team in the eight power conferences, then compared those numbers to where he ranked those teams heading into the season. (Here is the explanation (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/pre_season_ratings_2014) for KenPom’s preseason rating methodology.)

The result is a conference-by-conference look at who has had the biggest improvements and biggest drops since the season began....

Pac-12

The success stories:

Utah started the season No. 150, currently No. 35. Rise: 115 spots. By Pomeroy numbers, Larry Krystkowiak is the national Coach of the Year.

Oregon started the season No. 56, currently No. 29. Rise: 27 spots. Took one game for the Ducks to jump into Pomeroy’s top 50, and they’ve never left it since. Five-game winning streak has improved their position and strengthened hold on an NCAA tourney bid.

The flops:

Washington State started the season No. 103, currently No. 202. Drop: 99 spots. A 9-19 overall record, 2-14 in the league, will probably end Ken Bone’s tenure after five seasons.

USC started the season No. 113, currently No. 169. Drop: 56 spots. Everyone knew it would be a rebuilding job for Andy Enfield. But with one win in 2014, it’s even worse than we thought.

(I freely admit I stole this from Sancho's post at UF.net.)

DrumNFeather
03-04-2014, 11:25 AM
Schedule this week:

Tuesday 3/4

ASU @ Oregon



We're ASU fans tonight.

SoCalPat
03-04-2014, 03:15 PM
We're ASU fans tonight.

Negatory. As long as a top 4 seed is still a possibility, I'm rooting for that scenario to take root. ASU winning one more game slams that door shut.

SoCalPat
03-04-2014, 03:21 PM
FWIW, OSU is 7-9, not 7-8.

Jarid in Cedar
03-04-2014, 03:24 PM
Negatory. As long as a top 4 seed is still a possibility, I'm rooting for that scenario to take root. ASU winning one more game slams that door shut.

Agreed

DrumNFeather
03-04-2014, 05:10 PM
Negatory. As long as a top 4 seed is still a possibility, I'm rooting for that scenario to take root. ASU winning one more game slams that door shut.

Hmm...maybe, but I feel like Oregon is our biggest hurdle to the big dance. A first round bye would be nice though.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Applejack
03-04-2014, 05:32 PM
Hmm...maybe, but I feel like Oregon is our biggest hurdle to the big dance. A first round bye would be nice though.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

I'm with you DnF: our most realistic dancing scenario is a split on the upcoming roadie, a couple of wins in Vegas and a complete Oregon collapse.

U-Ute
03-04-2014, 05:32 PM
Hmm...maybe, but I feel like Oregon is our biggest hurdle to the big dance. A first round bye would be nice though.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Yeah. That's how I feel too. We want Oregon to get swept.

SoCalPat
03-04-2014, 05:50 PM
Hmm...maybe, but I feel like Oregon is our biggest hurdle to the big dance. A first round bye would be nice though.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Oregon only becomes a hurdle that cannot be cleared for an at-large bid if we lose to Cal. If we lose, then an Oregon loss vs. ASU is good because it opens the door to pass the Ducks on the final day of the season (a strong possibility since the Ducks play Arizona). Tonight's outcome will be viewed one way when it happens, quite likely in another light after our game vs. Cal.

DrumNFeather
03-04-2014, 06:40 PM
Oregon only becomes a hurdle that cannot be cleared for an at-large bid if we lose to Cal. If we lose, then an Oregon loss vs. ASU is good because it opens the door to pass the Ducks on the final day of the season (a strong possibility since the Ducks play Arizona). Tonight's outcome will be viewed one way when it happens, quite likely in another light after our game vs. Cal.

I think that's fair. In some ways (depending on what we do) it could be a win/win. But you're right, it's totally moot if we can't get a split at least.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

jrj84105
03-04-2014, 06:50 PM
Wouldn't drawing Oregon as a first round opponent be good for us? They're probably the highest RPI team that we have a chance of playing in the first round?

LA Ute
03-04-2014, 09:36 PM
I'd sure like to watch the ASU-Oregon game but we're stuck in double overtime with the Marquette-Providence game.

I'm just glad the Utes don't play in the Dunkin' Donuts Center.

sancho
03-04-2014, 10:28 PM
I'd sure like to watch the ASU-Oregon game but we're stuck in double overtime with the Marquette-Providence game.

I'm just glad the Utes don't play in the Dunkin' Donuts Center.

How come Altman can wear a tie in Oregon but not SLC?

SoCalPat
03-04-2014, 11:06 PM
Wouldn't drawing Oregon as a first round opponent be good for us? They're probably the highest RPI team that we have a chance of playing in the first round?

I'm not sure it's realistically possible. We can forget about Utah-Oregon in the 7-10 game, if only for the simple reason that OSU pretty much has 10th locked up (The most likely team OSU could finish tied for 9th with in the league is Utah, and the Utes own that tiebreaker). That leaves the 8-9 game. By my calculations, the only way Oregon finishes 8th AND Utah finishes 9th (allowing Washington to finish 7th) is for both Oregon and Utah to lose at least once, while Washington sweeps USC/UCLA. That would give Washington sole possession of 7th at 10-8, while Utah and Oregon finish no better than 9-9 or 8-10. (OSU finishing 8-10 also is irrelevant since they lose all tiebreakers with Utah and Oregon, and thereby are seeded 10th in Vegas).

A three-team tie between Utah, Oregon and Washington favors Oregon.

Oregon went 2-1 vs. Utah/Washington
Utah went 1-2 vs. Oregon/Washington
Washington went 1-2 vs. Utah/Oregon.

SoCalPat
03-04-2014, 11:16 PM
Ducks are going to beat ASU, which makes a chaotic push for a top 4 seed that much more chaotic, but keeps Utah in that hunt as well. It's exactly what we wanted (for now). If we beat Cal, we will be in a essential four-team tie for fifth heading into the final game, a five-team tie for fifth if Washington beats UCLA on Thursday.

311ute
03-05-2014, 08:54 AM
Oregon went 2-1 vs. Utah/Washington
Utah went 1-2 vs. Oregon/Washington
Washington went 1-2 vs. Utah/Oregon.


Washington and Oregon split, so it would be:

Oregon 2-1
Utah 1-2
Washington 2-2

DrumNFeather
03-05-2014, 08:58 PM
Stanford may just hand this one to the Buffs.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

DrumNFeather
03-05-2014, 09:15 PM
Stanford may just hand this one to the Buffs.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

CU wins.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Mormon Red Death
03-05-2014, 09:49 PM
who wins the tiebreaker between ASU, Oregon, Colo, Cal and Utah?

Mormon Red Death
03-05-2014, 10:04 PM
who wins the tiebreaker between ASU, Oregon, Colo, Cal and Utah?

If that is the tie for 3-7 It would go
3. ASU (Beat AZ and beat Cal Twice),
4. CAL (Beat AZ),
5. Oregon (Beat UCLA and Utah),
6. Utah (Beat UCLA)
7. Colo

DrumNFeather
03-05-2014, 11:26 PM
As of this very minute we are the 7 seed

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Mormon Red Death
03-05-2014, 11:42 PM
We need ore st, cal, ucla, and AZ to win

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk 2

Mormon Red Death
03-06-2014, 07:09 AM
So Here is the most likely scenarios based upon whether Utah Loses or wins:

Let's assume AZ beats Oregon, ASU beats Ore st (3rd seed), UCLA beats UW (2nd seed) as our base. Lets also assume CAL beats Colo

If Utah wins and Colo Loses then Utah takes 4th because they went 2-1 vs Cal and Colorado
If ASU Loses then Utah still takes 4th because ASU beat cal twice while splitting vs colo and Utah
If Oregon wins and ASU wins you have Ore @ 1-2 Utah 2-2 Colo 2-2 and Cal 2-1 and Utah takes 5th
If Ore wins and ASU loses Utah is the 5th seed

If Utah loses we get 8 - 9 game vs Wash

DrumNFeather
03-06-2014, 07:19 AM
Our RPI is now at 72, with our BPI being at 34. Based on the BPI index, we are in as an at large right now. Obviously, our RPI has work yet to do.

Applejack
03-06-2014, 07:54 AM
Our RPI is now at 72, with our BPI being at 34. Based on the BPI index, we are in as an at large right now. Obviously, our RPI has work yet to do.

Pop quiz: what is the worst RPI that has ever garnered an at-large bid?















Answer: 67 (USC in 2011)

DrumNFeather
03-06-2014, 07:59 AM
Pop quiz: what is the worst RPI that has ever garnered an at-large bid?















Answer: 67 (USC in 2011)

So you're saying there's a chance!

SoCalPat
03-06-2014, 08:15 AM
So Here is the most likely scenarios based upon whether Utah Loses or wins:

Let's assume AZ beats Oregon, ASU beats Ore st (3rd seed), UCLA beats UW (2nd seed) as our base. Lets also assume CAL beats Colo

If Utah wins and Colo Loses then Utah takes 4th because they went 2-1 vs Cal and Colorado
If ASU Loses then Utah still takes 4th because ASU beat cal twice while splitting vs colo and Utah
If Oregon wins and ASU wins you have Ore @ 1-2 Utah 2-2 Colo 2-2 and Cal 2-1 and Utah takes 5th
If Ore wins and ASU loses Utah is the 5th seed

If Utah loses we get 8 - 9 game vs Wash

So the poison pill game is Oregon winning. We cannot finish fourth under any scenario if the Ducks win, correct?

Mormon Red Death
03-06-2014, 08:28 AM
So the poison pill game is Oregon winning. We cannot finish fourth under any scenario if the Ducks win, correct?

Things get weirder if Wash sweeps the LA schools. but yeah I think we need the azzholes to be oregon in order to finish 4th.

DrumNFeather
03-06-2014, 09:35 AM
Lunardi now has Cal out of the tournament, and Oregon solidly in with the Pac 12 getting 6 teams.

Utah
03-06-2014, 09:40 AM
Lunardi now has Cal out of the tournament, and Oregon solidly in with the Pac 12 getting 6 teams.

Does anyone think if Utah ends up 4th in the PAC-12, they get left out?

Applejack
03-06-2014, 09:40 AM
Lunardi now has Cal out of the tournament, and Oregon solidly in with the Pac 12 getting 6 teams.

I know this will be difficult for many on this board to hear, but if Utah beats Stanford, we need to root against all of the bubble teams in their tournaments-including BYU. Sorry.

SoCalPat
03-06-2014, 09:45 AM
Does anyone think if Utah ends up 4th in the PAC-12, they get left out?

That, plus one in Vegas is the tipping point for me to where I would say it's ridiculous to hold our non-con SOS against us.

Two Utes
03-06-2014, 09:51 AM
That, plus one in Vegas is the tipping point for me to where I would say it's ridiculous to hold our non-con SOS against us.

Interesting comment. While this coaching staff has proven beyond a doubt that they can coach, they really screwed the pooch with the preseason schedule. A couple of good road losses would have helped us immensely in RPI. But, at the same time, the fans came back in droves despite the POS noncon schedule ( or maybe as a result of it).

We've got a very good coaching staff. Expect Larry K's name to start surfacing in coaching searches in the off-season.

Diehard Ute
03-06-2014, 09:55 AM
Interesting comment. While this coaching staff has proven beyond a doubt that they can coach, they really screwed the pooch with the preseason schedule. A couple of good road losses would have helped us immensely in RPI. But, at the same time, the fans came back in droves despite the POS noncon schedule ( or maybe as a result of it).

We've got a very good coaching staff. Expect Larry K's name to start surfacing in coaching searches in the off-season.

Don't see many jobs that Krysko would be interested in.

He's made it pretty clear he won't go back to the NBA, and he's also made it well known that he sees Utah as his dream job. He loves the mountain west and really likes the U.

I'm sure he'll get calls, but from all I've heard, he's not likely to entertain very many.

sancho
03-06-2014, 10:25 AM
Don't see many jobs that Krysko would be interested in.

He's made it pretty clear he won't go back to the NBA, and he's also made it well known that he sees Utah as his dream job. He loves the mountain west and really likes the U.

I'm sure he'll get calls, but from all I've heard, he's not likely to entertain very many.

If we win on Saturday, there's a decent chance that Stanford will have an opening. Would love to see K turn them down.

sancho
03-06-2014, 11:43 AM
I know this will be difficult for many on this board to hear, but if Utah beats Stanford, we need to root against all of the bubble teams in their tournaments-including BYU. Sorry.

In that case, our assignment tonight is to root for:

Vandy over LSU

Villanova over Xavier

Tulane over Southern Miss

Rice over Louisiana Tech

Dawminator
03-06-2014, 12:43 PM
In that case, our assignment tonight is to root for:

Vandy over LSU

Villanova over Xavier

Tulane over Southern Miss

Rice over Louisiana Tech

Dont forget UCLA over Washington

jrj84105
03-06-2014, 01:38 PM
I can't remember which site has this, but we are listed at 13% (up from 8% pre-Cal) chance of getting a bid, which seems pretty accurate. Here are the next games for bubble teams (quickly put together, hopefully someone will edit for completeness). Bold are Lunardi's bubble teams.

Arkansas @ Alabama (12-18, 6-11)
Tennessee vs Missouri (21-9, 9-8)
Dayton vs Richmond (18-11, 8-6)
Nebraska vs Wisconsin (25-5, 12-5)
Cal vs Colorado (21-9, 10-7)
Providence vs Creighton (23-6, 13-4)
Minnesota vs Penn St (14-15, 5-11)
FSU vs Syracuse (26-4, 13-4)
St John @ Marquette (17-13, 9-8)
G'Town @ Villanova (26-3, 14-2)
LSU @ Vandy (15-13, 7-9)

So I guess we root for Alabama, Richmond, Wisconsin, Colorado (from a purely at large bid perspective), Creighton, Penn St, Syracuse, Marquette, Villanova, and Vandy.

sancho
03-06-2014, 02:39 PM
Bracketology has 8 teams on each side of the bubble. Here they are in order with (quality wins, wins vs bubble teams, bad losses). A quality win is a win over a team firmly in the field. Utah is also included for reference:

Oregon (2,3,1)
BYU (3,0,4)
Xavier (2,4,3)
St Joes (2,2,1)
Arkansas (3,2,1)
Tennessee (1,3,3)
Dayton (4,1,3)
Nebraska (2,1,3)
Cal (2,2,2)
Providence (1,3,1)
Minnesota (3,1,2)
FSU (3,0,1)
Mizzou (1,3,2)
St Johns (1,2,2)
Georgetown (4,3,3)
LSU (1,3,3)
Utah (3,2,1)

Conclusions:

1) Get St Johns, LSU, Mizzou, Providence and Tennessee off this list. One quality win should not be enough. Nebraska, you're cut too with 3 bad losses and only 2 quality wins.

2) Dayton and Georgetown have more quality wins than anyone else on the list, but they also have 3 bad losses each. I can't see how BYU is more attractive than either - (4,1,3) and (4,3,3) vs (3,0,4) = no brainer.

3) BYU has more bad losses than any team on this list. As of now, they can still count Stanford as a quality win, but that might not be the case anymore if we win on Sat. It not possible to make a good argument for BYU over Utah, Georgetown, FSU, Minnesota, Dayton, or Arkansas. Each of those teams has as many or more quality wins with fewer bad losses.

4) Xavier has more bubble wins than anyone on the list, but they have 3 bad losses.

5) Utah is certainly competitive by this metric. Unfortunately, this is not the metric that is used.

Utah
03-06-2014, 02:47 PM
Bracketology has 16 teams on either side of the bubble. Here they are in order with (quality wins, wins vs bubble teams, bad losses). A quality win is a win over a team firmly in the field. Utah is also included for reference:

Oregon (2,3,1)
BYU (3,0,4)
Xavier (2,4,3)
St Joes (2,2,1)
Arkansas (3,2,1)
Tennessee (1,3,3)
Dayton (4,1,3)
Nebraska (2,1,3)
Cal (2,2,2)
Providence (1,3,1)
Minnesota (3,1,2)
FSU (3,0,1)
Mizzou (1,3,2)
St Johns (1,2,2)
Georgetown (4,3,3)
LSU (1,3,3)
Utah (3,2,1)

Conclusions:

1) Get St Johns, LSU, Mizzou, Providence and Tennessee off this list. One quality win should not be enough. Nebraska, you're cut too with 3 bad losses and only 2 quality wins.

2) Dayton and Georgetown have more quality wins than anyone else on the list, but they also have 3 bad losses each. I can't see how BYU is more attractive than either - (4,1,3) and (4,3,3) vs (3,0,4) = no brainer.

3) BYU has more bad losses than any team on this list. As of now, they can still count Stanford as a quality win, but that might not be the case anymore if we win on Sat. It not possible to make a good argument for BYU over Utah, Georgetown, FSU, Minnesota, Dayton, or Arkansas. Each of those teams has as many or more quality wins with fewer bad losses.

4) Xavier has more bubble wins than anyone on the list, but they have 3 bad losses.

5) Utah is certainly competitive by this metric. Unfortunately, this is not the metric that is used.

Six teams have one bad loss. Take those six, then fight among the others for the last two.

I get the preseason schedule sucked, and it was pathetic. BUT, it's pathetic that Utah isn't almost a lock as an at large team. It really is. When you compare 100 and higher wins vs losses, Utah is probably the most deserving team in the country of being in the tournament.

It's ridiculous.

UtahsMrSports
03-06-2014, 03:40 PM
This chart, tweeted out by Josh Furlong of KSL makes me shake my head.

1066

It is what it is I guess........

RPI is a joke. Look at ours, look at Colorado.

DrumNFeather
03-06-2014, 07:12 PM
Bill Walton said on the UCLA/UW broadcast that he's been working on Lunardi to convince him how good Utah is.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

sancho
03-06-2014, 07:23 PM
Bill Walton said on the UCLA/UW broadcast that he's been working on Lunardi to convince him how good Utah is.


Lunardi is getting sick of it. He singled out Utah today on his bracketology insider article. Said basically that our wins shouldn't matter as much because of our weak nonconf schedule and our road record.

He is an RPI zombie.

DrumNFeather
03-06-2014, 09:03 PM
UCLA wins. Utes the 6 seed right now.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

#1 Utefan
03-06-2014, 09:49 PM
The RPI is an antiquated metric that should be replaced as better systems are out there now. I find it amusing that BYU fans are buoyed and think they deserve a tourney berth because they have a high RPI. Sure they beat a couple of good (not great) teams in Texas and Stanford but they also had some very bad losses later to the likes of LMU, Pepperdine, Portland, and Pacific.

Why should they get a boost for playing Wichita St., UMASS, and Iowa St. when they lost all those games and got seal clubbed by Utah? Sure Utah played a crappy preconference schedule but BYU played a crappy conference schedule. BYU also has 4-5 bad losses while Utah only has one bad loss (Wazzu).

It is time to focus more on who you beat, how competitive you are in "good losses", who you lose to, and how well you finish. Rewarding a team for playing a tough schedule but losing most of them just doesn't make that much sense to me.

DrumNFeather
03-07-2014, 06:49 AM
Alright, here we go, one final look at the standings as we head into the final weekend of the regular season:



1. Arizona
15-2


2. UCLA
12-5


3. Arizona St.
10-7


4. Colorado
10-7


5. Oregon
9-8


6. Utah
9-8


7. Stanford
9-8


8. Cal
9-8


9. Washington
8-9


10. Oregon St.
7-10


11. USC
2-15


12. Washington St.
2-15



There are three locks heading into the final game. The 1, 2, and 10 seeds (OSU was swept by Washington). Everything else is up for grabs.

Schedule:

2:30 PM, ET - Utah @ Stanford (Pac 12)
4:00 PM, ET - Arizona @ Oregon (CBS)
4:30 PM, ET - ASU @ OSU (Pac 12)
4:30 PM, ET - USC @ Washington (Pac 12)
6:30 PM, ET - Colorado @ Cal (Pac 12)
11:00 PM, ET - UCLA @ Washington St. (FX Sports 1)

Mormon Red Death
03-07-2014, 07:43 AM
Alright, here we go, one final look at the standings as we head into the final weekend of the regular season:



1. Arizona
15-2


2. UCLA
12-5


3. Arizona St.
10-7


4. Colorado
10-7


5. Oregon
9-8


6. Utah
9-8


7. Stanford
9-8


8. Cal
9-8


9. Washington
8-9


10. Oregon St.
7-10


11. USC
2-15


12. Washington St.
2-15



There are three locks heading into the final game. The 1, 2, and 10 seeds (OSU was swept by Washington). Everything else is up for grabs.

Schedule:

2:30 PM, ET - Utah @ Stanford (Pac 12)
4:00 PM, ET - Arizona @ Oregon (CBS)
4:30 PM, ET - ASU @ OSU (Pac 12)
4:30 PM, ET - USC @ Washington (Pac 12)
6:30 PM, ET - Colorado @ Cal (Pac 12)
11:00 PM, ET - UCLA @ Washington St. (FX Sports 1)

The worst Utah can finish is the 8th Seed (they lose and Cal wins). They finish 7th if they lose and Cal loses.

If Utah wins here are the scenarios:
If ASU, COLO, Ore and CAL end in a tie with then

4th seed

If Utah, Colo, Ore and Cal end in a tie

4th seed

If Colo Cal and Utah

4th seed

If Utah and Ore or if utah, ore and ASU tie at 10-8
6th seed

Applejack
03-07-2014, 07:48 AM
The worst Utah can finish is the 8th Seed (they lose and Cal wins). They finish 7th if they lose and Cal loses.

If Utah wins here are the scenarios:
If ASU, COLO, Ore and CAL end in a tie with then

4th seed

If Utah, Colo, Ore and Cal end in a tie

4th seed

If Colo Cal and Utah

4th seed

If Utah and Ore or if utah, ore and ASU tie at 10-8
6th seed

OK, so to simplify, i should be rooting accordingly:

- For Utah: check
- Against Cal: I'll hold my nose
- Against Oregon: no problem

Mormon Red Death
03-07-2014, 07:51 AM
OK, so to simplify, i should be rooting accordingly:

- For Utah: check
- Against Cal: I'll hold my nose
- Against Oregon: no problem

I think we want Cal to win so that Colo finishes 10-8 too as we hold the tiebreaker on both of those teams. We beat Cal and We beat UCLA (Colo tiebreaker)

sancho
03-07-2014, 08:13 AM
OK, so to simplify, i should be rooting accordingly:

- For Utah: check


I'm focused on this one. My train of thought since I woke up this morning: beat Stanford...beat Stanford...RPI...beat Stanford

DrumNFeather
03-07-2014, 08:13 AM
I think we want Cal to win so that Colo finishes 10-8 too as we hold the tiebreaker on both of those teams. We beat Cal and We beat UCLA (Colo tiebreaker)

This may be the case vs. us with Stanford too, but you have to think that Cal knows they need to get a win going into the Pac 12 tourney. Right now, they stand a very good chance at being left out, and a loss to CU could seal that, so I think we see a better Cal team on Saturday. Again, the Utes could also have that happen vs. Stanford, but Stanford is at least on solid footing.

It would be pretty remarkable if this team can manage to finish 4th this season. That alone should get Kodiak some COY consideration.

DrumNFeather
03-07-2014, 08:14 AM
I'm focused on this one. My train of thought since I woke up this morning: beat Stanford...beat Stanford...RPI...beat Stanford

With absolutely no info to back up my claim, I think that having the first game of the day could help them out. A win, and then you sit back and watch everything else unfold.

sancho
03-07-2014, 08:17 AM
some very bad losses later to the likes of LMU, Pepperdine, Portland, and Pacific.


You know those secret scrimmages at the beginning of the season? We beat Wyoming in our secret scrimmage? These four teams played their secret scrimmage against teams from my nephew's 8th grade rec league. The games were all close, but the rec league prevailed. Yeah, that's how bad these teams are.

There will be no other team in the tournament with anything close to losses this bad.

Applejack
03-07-2014, 08:23 AM
You know those secret scrimmages at the beginning of the season? We beat Wyoming in our secret scrimmage? These four teams played their secret scrimmage against teams from my nephew's 8th grade rec league. The games were all close, but the rec league prevailed. Yeah, that's how bad these teams are.

There will be no other team in the tournament with anything close to losses this bad.

Actually, our Washington State loss is worse than any of those four.

sancho
03-07-2014, 08:25 AM
Actually, our Washington State loss is worse than any of those four.

No, it's not. But every team on the bubble has 1-2 bad losses. Almost every team in the tournament does. Syracuse lost to BC. Duke lost to Wake. One mulligan is accepted practice. No one else has FOUR losses in the horrible category.

Applejack
03-07-2014, 08:33 AM
No, it's not. But every team on the bubble has 1-2 bad losses. Almost every team in the tournament does. Syracuse lost to BC. Duke lost to Wake. One mulligan is accepted practice. No one else has FOUR losses in the horrible category.

Why not? Washington St is 220 in the RPI. BYU's four bad losses have RPIs of 140, 155, 178, and 179.

concerned
03-07-2014, 08:49 AM
I think we want Cal to win so that Colo finishes 10-8 too as we hold the tiebreaker on both of those teams. We beat Cal and We beat UCLA (Colo tiebreaker)


Since our game is first, we don't have to decide whom to root for until it is over. If we win, we root for Cal. If we lose, root for Colorado.

Mormon Red Death
03-07-2014, 09:19 AM
Since our game is first, we don't have to decide whom to root for until it is over. If we win, we root for Cal. If we lose, root for Colorado.

Good point

Solon
03-07-2014, 09:23 AM
Since our game is first, we don't have to decide whom to root for until it is over. If we win, we root for Cal. If we lose, root for Colorado.

No matter how it shakes out, it's been a pretty fun couple of weeks keeping track of the conference standings. Last year, I thought the Utes turned some heads with their performance in the conference tourney (esp. the win vs. Cal) and this year has continued that upward trajectory.

It would be great to get that #4 spot, but I'm not holding my breath.

Selfishly, I just want to avoid the 8-9 game. This would hold off the game vs. AZ for a little longer, and allow me to get to Vegas more easily on Wed.

But, yeah - it would be nice to just sit back and wait until Thursday as the #4.

LA Ute
03-07-2014, 09:24 AM
Why not? Washington St is 220 in the RPI. BYU's four bad losses have RPIs of 140, 155, 178, and 179.

Well...we had only one bad loss. There's some consolation in that. Now, if we just had more good wins....

Applejack
03-07-2014, 09:29 AM
Well...we had only one bad loss. There's some consolation in that. Now, if we just had more good wins....

I don't think that's our problem. We could have used some more road wins, even of the average variety.

LA Ute
03-07-2014, 09:40 AM
I don't think that's our problem. We could have used some more road wins, even of the average variety.

Correct. I would consider those good wins. Just think how different our position would be if we have beaten just WSU and Colorado, or maybe ASU, on the road. We'd be 11-6. A world of difference.

Applejack
03-07-2014, 09:49 AM
Correct. I would consider those good wins. Just think how different our position would be if we have beaten just WSU and Colorado, or maybe ASU, on the road. We'd be 11-6. A world of difference.

The what-ifs will keep you up at night. I think if we had beaten WSU we would be squarely on the bubble right now, with people talking about clinching a birth by beating Stanford.

Solon
03-07-2014, 10:12 AM
The what-ifs will keep you up at night. I think if we had beaten WSU we would be squarely on the bubble right now, with people talking about clinching a birth by beating Stanford.

For me, the WSU, Colorado, and the Oregon (home) game are the ones I want to do-over.
But, as MRD always says, "If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas."

U-Ute
03-07-2014, 10:25 AM
Yo' Dawg, we heard you like tiebreakers - so we put a tiebreaker in yo' tiebreaker so you can break ties while you break ties. (http://theairuphere.com/2014/03/06/breaking-down-the-pac-12-tiebreaker-scenarios/)

Colorado centric, but has some good info if someone can wrap their head around it. The good news is that it puts Utah at a 5 seed, at worst, if we beat Stanford.

Mormon Red Death
03-07-2014, 10:37 AM
Yo' Dawg, we heard you like tiebreakers - so we put a tiebreaker in yo' tiebreaker so you can break ties while you break ties. (http://theairuphere.com/2014/03/06/breaking-down-the-pac-12-tiebreaker-scenarios/)

Colorado centric, but has some good info if someone can wrap their head around it. The good news is that it puts Utah at a 5 seed, at worst, if we beat Stanford.

With Washington losing we can't finish 5th. if we win we are either 4th or 6th. If we lose we are either 7 or 8th

Mormon Red Death
03-07-2014, 10:39 AM
For me, the WSU, Colorado, and the Oregon (home) game are the ones I want to do-over.
But, as MRD always says, "If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas."

I thought it was "if you have big penius on your forehead you still wouldnt be happy because you would have two ball in front of your eyes" but then again maybe I heard it wrong.

LA Ute
03-07-2014, 11:59 AM
Hoping for some Miller-Van Horn-Majerus karma to come our way at the end of this season.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8E31Gt5n5k

sancho
03-07-2014, 12:07 PM
Why not? Washington St is 220 in the RPI. BYU's four bad losses have RPIs of 140, 155, 178, and 179.

I think I've been clear in my position that RPI numbers are meaningless. A bad loss is a bad loss. Forget rankings - is it really worse to lose at WSU than it is to lose at Portland? No. A good team should beat either one.


I don't think that's our problem. We could have used some more road wins, even of the average variety.

If we are talking RPI, the single biggest thing we could have done for ourselves is schedule better bad teams than the bad teams we played. Home or away. We should have been pounding on UVU instead of Idaho State because for some reason that's a major component of how we evaluate quality.


I think if we had beaten WSU we would be squarely on the bubble right now, with people talking about clinching a birth by beating Stanford.

I don't think so. That single win would not have moved our RPI high enough to be on people's lists.

Nobody is saying Utah doesn't belong because of the WSU loss. People are saying we don't belong because of RPI (or RPI related stats like OOC SOS or RPI road wins).

Plus, as we have seen, people care more about bigs wins than about bad losses. BYU is a perfect example this season. They have 4 losses comparable to our WSU loss, and people don't really care that much. If we had closed out that Arizona game at home, we would be squarely on the bubble. Those types of wins are what can move people to look beyond RPI.

Applejack
03-07-2014, 12:31 PM
I think I've been clear in my position that RPI numbers are meaningless. A bad loss is a bad loss. Forget rankings - is it really worse to lose at WSU than it is to lose at Portland? No. A good team should beat either one.



If we are talking RPI, the single biggest thing we could have done for ourselves is schedule better bad teams than the bad teams we played. Home or away. We should have been pounding on UVU instead of Idaho State because for some reason that's a major component of how we evaluate quality.



I don't think so. That single win would not have moved our RPI high enough to be on people's lists.

Nobody is saying Utah doesn't belong because of the WSU loss. People are saying we don't belong because of RPI (or RPI related stats like OOC SOS or RPI road wins).

Plus, as we have seen, people care more about bigs wins than about bad losses. BYU is a perfect example this season. They have 4 losses comparable to our WSU loss, and people don't really care that much. If we had closed out that Arizona game at home, we would be squarely on the bubble. Those types of wins are what can move people to look beyond RPI.

Obviously we'd be in contention with a win over Arizona, no one is arguing that. But think of our resume without the WSU loss. Now we have three road wins so people can't harp as much on our road woes, we have ZERO bad losses - how many teams can say that? Our worst loss would be a two point loss at Washington. Sure people would bitch about the non-con schedule (and with good reason), but if you are fighting for 3rd place in the Pac (we would be), have 4 top 50 wins, and ZERO losses outside the top 100, it would be really hard to keep us out.

sancho
03-07-2014, 12:40 PM
Obviously we'd be in contention with a win over Arizona, no one is arguing that. But think of our resume without the WSU loss. Now we have three road wins so people can't harp as much on our road woes, we have ZERO bad losses - how many teams can say that? Our worst loss would be a two point loss at Washington. Sure people would bitch about the non-con schedule (and with good reason), but if you are fighting for 3rd place in the Pac (we would be), have 4 top 50 wins, and ZERO losses outside the top 100, it would be really hard to keep us out.

If those were the metrics, it would already be hard to keep us out. We already have fewer bad losses than anyone else on the bubble. Unfortunately, RPI is what drives the conversation, and ours wouldn't be that much better had we beat WSU. People harp on our road woes because they want to include some talking point other than RPI. But it's RPI that they really use.

Applejack
03-07-2014, 12:45 PM
Hoping for some Miller-Van Horn-Majerus karma to come our way at the end of this season.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8E31Gt5n5k

Oh man, that takes me back. Spider Smith! Kenny Thomas! Dave Bliss! I hated New Mexico basketball back then. Worse than BYU even.

LA Ute
03-07-2014, 02:02 PM
I will just say one more time how much fun it is to be in this conference when we are doing even moderately well against such challenging competition. Imagine what it will be like when we are doing really well!

#1 Utefan
03-07-2014, 02:28 PM
Wazzu was bad but are you trying to say one bad loss is equal to those
4? That is to say nothing of the fact that Utah crushed BYU head to head. I just don't see what is so great about BYU's resume just because they played a good preseason schedule (and lost most of them).

Are wins over Texas, Stanford, and Gonzagaworth more then wins over UCLA, ASU, Colorado, Cal, and BYU themselves? I'm not seeing it.

311ute
03-07-2014, 04:14 PM
If my calculations are correct, after the Washington loss last night, there are 16 possible scenarios for the Utes. 8 with a win, 8 with a loss.

With a Utah win:

3/8 scenarios we get the 4 seed
4/8 we get the 5 seed
1/8 we get the 6 seed

With a Utah loss:

2/8 we get the 7 seed
5/8 we get the 8 seed
1/8 we get the 9 seed


The worst possible scenario is the following:

Utah loses, Oregon loses, Cal loses, and UW loses. In which case we would get the 8 seed playing Oregon. But that's the only scenario in which we would play Oregon first round, and USC beating Washington is unlikely IMO. (All other scenarios we would be playing Washington in that game)


If the Utes lose (we play the first game of the day Saturday), we should be cheering for Oregon and Colorado to win.

If we win it's a bit jumbled, but the only constant I could find is we want Cal to win.

LA Ute
03-07-2014, 05:17 PM
FWIW, Riley just tweeted this out.

http://espn.kall700sports.com/utah-pac-12-tourney-possibilities/

Solon
03-07-2014, 05:49 PM
FWIW, Riley just tweeted this out.

http://espn.kall700sports.com/utah-pac-12-tourney-possibilities/

In the end, it really boils down to winning tomorrow.
With a win, the worst the Utes will end up with is a 6, which will match up with the 11 and opposite the bracket from AZ.

Let's beat Robber Baron U - West.

sancho
03-08-2014, 02:34 PM
That ends the at large hopes. It's all on the tournament now.

Time to shift from rooting against other bubble teams to rooting for them.

DrumNFeather
03-08-2014, 02:38 PM
So, we're rooting for the Buffs now to secure the 7 seed.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

sancho
03-08-2014, 02:44 PM
So, we're rooting for the Buffs now to secure the 7 seed.


I don't think it matters much. Either path will involve beating Arizona and ucla.

DrumNFeather
03-08-2014, 03:43 PM
I don't think it matters much. Either path will involve beating Arizona and ucla.

I think it matters because there seems to be enough of a gap between AZ and UCLA, that I'd like to avoid the cats as long as possible, and I think OSU is a slightly better matchup than what appears to be an underachieving Washington team that could get hot.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Mormon Red Death
03-08-2014, 06:52 PM
We are the 8 seed we play at noon on wednesday

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk 2

sancho
03-08-2014, 07:01 PM
We are the 8 seed we play at noon on wednesday


Well, that's one spot higher than we were picked by the media. So, there's that, I guess.

sancho
03-08-2014, 07:04 PM
I don't think it matters much. Either path will involve beating Arizona and ucla.

When I said this, I was assuming Arizona would win today. Gonna be tough to hand them their second loss in a row (assuming we get past the huskies).

LA Ute
03-09-2014, 08:19 AM
FWIW. Ken Pomeroy includes a metric called "luck."

http://kenpom.com

The Utes rank 347th out of 351 D1 teams in that category.

U-Ute
03-09-2014, 09:13 AM
FWIW. Ken Pomeroy includes a metric called "luck."

http://kenpom.com

The Utes rank 347th out of 351 D1 teams in that category.

I feel bad for those 4 teams. It has been rough this year.

UTEopia
03-09-2014, 09:52 PM
FWIW. Ken Pomeroy includes a metric called "luck."

http://kenpom.com

The Utes rank 347th out of 351 D1 teams in that category.


As unlucky as the Utes have been on both the court and the football field the last couple of years I am hopeful that the luck category will swing back in our favor one year and we can all again experience a once in a lifetime experience like the Fiesta Bowl, Sugar Bowl or Final Four. I was fortunate to be able to attend all three and would love to be able to do so again.

Although the poor OOC schedule undoubtedly had an impact on the Utes post season chances, the main thing that stands in their way was the inability to successfully negotiate the final seconds of games. I am bullish on LK and the Utes, but that is an area where they failed to perform against Boise and did no better 20 games later. I remember many of us commenting at the time that had the Utes been tested more in the OOC they might have faired better against Boise. Unfortunately, recent history has proven that for whatever reason the Utes were no better prepared to execute at the end of the game yesterday then they were in early December. That is the only thing that discourages me about this coaching staff and this team.

LA Ute
03-10-2014, 10:01 AM
It is weird to look at the PAC-12 tournament bracket and know that Utah could easily beat any team there. I don't expect that to happen, but it is a strange sensation.

Solon
03-10-2014, 10:25 AM
It is weird to look at the PAC-12 tournament bracket and know that Utah could easily beat any team there. I don't expect that to happen, but it is a strange sensation.

MRD & I discussed this yesterday too. I can't get a handle on this team - they could beat any team in the Pac. Or they could lose by 25 to any team in the conference. I just have no sense of this season, so I have no real sense of what's going to happen in Vegas this week (which I hope makes for some fun games).

On the other hand, if the Utes are in a 1-possession game as the clock ticks down, I have a very defined sense of what will probably happen. :cry:

LA Ute
03-10-2014, 10:28 AM
MRD & I discussed this yesterday too. I can't get a handle on this team - they could beat any team in the Pac. Or they could lose by 25 to any team in the conference. I just have no sense of this season, so I have no real sense of what's going to happen in Vegas this week (which I hope makes for some fun games).

On the other hand, if the Utes are in a 1-possession game as the clock ticks down, I have a very defined sense of what will probably happen. :cry:

"Argh," he muttered, in sad agreement.

sancho
03-10-2014, 10:32 AM
MOr they could lose by 25 to any team in the conference.

That's one thing they haven't done. Maybe we are due? I hope not. I do think Arizona is a much better team than us and that we were somewhat lucky to stay to close with them during the season.

Applejack
03-10-2014, 10:33 AM
That's one thing they haven't done. Maybe we are due? I hope not. I do think Arizona is a much better team than us and that we were somewhat lucky to stay to close with them during the season.

Agreed. This team has shown up for every game, except perhaps UCLA Part II (and Washington State).

Solon
03-10-2014, 11:23 AM
That's one thing they haven't done. Maybe we are due? I hope not. I do think Arizona is a much better team than us and that we were somewhat lucky to stay to close with them during the season.

Definitely due - right? This is what I thought vs. Stanford - when they kept clanging FTs, I thought, "Finally - someone else gets to fall apart in the final minute." Alas.

You're right about AZ - much better talent. But still . . . the Utes managed to hang with them - and conceivably could have won in SLC. Crazy year.

DrumNFeather
03-11-2014, 09:16 AM
The Huskies come into the game vs Utah at 4-6 in their last 10. Their best win during that stretch was a close 64-60 win over Stanford. CJ Wilcox is their leading scorer averaging 18 PPG. We split the season series with them, losing by two in Seattle and beating them by nine up in SLC. Our Utes are 6-4 in our last 10, with two of those losses coming in OT and the other being by one vs. Stanford. Given that we were potentially within a point of a top 4-6 seed in this conference, I think we should be favored in this game and win it...I think we're probably one of the two schools (Oregon being the other) that "nobody wants to play."

The focus for this game has got to be rebounds and turnovers. Stanford just killed us on the boards and second chance points. If we clean that up, I think we get past Washington on Wed.

LA Ute
03-11-2014, 10:50 AM
Tony Jones is the most perceptive news media observer out there, I think.


At their best, Wright and Loveridge work seamlessly with each other, with Wright getting to the basket and Loveridge making plays on the perimeter as well as in the paint. When that happens, the rest of Utah’s offense opens up. Taylor gets open looks from 3-point range. Dallin Bachynski and Jeremy Olsen have room to work inside.

But the margin of error is small for these Utes. If Wright’s driving lanes are bottled up, or if Loveridge’s offensive game is in the tank, Utah becomes an easy team to defend, and scoring becomes a chore.

That’s the biggest reason why the two need to be good at the same time. The Utes will need to be effective offensively if they want to keep playing this week. And having Wright and Loveridge playing well is the best way to assure that.

No pressure.

"They are a barometer for us," Krystkowiak said. "We like what we’re doing offensively and we know that those two drive us on both ends. It’s going to be a team effort and we have to be good as a group in order to be successful."

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/utes/57663305-89/utah-wright-loveridge-utes.html.csp

Utah
03-11-2014, 11:33 AM
Tony Jones is the most perceptive news media observer out there, I think.



http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/utes/57663305-89/utah-wright-loveridge-utes.html.csp

This is why next year becomes so exciting. Our two best players are Wright and Loveridge. They may not be our best players next year. Taylor is #3 this year. He may be our sixth to eighth best player next year. Especially if Coach K keeps developing our big guys so well.

Applejack
03-11-2014, 11:42 AM
This is why next year becomes so exciting. Our two best players are Wright and Loveridge. They may not be our best players next year. Taylor is #3 this year. He may be our sixth to eighth best player next year. Especially if Coach K keeps developing our big guys so well.

8th? Did Xan Ricketts get an extra year?

Let's not exaggerate, Wright will definitely be our best player (if he's here) next year. Jordan will almost certainly be number 2. What will hopefully happen is that Kuzma or BreKkot will take over the third scorer and be able to fill the gaps when Jlover is off or when teams realized Delon can't shoot.

Applejack
03-11-2014, 11:49 AM
The Huskies come into the game vs Utah at 4-6 in their last 10. Their best win during that stretch was a close 64-60 win over Stanford. CJ Wilcox is their leading scorer averaging 18 PPG. We split the season series with them, losing by two in Seattle and beating them by nine up in SLC. Our Utes are 6-4 in our last 10, with two of those losses coming in OT and the other being by one vs. Stanford. Given that we were potentially within a point of a top 4-6 seed in this conference, I think we should be favored in this game and win it...I think we're probably one of the two schools (Oregon being the other) that "nobody wants to play."

The focus for this game has got to be rebounds and turnovers. Stanford just killed us on the boards and second chance points. If we clean that up, I think we get past Washington on Wed.

I have been u.n.i.m.p.r.e.s.s.e.d. with the Huskies both games this year. They seem mopey, like they don't care. That's on Romar (I think he's done soon). We should win this game, but we'll have to see what happens on a neutral court.

Utah
03-11-2014, 11:59 AM
8th? Did Xan Ricketts get an extra year?

Let's not exaggerate, Wright will definitely be our best player (if he's here) next year. Jordan will almost certainly be number 2. What will hopefully happen is that Kuzma or BreKkot will take over the third scorer and be able to fill the gaps when Jlover is off or when teams realized Delon can't shoot.

Basketball is different than football or baseball. Experience isn't as important as raw ability. I would hope that Kuzma or Brekkot is better than Loveridge next year. Also, here is who could possibly be better than Taylor next year:

Olsen
Onwas
Tucker
Ogbe
Bachinski
Brekkot
Kuzma
the other Wright

Taylor is awesome and I love him, but he does had holes in his game. As does Loveridge. Now, I don't think all will be better than Taylor. BUT, if one or two are...if one can be better than Loveridge...then wow, look out, we will be really, really good next year.

sancho
03-11-2014, 11:59 AM
8th? Did Xan Ricketts get an extra year?

Let's not exaggerate, Wright will definitely be our best player (if he's here) next year. Jordan will almost certainly be number 2. What will hopefully happen is that Kuzma or BreKkot will take over the third scorer and be able to fill the gaps when Jlover is off or when teams realized Delon can't shoot.

Yes, Taylor will still be an important part of the offense. We need shooting, and he has it. Hopefully, we will also have shooting from Ogbe and/or Tucker. If Loveridge can get his percentage back over 30, it will open up a lot of things for our offense. If we get outside shooting from any freshman, that's a bonus. Van Dyke was supposed to be a shooter, and it didn't really work out.

Applejack
03-11-2014, 12:11 PM
Basketball is different than football or baseball. Experience isn't as important as raw ability. I would hope that Kuzma or Brekkot is better than Loveridge next year. Also, here is who could possibly be better than Taylor next year:

Olsen
Onwas
Tucker
Ogbe
Bachinski
Brekkot
Kuzma
the other Wright

Taylor is awesome and I love him, but he does had holes in his game. As does Loveridge. Now, I don't think all will be better than Taylor. BUT, if one or two are...if one can be better than Loveridge...then wow, look out, we will be really, really good next year.

Utah, I love you and your sunny-side up view of Ute athletics, but I'm going to promise you from the bottom of my cold, black, pessimistic heart that Isaiah Wright is not going to be better than Loveridge or Taylor next year. Nor will a lot of players on that list, but I.Wright is probably a red shirt candidate.

Utah
03-11-2014, 01:59 PM
Utah, I love you and your sunny-side up view of Ute athletics, but I'm going to promise you from the bottom of my cold, black, pessimistic heart that Isaiah Wright is not going to be better than Loveridge or Taylor next year. Nor will a lot of players on that list, but I.Wright is probably a red shirt candidate.

No, no. That's fine. Here is what I said:

"BUT, if one or two are [better than Taylor]...if one can be better than Loveridge...then wow, look out, we will be really, really good next year."

SoCalPat
03-11-2014, 04:46 PM
Let's not exaggerate, Wright will definitely be our best player (if he's here) next year. Jordan will almost certainly be number 2.

We did not recruit Chris Reyes (nor would he have accepted our offer) with the tag of, "You can be our No. 3 or 4 option on offense."

I think the Chapman kid will take minutes from Jordan quickly and frequently. Whether he starts or not is irrelevant; Jordan ain't playing 36 minutes a game in league matchups next year.

NorthwestUteFan
03-11-2014, 06:35 PM
That is probably a good thing. I can see Jordan filling a productive role with less court time. Perhaps he will take a larger leadership role and be more active on offense if he only plays 16 minutes.

Also having a very mobile and active Kuzma down low should open up the defense a bit for Loveridge. Reyes pushing him for PT should also light a fire in him.

I love the kid, have nothing but respect for him, and want to see him succeed at this level and at the next.

sancho
03-11-2014, 07:39 PM
We did not recruit Chris Reyes (nor would he have accepted our offer) with the tag of, "You can be our No. 3 or 4 option on offense."

I think the Chapman kid will take minutes from Jordan quickly and frequently. Whether he starts or not is irrelevant; Jordan ain't playing 36 minutes a game in league matchups next year.

Well, Coach K hit the jackpot with Delon Wright, but most JC guys are not going to come in and dominate like that. If Reyes can just rebound, I'll be pleased. If he can do more than that, cartwheels. My JC theory is that there are no quality big guys at JCs. So the few who are there can put up ridiculous stats like Reyes. How often does he go up against a 6'9" PF in the post? Again, I will be happy if he just has a good nose for the ball.

Applejack
03-11-2014, 09:47 PM
Well, Coach K hit the jackpot with Delon Wright, but most JC guys are not going to come in and dominate like that. If Reyes can just rebound, I'll be pleased. If he can do more than that, cartwheels. My JC theory is that there are no quality big guys at JCs. So the few who are there can put up ridiculous stats like Reyes. How often does he go up against a 6'9" PF in the post? Again, I will be happy if he just has a good nose for the ball.

:highfive:

Look, I want the Utes to win the national championship next year as much as the next guy, but I think a lot of Ute fans are spoiled right now about the type of progress that can happen in a year. People are saying, well we won 5 Pac games last year, 9 this year, so 13 next year! I have never seen Reyes play, so I have no idea what we have with him. Hopefully he can come right in and contribute, but think of our recent JC guys: Lenz (1 terrible year, 1 decent year), Onwas (started REALLY slowly, became a productive player at the end of the season), Marko (probably won't be back), and Delon (manna from heaven). I'm pretty sure that Larry Kodiak is planning on Wright-JLover as his top two players. It will be nice if one of the incoming freshman is battle ready or Reyes is a Delon-redux or one of the bench guys blossom, but more than likely we will improve via incremental improvement and familiarity.

Utah
03-11-2014, 10:04 PM
Quick question:

Who are the top two recruits Coach K has brought in?

Kuzma and Chapman.

So, why don't they have a chance to be our two best players next year? Especially when Kuzma will essentially be a RS freshman?

Delon and Jordan were both three stars.

So, again, why can't Kuzma and Chapman be better than those two?

UBlender
03-11-2014, 10:32 PM
Quick question:

Who are the top two recruits Coach K has brought in?

Kuzma and Chapman.

So, why don't they have a chance to be our two best players next year? Especially when Kuzma will essentially be a RS freshman?

Delon and Jordan were both three stars.

So, again, why can't Kuzma and Chapman be better than those two?

"Can't" isn't really the issue. They can be that good, but they are less likely to do so early on because they are coming into a very different situation than what Loveridge and Wright stepped into. Jordan joined a team fresh off a six win season that was absolutely desperate for anyone who could make a basket while Wright joined a team that really only had Taylor returning at guard. The new guys next year don't get to step into that sort of vacuum. They may be more talented but still take longer to produce at the levels of their predecessors.

Utah
03-11-2014, 11:36 PM
"Can't" isn't really the issue. They can be that good, but they are less likely to do so early on because they are coming into a very different situation than what Loveridge and Wright stepped into. Jordan joined a team fresh off a six win season that was absolutely desperate for anyone who could make a basket while Wright joined a team that really only had Taylor returning at guard. The new guys next year don't get to step into that sort of vacuum. They may be more talented but still take longer to produce at the levels of their predecessors.

Kuzma will be in his second year. We expected big things out of Jordan his second year. We all expect big things out of Wright in his second year at Utah next year. So, why not Kuzma? Have we heard anything but how good he is going to be?

So, if Kuzma has been placed as a better recruit than Jordan, and all reports coming out of practice is that he is better than we thought, why wouldn't there be a chance that Kuzma is better than Jordan next year? Especially when it really seems like Jordan has hit his ceiling?

Take longer to produce at Jordan's levels? So, he probably can't shoot better than 29% from three? 42% fg? Those aren't very good numbers. Not only that, but Kuzma and Chapman will be stepping into roles where it will be easier for them to excel, because teams will focus on Jordan and Wright. And Olsen. And Taylor.

I, for one, think the game will get a little easier for guys like Chapman and Kuzma, who, for probably the first time ever, will be playing in a system with other good players. Talk about making the game easier for them.

So, will Kuzma and Chapman be better than Jordan or Wright? Maybe. Maybe not.

The fact is, we still aren't as talented or as big as most PAC-12 teams. Chapman and Kuzma are bigger and have more potential and it sounds like Kuzma is more talented than Loveridge or Wright. So, yes, I expect those two to compete for top two players on this team next year. Worst case scenario, if those two aren't our third and fourth best players next year, then we probably don't improve much, because as nice as Loveridge and Wright are, we ended up 8th in the PAC-12, with an embarrassing road record. We need to get drastically better if we want to seriously contend.

Diehard Ute
03-12-2014, 05:13 AM
Kuzma will be in his second year. We expected big things out of Jordan his second year. We all expect big things out of Wright in his second year at Utah next year. So, why not Kuzma? Have we heard anything but how good he is going to be?

So, if Kuzma has been placed as a better recruit than Jordan, and all reports coming out of practice is that he is better than we thought, why wouldn't there be a chance that Kuzma is better than Jordan next year? Especially when it really seems like Jordan has hit his ceiling?

Take longer to produce at Jordan's levels? So, he probably can't shoot better than 29% from three? 42% fg? Those aren't very good numbers. Not only that, but Kuzma and Chapman will be stepping into roles where it will be easier for them to excel, because teams will focus on Jordan and Wright. And Olsen. And Taylor.

I, for one, think the game will get a little easier for guys like Chapman and Kuzma, who, for probably the first time ever, will be playing in a system with other good players. Talk about making the game easier for them.

So, will Kuzma and Chapman be better than Jordan or Wright? Maybe. Maybe not.

The fact is, we still aren't as talented or as big as most PAC-12 teams. Chapman and Kuzma are bigger and have more potential and it sounds like Kuzma is more talented than Loveridge or Wright. So, yes, I expect those two to compete for top two players on this team next year. Worst case scenario, if those two aren't our third and fourth best players next year, then we probably don't improve much, because as nice as Loveridge and Wright are, we ended up 8th in the PAC-12, with an embarrassing road record. We need to get drastically better if we want to seriously contend.

You do know Kuzma can't practice or participate right? All he can do are skill drills, nothing close to learning the system.

The reports you hear are from his individual shooting work and playing in intramural games, not practicing with D1 players.

UTEopia
03-12-2014, 06:07 AM
The main reasons why I believe the Utes will be better next year:

1. Delon Wright will work on an outside shot and a better pull-up shot and may not be forced to play 39 minutes a game.
2. Jordan Loveridge will not be forced to play 38 minutes a game.
3. The core players will have a full year together.
4 Kuzma, Chapman and Reyes will add other options to Onwas, Ogbe, Tucker and Fields.
5. Larry will spend the summer working out some end of half and end of game plays that will work.
6. We will move up from No. 354 in the luck category to No. 173.

sancho
03-12-2014, 07:22 AM
The main reasons why I believe the Utes will be better next year:

1. Delon Wright will work on an outside shot and a better pull-up shot and may not be forced to play 39 minutes a game.
2. Jordan Loveridge will not be forced to play 38 minutes a game.
3. The core players will have a full year together.
4 Kuzma, Chapman and Reyes will add other options to Onwas, Ogbe, Tucker and Fields.
5. Larry will spend the summer working out some end of half and end of game plays that will work.
6. We will move up from No. 354 in the luck category to No. 173.

Yup. Don't forget #7. The conference loses many of its best players.

Even if we were to red shirt all the freshmen, we would still be better next year. Add the frosh, and it really could be a special year.

Applejack
03-12-2014, 08:16 AM
Yup. Don't forget #7. The conference loses many of its best players.

Even if we were to red shirt all the freshmen, we would still be better next year. Add the frosh, and it really could be a special year.

No one is saying that we won't be better next year - with all the talent coming back, we had better be. I just think it's highly unlikely that a true or redshirt freshman is going to be better than a first team all Pac-12 senior. I don't think I'm making an outlandish claim here.

U-Ute
03-13-2014, 08:59 AM
No one is saying that we won't be better next year - with all the talent coming back, we had better be. I just think it's highly unlikely that a true or redshirt freshman is going to be better than a first team all Pac-12 senior. I don't think I'm making an outlandish claim here.

Heresy!

J/K :clap:

I expect Kuzma and Chapman to go through all of the same freshman growing pains. They will probably look decent in OOC against inferior competition, make some dumb mistakes early in conference play, and be pretty good by season's end to the point where they can be solid contributors behind the play of Wright, Loveridge, and Taylor and we can make a run in the conference tourney.

The big difference I hope they will make is having two guys that can be double digit scorers in any game where the defense is locked into our other guys. Look at what Hollis-Jefferson and York did against us in the Hunty when we had locked up Gordon and contained Johnson. We made other guys make shots, and they did.

That's the kind of contribution I think they can make next year.

DrumNFeather
03-13-2014, 11:21 AM
Utah has moved into Lunardi's "next four out" list. I suspect this has to do with Georgetown getting dropped by DePaul.

The RPI sits at 72.

I'm not saying anything, but a win this afternoon certainly puts the Utes back in the discussion, especially if other "bubble" teams don't advance very fair in their respective conference tournaments.

U-Ute
03-13-2014, 01:51 PM
Do we start the "NIT speculation" thread for who we will be playing first?

DrumNFeather
03-13-2014, 02:50 PM
They made a remark on the broadcast that Utah was one of the top seeded teams on the rankings for the NIT, so perhaps they get a home game or two.

Applejack
03-13-2014, 03:02 PM
They made a remark on the broadcast that Utah was one of the top seeded teams on the rankings for the NIT, so perhaps they get a home game or two.

I read somewhere that the powers that be have only set aside one game at the Hunty for NIT play because we have to recarpet the roof or something.

Diehard Ute
03-13-2014, 03:02 PM
They made a remark on the broadcast that Utah was one of the top seeded teams on the rankings for the NIT, so perhaps they get a home game or two.

Only one.

Renovation schedule for the JMHC won't allow any more per Steve Pyne.