EagleOutsider.com

another rock fight

Get TJ off the floor please

overcame a teddy valentine special

The injury what-ifs are big for this year but its nice to have a coach that doesn’t rest on easy excuses. Good shit Earl. Winning vs GaTech guarantees us CBI/NIT no? Even if there’s an ACCT 0-1, that’s 16-16.

ACC road wins have actually been happening and it’s nice

Nice to devastate Wake Forest’s tourney livelihood two years in a row too. “Fuckin Boston College” part 2

Good things happen when you win the second half. (TM Logo Enterprises)

Jesus, starting to think he can coach because this roster is abysmal and he keeps winning.

BCEagles25 {l Wrote}:The injury what-ifs are big for this year but its nice to have a coach that doesn’t rest on easy excuses. Good shit Earl. Winning vs GaTech guarantees us CBI/NIT no? Even if there’s an ACCT 0-1, that’s 16-16.

ACC road wins have actually been happening and it’s nice

Unfortunately if we do not win the ACCT we are done for the year. The CBI is a pay-for-play tournament ($50k entry) - BC doesn't do that.

The NIT is almost certainly out of play as well. Look at BC's NET rating (165 as I'm typing this before Wake result computed):

https://bballnet.com/teams/boston-college

Quad 4 losses are almost unforgiveable and would nearly sink a resume alone. We have two. Our Q2/Q3 record is not great either. Couple solid wins but straight up got beaten by teams like Nova and Nebraska. Teams like Clemson, Michigan, and UNC are on the NCAA/NIT bubble. Not us.

To put it into perspective, Wake with a NET rating of 84 is probably on the outside of the NIT. We are their worst loss of the season (currently Q4, will be Q3 when we rise above NET 160 after tonight's W).

https://bballnet.com/teams/wake-forest

To play this out: a Q4 win vs. GT; a Round 2 Q2 win vs. Wake; and two Q1 wins in the Quarters and Semis, followed by a loss in the ACC final: 19-16 (13-11 ACC), with 5 ranked wins on the year...all to not make the NIT.

If BC beats Georgia Tech and Wake Forest beats Syracuse, then BC is a #9 seed in the ACC tournament. The #9 seed gets a fucking FIRST ROUND BYE. Huge difference between #10 and #9. So this team has somehow found a way to have something to play for.

Primetime {l Wrote}: We are their worst loss of the season (currently Q4, will be Q3 when we rise above NET 160 after tonight's W).

Thought about this, and looked into it more. While it will change very slightly if our NET rises above 160, WE ARE:

-UVA's worst loss
-2 of VT's 3 worst losses
-FSU's worst loss (!) - worse than Stetson and Troy, and a neutral-floor game vs. Siena
-ND's second-worst loss (only to FSU)
-Cornell's second-worst loss (they are actually better than us, that season opener was not a fluke)

Hope and pray that QP comes back, Hand shoots the lights out, freshmen are good, and we get an impact player in the portal.

Analytics ruin everything… not because people can’t do math… but because data is selectively culled and weighted. While this manipulation produces something easily digestible (like lists and rankings), the downstream output is corrupted at its source.

For instance, NET does not take into account when you lose a game. So, early season losses at the start of the season when Kentucky freshmen are adjusting count the same as the weeks leading up to the tourney when they are dominating. I understand the troglodyte/failed athletes that proliferate Athletic Director ranks need something simple to understand the world around them (and explain to their woke Presidents). But, NET is every bit as bad a tool as you’d expect the NCAA to create.

HJS {l Wrote}:Analytics ruin everything… not because people can’t do math… but because data is selectively culled and weighted. While this manipulation produces something easily digestible (like lists and rankings), the downstream output is corrupted at its source.

For instance, NET does not take into account when you lose a game. So, early season losses at the start of the season when Kentucky freshmen are adjusting count the same as the weeks leading up to the tourney when they are dominating. I understand the troglodyte/failed athletes that proliferate Athletic Director ranks need something simple to understand the world around them (and explain to their woke Presidents). But, NET is every bit as bad a tool as you’d expect the NCAA to create.

The NET is a really stupid way to evaluate NIT teams. It's super lazy by the committee. BC would destroy a whole bunch of the teams I've seen listed in this thread at the moment.

innocentbystander {l Wrote}:If BC beats Georgia Tech and Wake Forest beats Syracuse, then BC is a #9 seed in the ACC tournament. The #9 seed gets a fucking FIRST ROUND BYE. Huge difference between #10 and #9. So this team has somehow found a way to have something to play for.

BC just needs to win. BC would win a tiebreaker over Wake. BC split with Wake, both lost to Pitt and Miami and BC beat UVA where Wake did not.

a. When two teams are tied in the standings, regular season head-to-head results are used as the tiebreaker.

b. If the tied teams played each other twice in the regular season and split their games, then each team’s record against the team occupying the highest position in the final regular-season standings (or in case of a tie for first place, the next highest position in the regular-season standings) and then continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.

claver2010 {l Wrote}:overcame a teddy valentine special

This was one of the worst calls I've ever seen in a basketball game and caused me to absolutely lose it in my living room on a random Tuesday Night. JZ probably has bruises across his forearms from that hit!

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

innocentbystander {l Wrote}:If BC beats Georgia Tech and Wake Forest beats Syracuse, then BC is a #9 seed in the ACC tournament. The #9 seed gets a fucking FIRST ROUND BYE. Huge difference between #10 and #9. So this team has somehow found a way to have something to play for.

BC just needs to win. BC would win a tiebreaker over Wake. BC split with Wake, both lost to Pitt and Miami and BC beat UVA where Wake did not.

a. When two teams are tied in the standings, regular season head-to-head results are used as the tiebreaker.

b. If the tied teams played each other twice in the regular season and split their games, then each team’s record against the team occupying the highest position in the final regular-season standings (or in case of a tie for first place, the next highest position in the regular-season standings) and then continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.

that is an awesome analysis. so either Wake or Syracuse win, it doesn't matter, BC's 10 ACC wins gets them the coveted #9 slot. great

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

claver2010 {l Wrote}:overcame a teddy valentine special

This was one of the worst calls I've ever seen in a basketball game and caused me to absolutely lose it in my living room on a random Tuesday Night. JZ probably has bruises across his forearms from that hit!

This.

Although I think QP did charge.

post game presser was interesting (mostly from wake side)

including wake coach talking about how he recruited "justin" zachary

Primetime {l Wrote}:

BCEagles25 {l Wrote}:The injury what-ifs are big for this year but its nice to have a coach that doesn’t rest on easy excuses. Good shit Earl. Winning vs GaTech guarantees us CBI/NIT no? Even if there’s an ACCT 0-1, that’s 16-16.

ACC road wins have actually been happening and it’s nice

Unfortunately if we do not win the ACCT we are done for the year. The CBI is a pay-for-play tournament ($50k entry) - BC doesn't do that.

The NIT is almost certainly out of play as well. Look at BC's NET rating (165 as I'm typing this before Wake result computed):

https://bballnet.com/teams/boston-college

Quad 4 losses are almost unforgiveable and would nearly sink a resume alone. We have two. Our Q2/Q3 record is not great either. Couple solid wins but straight up got beaten by teams like Nova and Nebraska. Teams like Clemson, Michigan, and UNC are on the NCAA/NIT bubble. Not us.

To put it into perspective, Wake with a NET rating of 84 is probably on the outside of the NIT. We are their worst loss of the season (currently Q4, will be Q3 when we rise above NET 160 after tonight's W).

https://bballnet.com/teams/wake-forest

To play this out: a Q4 win vs. GT; a Round 2 Q2 win vs. Wake; and two Q1 wins in the Quarters and Semis, followed by a loss in the ACC final: 19-16 (13-11 ACC), with 5 ranked wins on the year...all to not make the NIT.

It’s not bad analysis, but NET is hugely flawed in that it worships certain conferences. The top teams I understand, but where it fails is at the bottom of good conferences.

The goddamned Butler bulldogs are 2-10 in Q1, 2-4 in Q2, are 14-16 and are… #128?
LSU is 1-10 Q1 and 13-16 and they’re 3 spots ahead of BC?
USF of 2007 fame is 13-16 (best win… #76 UCF?) including 1-4 Q2 and is 7 spots ahead of BC?
UMass Lowell has 5 Q4 losses, hasn’t beaten a Q1 or Q2 team, and those cucks are #122.

I also don’t think Wake is on the NIT bubble at all. 68 teams make the big tourney. No way the 16th team out isn’t one of the 32 in it.

Logitano {l Wrote}:Good things happen when you win the second half. (TM Logo Enterprises)

I am no longer sorry for what is going to happen to you. Say hi to Jack Goodyear when you get there.

BCEagles25 {l Wrote}:

Primetime {l Wrote}:

BCEagles25 {l Wrote}:The injury what-ifs are big for this year but its nice to have a coach that doesn’t rest on easy excuses. Good shit Earl. Winning vs GaTech guarantees us CBI/NIT no? Even if there’s an ACCT 0-1, that’s 16-16.

ACC road wins have actually been happening and it’s nice

Unfortunately if we do not win the ACCT we are done for the year. The CBI is a pay-for-play tournament ($50k entry) - BC doesn't do that.

The NIT is almost certainly out of play as well. Look at BC's NET rating (165 as I'm typing this before Wake result computed):

https://bballnet.com/teams/boston-college

Quad 4 losses are almost unforgiveable and would nearly sink a resume alone. We have two. Our Q2/Q3 record is not great either. Couple solid wins but straight up got beaten by teams like Nova and Nebraska. Teams like Clemson, Michigan, and UNC are on the NCAA/NIT bubble. Not us.

To put it into perspective, Wake with a NET rating of 84 is probably on the outside of the NIT. We are their worst loss of the season (currently Q4, will be Q3 when we rise above NET 160 after tonight's W).

https://bballnet.com/teams/wake-forest

To play this out: a Q4 win vs. GT; a Round 2 Q2 win vs. Wake; and two Q1 wins in the Quarters and Semis, followed by a loss in the ACC final: 19-16 (13-11 ACC), with 5 ranked wins on the year...all to not make the NIT.

It’s not bad analysis, but NET is hugely flawed in that it worships certain conferences. The top teams I understand, but where it fails is at the bottom of good conferences.

The goddamned Butler bulldogs are 2-10 in Q1, 2-4 in Q2, are 14-16 and are… #128?
LSU is 1-10 Q1 and 13-16 and they’re 3 spots ahead of BC?
USF of 2007 fame is 13-16 (best win… #76 UCF?) including 1-4 Q2 and is 7 spots ahead of BC?
UMass Lowell has 5 Q4 losses, hasn’t beaten a Q1 or Q2 team, and those cucks are #122.

I also don’t think Wake is on the NIT bubble at all. 68 teams make the big tourney. No way the 16th team out isn’t one of the 32 in it.

Unfortunately math isn't a simple 84-68 = 16 to calculate how many teams out Wake is. For the Field of 68, you usually need a KenPom (~NET) of about 50 to be safe given small conference auto bids. For the NIT, they automatically take all conference #1 seeds who don't make the NCAA (i.e. lose in their conference tourney).

This NIT bracketologist has Wake in the NIT's "First Four Out":
https://thebarkingcrow.com/nit-bracketo ... march-1st/

I will give you that the NET does reward SOS: unfortunately for BC our OOC was awful and even our wins against bad teams were mediocre performances.

What is actually frustrating is that it doesn't reward improvement over the course of a season, or key injuries (e.g. us getting Post back, or Wake losing a key guy for the rest of the season)

Primetime {l Wrote}:

BCEagles25 {l Wrote}:

Primetime {l Wrote}:

BCEagles25 {l Wrote}:The injury what-ifs are big for this year but its nice to have a coach that doesn’t rest on easy excuses. Good shit Earl. Winning vs GaTech guarantees us CBI/NIT no? Even if there’s an ACCT 0-1, that’s 16-16.

ACC road wins have actually been happening and it’s nice

Unfortunately if we do not win the ACCT we are done for the year. The CBI is a pay-for-play tournament ($50k entry) - BC doesn't do that.

The NIT is almost certainly out of play as well. Look at BC's NET rating (165 as I'm typing this before Wake result computed):

https://bballnet.com/teams/boston-college

Quad 4 losses are almost unforgiveable and would nearly sink a resume alone. We have two. Our Q2/Q3 record is not great either. Couple solid wins but straight up got beaten by teams like Nova and Nebraska. Teams like Clemson, Michigan, and UNC are on the NCAA/NIT bubble. Not us.

To put it into perspective, Wake with a NET rating of 84 is probably on the outside of the NIT. We are their worst loss of the season (currently Q4, will be Q3 when we rise above NET 160 after tonight's W).

https://bballnet.com/teams/wake-forest

To play this out: a Q4 win vs. GT; a Round 2 Q2 win vs. Wake; and two Q1 wins in the Quarters and Semis, followed by a loss in the ACC final: 19-16 (13-11 ACC), with 5 ranked wins on the year...all to not make the NIT.

It’s not bad analysis, but NET is hugely flawed in that it worships certain conferences. The top teams I understand, but where it fails is at the bottom of good conferences.

The goddamned Butler bulldogs are 2-10 in Q1, 2-4 in Q2, are 14-16 and are… #128?
LSU is 1-10 Q1 and 13-16 and they’re 3 spots ahead of BC?
USF of 2007 fame is 13-16 (best win… #76 UCF?) including 1-4 Q2 and is 7 spots ahead of BC?
UMass Lowell has 5 Q4 losses, hasn’t beaten a Q1 or Q2 team, and those cucks are #122.

I also don’t think Wake is on the NIT bubble at all. 68 teams make the big tourney. No way the 16th team out isn’t one of the 32 in it.

Unfortunately math isn't a simple 84-68 = 16 to calculate how many teams out Wake is. For the Field of 68, you usually need a KenPom (~NET) of about 50 to be safe given small conference auto bids. For the NIT, they automatically take all conference #1 seeds who don't make the NCAA (i.e. lose in their conference tourney).

This NIT bracketologist has Wake in the NIT's "First Four Out":
https://thebarkingcrow.com/nit-bracketo ... march-1st/

I will give you that the NET does reward SOS: unfortunately for BC our OOC was awful and even our wins against bad teams were mediocre performances.

What is actually frustrating is that it doesn't reward improvement over the course of a season, or key injuries (e.g. us getting Post back, or Wake losing a key guy for the rest of the season)

This.

Longtime listener, first time caller (this year).

I think we all know we have no real postseason except for the ACCT. The other thing we all know is that the refs will f us in the ACCT, there is no way the ACC will let us win and take out a Clemson or UNC or even Pitt at this point, all of whom would legit be on the bubble if we beat them in the ACCT.

So the ACCT is the dance for BC. Fair enough, it was exciting last year, too, for how deep they went.

The feel-good take away from this season is that Earl has shown, two years in a row now, he gets guys to buy in as the season goes on and they peak at the right time, and there is clearly some actual DI talent on the roster. All of this is a welcome change from Coach Crewcut and that narrow guy before him.

What we need now is a better non-conf start to the year, followed by this development and peak phenomenon. If Post comes back next year and Hastings brings some bruising block play, the dance is not unrealistic even if Hand is not 100%.

If Post does not come back next year, all bets are off tho. Im probably ready too deeply into it, but at the WF post-game presser, MAL was commenting that it was his senior night too, last road regular season conference game, and Post was sitting next to him and did not echo that for himself. Anyone inside baseball on this? What's his NIL bottom dollar? Pass the kitty boys.

Bumpers {l Wrote}:Longtime listener, first time caller (this year).

I think we all know we have no real postseason except for the ACCT. The other thing we all know is that the refs will f us in the ACCT, there is no way the ACC will let us win and take out a Clemson or UNC or even Pitt at this point, all of whom would legit be on the bubble if we beat them in the ACCT.

So the ACCT is the dance for BC. Fair enough, it was exciting last year, too, for how deep they went.

The feel-good take away from this season is that Earl has shown, two years in a row now, he gets guys to buy in as the season goes on and they peak at the right time, and there is clearly some actual DI talent on the roster. All of this is a welcome change from Coach Crewcut and that narrow guy before him.

What we need now is a better non-conf start to the year, followed by this development and peak phenomenon. If Post comes back next year and Hastings brings some bruising block play, the dance is not unrealistic even if Hand is not 100%.

If Post does not come back next year, all bets are off tho. Im probably ready too deeply into it, but at the WF post-game presser, MAL was commenting that it was his senior night too, last road regular season conference game, and Post was sitting next to him and did not echo that for himself. Anyone inside baseball on this? What's his NIL bottom dollar? Pass the kitty boys.

Re: Post, it's a bit concerning to me that he is not participating in the NIL collective/group that the BC players released last week. Have to assume he is keeping his options for next year and that he will get offers from some big name teams for his final year.

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:

Bumpers {l Wrote}:Longtime listener, first time caller (this year).

I think we all know we have no real postseason except for the ACCT. The other thing we all know is that the refs will f us in the ACCT, there is no way the ACC will let us win and take out a Clemson or UNC or even Pitt at this point, all of whom would legit be on the bubble if we beat them in the ACCT.

So the ACCT is the dance for BC. Fair enough, it was exciting last year, too, for how deep they went.

The feel-good take away from this season is that Earl has shown, two years in a row now, he gets guys to buy in as the season goes on and they peak at the right time, and there is clearly some actual DI talent on the roster. All of this is a welcome change from Coach Crewcut and that narrow guy before him.

What we need now is a better non-conf start to the year, followed by this development and peak phenomenon. If Post comes back next year and Hastings brings some bruising block play, the dance is not unrealistic even if Hand is not 100%.

If Post does not come back next year, all bets are off tho. Im probably ready too deeply into it, but at the WF post-game presser, MAL was commenting that it was his senior night too, last road regular season conference game, and Post was sitting next to him and did not echo that for himself. Anyone inside baseball on this? What's his NIL bottom dollar? Pass the kitty boys.

Re: Post, it's a bit concerning to me that he is not participating in the NIL collective/group that the BC players released last week. Have to assume he is keeping his options for next year and that he will get offers from some big name teams for his final year.

International players are prohibited from receiving NIL money. Best news for BC hoops in years.

he was on acc radio last week and described next year as up in the air

i believe due to his visa there are a lot of restrictions on nil

Bunratty {l Wrote}:

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:

Bumpers {l Wrote}:Longtime listener, first time caller (this year).

I think we all know we have no real postseason except for the ACCT. The other thing we all know is that the refs will f us in the ACCT, there is no way the ACC will let us win and take out a Clemson or UNC or even Pitt at this point, all of whom would legit be on the bubble if we beat them in the ACCT.

So the ACCT is the dance for BC. Fair enough, it was exciting last year, too, for how deep they went.

The feel-good take away from this season is that Earl has shown, two years in a row now, he gets guys to buy in as the season goes on and they peak at the right time, and there is clearly some actual DI talent on the roster. All of this is a welcome change from Coach Crewcut and that narrow guy before him.

What we need now is a better non-conf start to the year, followed by this development and peak phenomenon. If Post comes back next year and Hastings brings some bruising block play, the dance is not unrealistic even if Hand is not 100%.

If Post does not come back next year, all bets are off tho. Im probably ready too deeply into it, but at the WF post-game presser, MAL was commenting that it was his senior night too, last road regular season conference game, and Post was sitting next to him and did not echo that for himself. Anyone inside baseball on this? What's his NIL bottom dollar? Pass the kitty boys.

Re: Post, it's a bit concerning to me that he is not participating in the NIL collective/group that the BC players released last week. Have to assume he is keeping his options for next year and that he will get offers from some big name teams for his final year.

International players are prohibited from receiving NIL money. Best news for BC hoops in years.

did not know that. thanks

though, the point still remains that he will get offers to come join bigger programs with championship goals.

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:Analytics ruin everything… not because people can’t do math… but because data is selectively culled and weighted. While this manipulation produces something easily digestible (like lists and rankings), the downstream output is corrupted at its source.

For instance, NET does not take into account when you lose a game. So, early season losses at the start of the season when Kentucky freshmen are adjusting count the same as the weeks leading up to the tourney when they are dominating. I understand the troglodyte/failed athletes that proliferate Athletic Director ranks need something simple to understand the world around them (and explain to their woke Presidents). But, NET is every bit as bad a tool as you’d expect the NCAA to create.

The NET is a really stupid way to evaluate NIT teams. It's super lazy by the committee. BC would destroy a whole bunch of the teams I've seen listed in this thread at the moment.

Based on the results post-adoption, it is easy to see why. The Big10 and SEC were pushing a divorce from the NCAA. This was a concession from the Committee to quell the separation. The reality, however, is delaying the inevitable while making traditional BB conferences like ACC, P12 and Big East to die on the vine… which just strengthens the dual conference offering B10/SEC is going to have. You literally can’t run an organization worse than the NCAA… even if you had Gary Bettman as the Commissioner.

HJS {l Wrote}:

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:Analytics ruin everything… not because people can’t do math… but because data is selectively culled and weighted. While this manipulation produces something easily digestible (like lists and rankings), the downstream output is corrupted at its source.

For instance, NET does not take into account when you lose a game. So, early season losses at the start of the season when Kentucky freshmen are adjusting count the same as the weeks leading up to the tourney when they are dominating. I understand the troglodyte/failed athletes that proliferate Athletic Director ranks need something simple to understand the world around them (and explain to their woke Presidents). But, NET is every bit as bad a tool as you’d expect the NCAA to create.

The NET is a really stupid way to evaluate NIT teams. It's super lazy by the committee. BC would destroy a whole bunch of the teams I've seen listed in this thread at the moment.

Based on the results post-adoption, it is easy to see why. The Big10 and SEC were pushing a divorce from the NCAA. This was a concession from the Committee to quell the separation. The reality, however, is delaying the inevitable while making traditional BB conferences like ACC, P12 and Big East to die on the vine… which just strengthens the dual conference offering B10/SEC is going to have. You literally can’t run an organization worse than the NCAA… even if you had Gary Bettman as the Commissioner.

I think the SEC and the B1G(14-soon-16)TEN combine for more than 53% of ALL tv college sports viewing. There are 351 division-1 college basketball schools but, meh, 32 of them are what matter. Just those soon-to-be 32 schools, 53% of ALL national TV viewing. I believe that is the horrible "metric" that the SEC and the B1G noticed quite some ago, and (obviously) they want to monetize their viewing advantage. The surest way to do that is to EXCLUDE all the others and to ONLY play one another. Fuck everyone else. (And for the record, these two conferences would boot out Vanderbilt and add in Notre Dame in a split second as that would take them to about 55%)

Why be part of the NCAA? Why "share" if they don't have to? This is Briffault's Law and the SEC/B1G is the woman in this college family athletic arrangement. And we all know Briffault's Law.

Moreover, the TV networks don't give a fuck about the NCAA. They care about viewers and paid memberships to pay-for-subscription networks. They care about people who actually WATCH their programming because that is what gets them big bucks for commercials.

Perhaps the NCAA is poorly run. But the NCAA does not OWN or ORDER or COMMAND the athletic departments or the Board of Trustees of these 32 schools. So there really isn't that much the NCAA can do. These schools are free to handle their student athletes anyway they want. At the moment, that is best served by the NCAA but it soon won't be. They just have to obey federal law and Title-IX with their scholarship practices. There is no law forcing them to do business with the NCAA in perpetuity.