Just out......#25 in basketball

[Willy '06]

Looks like we lost 7 votes in the ESPN poll, but kept our 2 votes in the AP poll. I think the chances that we are out for good are pretty strong now (I guess they already were) considering a 2 win weekend has us losing votes.

[ugarte]

Looks like we lost 7 votes in the ESPN poll, but kept our 2 votes in the AP poll. I think the chances that we are out for good are pretty strong now (I guess they already were) considering a 2 win weekend has us losing votes.

As predicted. We may get some votes back if we win out - including a decisive home court win over Princeton - but we aren't going to be in the top 25 again.

[KeithK]

Looks like we lost 7 votes in the ESPN poll, but kept our 2 votes in the AP poll. I think the chances that we are out for good are pretty strong now (I guess they already were) considering a 2 win weekend has us losing votes.

As predicted. We may get some votes back if we win out - including a decisive home court win over Princeton - but we aren't going to be in the top 25 again.

I don't know. Does basketball have a post tournament poll like hockey does? If so we might crack the top 25 if we win a couple of games.

[CM cWo 44]

Looks like we lost 7 votes in the ESPN poll, but kept our 2 votes in the AP poll. I think the chances that we are out for good are pretty strong now (I guess they already were) considering a 2 win weekend has us losing votes.

As predicted. We may get some votes back if we win out - including a decisive home court win over Princeton - but we aren't going to be in the top 25 again.

I don't know. Does basketball have a post tournament poll like hockey does? If so we might crack the top 25 if we win a couple of games.

Not sure if this was a joke or not, but either way, LOL

[YankeeLobo]

Losing to a 300+ RPI team in the 21st ranked conference in mid February, yeah that's usually the recipe for going unranked the rest of the season.  Would have been nice to stay in the rankings, especially since you can easily climb week to week as long as you win games you should win (cough!Penn!cough!), regardless of how good you really are.  Cornell easily could've climbed to #15.  But hey, if the lack of ranking helps drive them towards the tournament, then great.  Rankings don't mean sh*t, but they are huge for a program like Cornell that needs all the help it can get when recruiting against other schools.

[Swampy]

Losing to a 300+ RPI team in the 21st ranked conference in mid February, yeah that's usually the recipe for going unranked the rest of the season.  Would have been nice to stay in the rankings, especially since you can easily climb week to week as long as you win games you should win (cough!Penn!cough!), regardless of how good you really are.  Cornell easily could've climbed to #15.  But hey, if the lack of ranking helps drive them towards the tournament, then great.  Rankings don't mean sh*t, but they are huge for a program like Cornell that needs all the help it can get when recruiting against other schools.

The silver lining on this cloud is that it seems to have moved Cornell out of the dreaded 8-9 slot in most of the bracket projections. An 11 seed would put us against a 6 and a 3. Given how strong the top eight or so teams are this year, the 3 seeds would be teams 9-12 if things go as expected.

Of course we have to get invited to the dance for any of this to matter.

[Jordan 04]

Losing to a 300+ RPI team in the 21st ranked conference in mid February, yeah that's usually the recipe for going unranked the rest of the season.  Would have been nice to stay in the rankings, especially since you can easily climb week to week as long as you win games you should win (cough!Penn!cough!), regardless of how good you really are.  Cornell easily could've climbed to #15.  But hey, if the lack of ranking helps drive them towards the tournament, then great.  Rankings don't mean sh*t, but they are huge for a program like Cornell that needs all the help it can get when recruiting against other schools.

The silver lining on this cloud is that it seems to have moved Cornell out of the dreaded 8-9 slot in most of the bracket projections. An 11 seed would put us against a 6 and a 3. Given how strong the top eight or so teams are this year, the 3 seeds would be teams 9-12 if things go as expected.

Of course we have to get invited to the dance for any of this to matter.

I've seen this written or talked about a lot. I don't buy it; not for one second. To put it quite simply, this Cornell team has been smashed by their first round opponents the last 2 years. (No moral victories for hanging around for a half against Mizzou when you're run out of the gym in the 2nd half).  

The goal should be to win a tournament game. Analyzing potential sweet-sixteen clinching games for a team that hasn't even sniffed a victory in the NCAA's is putting the cart well before the horse. A seeding in the 8-9 slot would have given us a much better chance at that elusive tournament victory than does an 11 or 12 seed. Furthermore, a potential matchup vs. a #1 seed in the 2nd round could have provided a very valuable national recruiting spotlight for the Big Red.

[billhoward]

Isn't it okay to dream? Like dream about what's the best path into the round of 16 even if you're not certain you'll survive the first game? Anyway, unlike the previous two years, we do have a chance to go more than one round.

[YankeeLobo]

I agree with Jordan.  Let them win a game before we start talking about the Sweet 16.  As things stand we're already going to be a heavy underdog against whichever team we're slotted against in the first round.  That said, I agree with billhoward in that we'll get a more favorable second round matchup if we are a lower seed.  Big 6 bubble teams tend to got slotted in the 7-10 area, while upstart mid-majors, by merit of their gaudier W-L records, often get up to the 4 to 6 spots.  I'd much rather play an upstart mid major (Northern Iowa, Butler, etc.) than a more athletic team from the ACC or Big East like Maryland or UConn.

[RichH]

Losing to a 300+ RPI team in the 21st ranked conference in mid February, yeah that's usually the recipe for going unranked the rest of the season.  Would have been nice to stay in the rankings, especially since you can easily climb week to week as long as you win games you should win (cough!Penn!cough!), regardless of how good you really are.  Cornell easily could've climbed to #15.  But hey, if the lack of ranking helps drive them towards the tournament, then great.  Rankings don't mean sh*t, but they are huge for a program like Cornell that needs all the help it can get when recruiting against other schools.

The silver lining on this cloud is that it seems to have moved Cornell out of the dreaded 8-9 slot in most of the bracket projections. An 11 seed would put us against a 6 and a 3. Given how strong the top eight or so teams are this year, the 3 seeds would be teams 9-12 if things go as expected.

Of course we have to get invited to the dance for any of this to matter.

Not only that, but with all the media coverage and talk about this CU team, we're much less likely to be an "unknown quantity" to a top team/coach.  A lot more is known about our players, style, and strengths than in past years. Not to say anyone in the tournament is going to take any game lightly, but a lot of the prep work for us is out there now.  You hear a lot of people saying that we're "dangerous."

I've seen this written or talked about a lot. I don't buy it; not for one second. To put it quite simply, this Cornell team has been smashed by their first round opponents the last 2 years. (No moral victories for hanging around for a half against Mizzou when you're run out of the gym in the 2nd half).  

The goal should be to win a tournament game. Analyzing potential sweet-sixteen clinching games for a team that hasn't even sniffed a victory in the NCAA's is putting the cart well before the horse. A seeding in the 8-9 slot would have given us a much better chance at that elusive tournament victory than does an 11 or 12 seed. Furthermore, a potential matchup vs. a #1 seed in the 2nd round could have provided a very valuable national recruiting spotlight for the Big Red.

[billhoward]

Ought to be weight given to quality losses. Kansas for sure, Syracuse possibly.

[ugarte]

Ought to be weight given to quality losses. Kansas for sure, Syracuse possibly.

There is. It comes up in the discussion. Basketball seeds and bids aren't mechanical like hockey/lax. It will help but only so much. Those losses should keep the team from being a 14 just like the Penn loss will keep them from being a 9.

[YankeeLobo]

Ought to be weight given to quality losses. Kansas for sure, Syracuse possibly.

There is. It comes up in the discussion. Basketball seeds and bids aren't mechanical like hockey/lax. It will help but only so much. Those losses should keep the team from being a 14 just like the Penn loss will keep them from being a 9.

I didn't know that the Committee looks at quality losses.  As I understand it, they look at QUALITY wins and BAD losses.  There are too many teams in the field fighting for seeding or a spot in the tourney for the committee to worry about who lost to Kansas by 5 pts during the course of the year.  Plenty of teams have bad losses.  If that's the case, San Diego State should be get in because they lost a bunch of close games to good teams.

That said, the Kansas loss is really what propelled this team into the national spotlight.  It will help, if only because of the impression it left with selection committee members, but officially I don't believe the Committee weighs quality losses (IMO no such thing as one) in the selection process.  I could be wrong though...

[Trotsky]

officially I don't believe the Committee weighs quality losses (IMO no such thing as one) in the selection process.  I could be wrong though...

I guess they do indirectly to the extent that it gooses the SOS.

[semsox]

Ought to be weight given to quality losses. Kansas for sure, Syracuse possibly.

There is. It comes up in the discussion. Basketball seeds and bids aren't mechanical like hockey/lax. It will help but only so much. Those losses should keep the team from being a 14 just like the Penn loss will keep them from being a 9.

I didn't know that the Committee looks at quality losses.  As I understand it, they look at QUALITY wins and BAD losses.  There are too many teams in the field fighting for seeding or a spot in the tourney for the committee to worry about who lost to Kansas by 5 pts during the course of the year.  Plenty of teams have bad losses.  If that's the case, San Diego State should be get in because they lost a bunch of close games to good teams.

That said, the Kansas loss is really what propelled this team into the national spotlight.  It will help, if only because of the impression it left with selection committee members, but officially I don't believe the Committee weighs quality losses (IMO no such thing as one) in the selection process.  I could be wrong though...

I'm not sure this is right.  I'm pretty sure the committee literally takes every piece of evidence available in order to make and seed the field.  It's why George Mason got a seed a few years ago despite not having as strong a profile as some of the others left out.  It's why injuries to players can knock down a team's seed if it occurs late in the season, or conversely, why some teams can get higher seeds when they have players returning to health despite struggling without them.