Jerry Palm's update (ISU still needs one more win) LINK
- Thread starter cyclonefan1983
- Start date
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
This is pretty much what I was thinking. He isn't taking into account the season as a whole. He has a number against his top 100 and that is it. How many of those teams he's saying didn't get in finished 3rd in the Big XII? How many finished with a winning record in the Big XII? It's not like we play in the mac and need a huge Out of conference record to prove our worth. By his logic, we'd be better going indy in Basketball and just scheduling top 100 teams only. We'd definitely pull at least 8 or 9 wins. And so according to him the other 20 losses wouldn't matter because of our wins.
Then again, as others have said, he's become a troll looking for promotion. When he goes in to negotiate his next salary increase, he'll be pointing to CF and how much we talked about him.
yes sweating bullets... remember the last time a 2nd, 3rd or 4th place finish in the big 12 resulted in no tourney bid? I dont. We will win again anyways...
The current group of 10, even including NU and CU being gone, has not had less than 4 bids in the last 10 years. Since the beginning of the big 12 it has happened once (and that year, the conference still got a 4th bid from now-gone nebraska)
(quick grab from wiki)
2011- 5 (all current members)
2010- 7 (all current members)
2009- 6 (all current members)
2008- 6 (all current members)
2007- 4 (all current members)
2006- 4 (all current members)
2005- 6 (all current members)
2004- 4 (all current members)
2003- 6 (5+ colorado)
2002- 6 (all current members)
2001- 6 (all current members)
2000- 6 (all current members)
1999- 5 (all current members)
1998- 4 (3+nebraska)
1997- 5 (4+colorado)
ISU is in. Change the subject. It is warmer in the DSM/Ames area. Let us hope for more of this during the ISU FB spring practices, as well as the scrimmages.
Just reading this now and haven't read to the end so sorry if somebody already stated this, but how many of those teams had top 35 rpis out of a power conference? I've got to think that's a pretty short list. The mid-majors are everybody's darlings and they'll take some bids from somebody, but if we tread water from here on out, I don't feel like we've got a lot to worry about come selection Sunday. K-state was everybody's dark horse around 12:30 on Saturday but we came into their house, did their girlfriend on the couch, and walked out with a couple beers for the road from their fridge. The fact that Frank Martin gave us a ton of credit in his post game comments will be noticed, as will the fact that guys like Bill Self have been tooting our horn for quite some time.
If the wheels come off and we start dropping games by big margins, we might be sweating a little, but we haven't gotten our doors blown off by anybody since December so I don't view that as a likely hood. We're a different team than we were when we played in Ann Arbor and anybody with two funtioning brain cells and a pulse can see that. Nobody's words can change the FACT that we are one of the best 30-some at large teams in the country right now. That doesn't make us a lock, but it makes a helluva case for our inclusion in the dance.
Screw Jerry Palm and the nay-sayers (who are dropping like flies). Enjoy these last 2 weeks of the season and don't sweat his ilk.
Let's add Mizzou to our list. Then Baylor, then Texas ... etc. Then everyone will be talking about "one of the hottest teams entering the tourney."
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
I'd love to sweep this week (of course). Going into the conference tournament owning a win over every team in the conference would make me even more confident.
That's a little more in line with reality.
Bracket matrix still has ISU at 9 (it may not reflect changes after KSU win because some bracketeers may not have updated since then).
Interesting thing, though — For teams considered "in" by consensum in Bracket Matrix, Palm (CBS) is not more than 2 seeds off the matrix average (and mostly within 1) of the average, with one exception: Iowa State. Was 4 seeds off at 13, now he has ISU at 12
To be fair, 11-5 is a lot lot better looking/sounding than the 11-7 we could end up at. The same way that the women's 0-5 conference start is utterly horrible but ultimately not refelective of their final record (which is currently 8-8).
So if you're opinion is 1 or 2 "lucky" wins in there, plus 2 more potential (likely, if you're not buying ISU) losses still to come, and finally a bunch of horrible teams at the bottom of the conference (which I say there's only 1 bad team) then I can see where 11-5 is a "gaudy" record.
Conference record comparisons are obviously flawed until the conference season is over.
What are we against RPI top 300? What are they? I get to pick an arbitrary number just like the top 100 people.
Perhaps you are right. Maybe we should all be using 1-50, 51-100, 101-200 and vs. top 100 like the NCAA selection committee does (arbitrary or not).
NCAA
My point is that these Nitty Gritty sheets are directly from the NCAA website and are what the selection committee uses. Right or wrong they single out the top 100, that is why everyone seems to gravitate toward that metric - it is one of the metrics on the first sheet the selection committee looks at.
There are flaws in obsessing with any single datum point. That is why the selection committee looks at many.
Playing a full home and away sked in the conference is significant... I don't know how anyone could justify taking someone with a lesser conference record AKA K-State.