Bubble Update
Here is the RPI Top-55 after Sunday’s games were included with the Dance Card providing some further insight on the Bubble Teams (#36 – #55). Here are several things that stood out to me:
- Maryland has finally fallen off of the bubble.
- The Dance Card is now projecting six MVC teams into the Tournament. The MVC conference tournament starts Thursday with two play-in games. It will be interesting to see if any of the teams that lose on Friday get a bid. Here’s a bracket so you can follow the action. 
- The BE has 8 teams ranked in the Top-30….pretty good by any measure.
- Strange coincidence this week…All of the teams ranked 1-48 are predicted to get into the tournament. No one from 49-55 is predicted in….but #59 California is.
- Non Sports Related…..Check out www.pandora.com….pretty cool.
0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'>
RPI
Rank
Team
Conf
29
George Washington
A10
50
1
Duke
ACC
13
34
35
51
5
B10
11
14
15
17
25
45
8
B12
12
44
48
2
Villanova
BE
3
7
18
22
26
27
28
23
George Mason
CAA
37
NC
38
Hofstra
55
Old Dominion
6
CUSA
52
UAB
54
53
Wisconsin
Horz
20
Missouri St.
MVC
24
Wichita St.
31
32
Creighton
41
43
Bradley
39
Air Force
MWC
16
UCLA
19
P10
30
40
Bucknell
Pat
47
Sun Belt
4
SEC
10
33
36
42
46
21
WAC
49
9
Gonzaga
WCC
Dance
Card Predicts In
Dance
Card Predicts Out
23 Responses to “Bubble Update”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I am about to have an aneurism having to hear over and over about the mythically awesome mid-major power of the MVC. As it stands now the national talking heads have as many/ more teams from the MVC getting into the tournament than the ACC. Can someone explain to me how THOSE teams beating up on each other some how more impressive than when the ACC teams in the middle do it? It’s truly a sad day for the ACC if we get fewer bids than the MVC and truly an indicator of how proud of our 2nd (wait, 3rd, no 4th) finish in the ACC we should actually be.
Where would NCSU finish in the MVC? I am guessing around fourth or fifth.
Face it the ACC is down this year and truly only deserving of about 5 bids. And most likely we may be the fifth bid behind FSU.
After looking over the RPI, here are some powerhouses that are going to have a higher RPI than we will at the end of the year. I am projecting another drop after we experience a whooping by WFU and quick exit from the ACC tourney:
UNC by the Sea
Hofstra
George Mason
Air Force
Bucknell
We are truly a cross country school.
Bradley
I think NC State would win the MVC. Hell, I think Carolina, BC, Miami, or Florida State would win it too.
BTW, any chance someone can recompute Southern Illinois RPI to include their loss to a I-AA school (Alaska Anchorage, current record about 17-10).
One must remember that the MVC teams always seem to perform well in the tournament – not much differently than middle-tier big conference teams. I agree that 6 is a bit much, but could certainly understand 4.
Assuming the ACC ends of with 4 teams in the tourney, this may be the first time expansion will cost the league some money. Since the NCAA expanded the field, the ACC has put way more than one third of the teams into the tourney. Going into the future – Is 4 making the tourney going to be a low number or average? If it is average, the league will have changed rather dramatically. The 8 – 8 regular season formula is also not working very well this year. I could see 2 teams finishing 8 – 8 this year without either one making the tourney. I am pretty sure this has never happened before.
Expansion only added one “BB team” to the mix…so it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the number hasn’t gone up dramatically. There are enough wins available to put six or seven teams into the NCAAT. This year, no one has stepped up to claim them. Maybe this is just another indication that the ACC is down this year.
Pure guess…I would think that the ACC’s new average will be 5 teams into the NCAAT.
I agree that 5 is the best guess for the new average but wasn’t the old average before expansion pretty close to 5?
Duke & UNC Chapel Hill opposed expansion. If they average losing 4 or 5 games a year in the league other than to each other in the next 10 years, the available wins to make the tourney aren’t necessarily going to be there for very many teams.
This is all conjecture at this point and it really ends at the same place – you better have your house in order to have the best chance to compete in whatever environment you find.
Look at last years NBA draft and is it any wonder the ACC is down this year?
But VaWolf is right the programs added weren’t known for their BB. Next year should be better in terms of NCAAT participation.
I don’t see California listed but they are in? Should they be listed in the PAC 10 list?
No I didn’t include California.
At the bottom of the table, the phrase “NCAAT Locks”, links to an entry I did in January looking at defining the “Bubble” based only on RPI ranking.
1-35……….lock
36-55……..8 teams on average
56-74……..1 team on average, never more than 2.
I just wanted to point out that the Dance Card is picking California for the one long-shot entry based on the games thru Sunday.
Here’s what I’ve got for NCAAT teams from the ACC
15 year average = 4.9
05…..5
04…..6
03…..4
02…..4
01…..6
00…..3
99…..3
98…..5
97…..6
96…..6
95…..4
94…..5
93…..6
92…..5
91…..6
VaWolf82 – Thanks. The league would need to average 6.5 to keep the ratio the same as 4.9. Not likely, but I think 6.0 is possible.
Some more Bubble info and talk from Wilmington Star News
here’s a random thought, i’ll raise it again if there’s ever a thread on the general state of the basketball program:
returning our program to national contention is going to take some action and groundwork, and that work cannot, for political reasons, start out as a movement to fire herb sendek (in other words, fireherbsendek.com just wouldn’t get anywhere)
the Wolfpack Club and/or the Athletic Department should give someone the job of assessing all of the year-in-year-out national contender programs. take stock of their resources, their methods, their operations. probably this is some committee.
the committee should come up with a report outlining what we need to change at NCSU in order to run our program like the big boys.
those recommendations become the roadmap for change. if they can be implemented, and team still doesn’t make it, then it’s time for a change at the top.
it would be a lot simpler to fire herb (and lee fowler, for that matter), but (1) if herb really isn’t getting some resources he needs, maybe he deserves those and (2) the status quo is not going to abruptly change by firing herb, there has to be some groundwork and this would start that
1) We are part of the big boys not some outsider. By being a member of the ACC and our heritage makes us one of the big boys.
2) Resources are here! We have a modern facility, are in the best conference in the country, have the best TV contract, constant media attention and the area bleeds basketball 9 to 10 months a year.
I’m sorry but we don’t need no stinkin’ committee we need accountability! If we can put a man on the moon in 10 years we can put a banner in our dadgum RBC in ten years. Enough is enough!
General Note:
Don’t start lines with “#”. The blog obviously doesn’t know how to handle it.
Starting with “1.” isn’t much better.
Looks like the comments can handle “1)”
’74, i do think we need to change the program, including the head coach, but i’m also being very practical — even if herb were fired, the most likely result is that the same people who hired herb will hire the next coach, using the same criteria, and history will repeat itself
we need a background change in the athletic department, making national prominence the mission and developing a plan on how to get there
personally, i have no expectation of seeing different results until i see something going on system-wide that’s geared towards delivering different results
Todd Turner isn’t here to hire the next guy.
Top to bottom this is the worst year in the league I can remember since 78-79. Not splitting basketball was a mistake. We should have three sub groups, North, South and Big 4. 6 Games against your sub group and 8 against the other teams for a 14 game schedual.
The brunt will be on the Big 4, but even if a team in the Big Four goes 1-5 against its group, it could easily go 6-2 against the remainder. Two less league games would help some teams.
Imagine what that would do for Miami, GT, Clemson and FSU – it would probably get two of them in the NCAA each year. Same with the North with BC, UVA, MD and VT.
The winners of the three divsions get a bye and are seeded according to record 1,2,3 and the best of the rest gets the 4th bye.
I don’t see it improving next year beyond 4, maybe 5 teams when we should be putting 6-7 teams in each year.
I posted this idea on another topic on this blog but since it really is more relevant to this I’ll repeat. If Herb were to leave at the end of this season what would you think of going after Johnny Dawkins?
Now before you call me looney or worse think about this. He’s bright, articulate and has had the best training you can possibly have. Sort of like, only in reverse, Vic Bubas going to Duke back in 1960. In fact I think he’s a black Vic Bubas in many ways. And instead of living in K’s shadow he could create his own here in Raleigh. Do I think it would be likely? No because despite everything Herb will not be leaving first of all and it would be tough to get JD. But I think he could take what we have a build a program worthy of real wolfpack desires!
^ “take what we have and build”
lumberpack – That is a real creative idea. I don’t see it happening anytime soon but if the league goes 2 or 3 years getting 4 into the tourney the loss of revenue is going to get people looking into these kinds of ideas. The 2 divisions for football are obvious to create a championship game. Does anybody know why the league decided to use the 2 divisions for baseball?