Blind Resume: Conference's Get Bids, Not Teams?

[MacabreMob]

Just for fun!

Here is a blind resume test....

Tell me who gets in. Maybe both. What seeds would they get?

Resume #1

Overall Record: 18-13
Conference Record/Place: 9-9/tied 5th
RPI: 58
SOS: 37
Conf RPI: 2
Conf Trny Record: 0-1, L as #6 seed
W/L vs 1-25 RPI: 1-6
W/L vs 1-50: 4-9 (home vs 14 in-conference, home vs 37 in-conf, road vs 37 in-conf, road vs 50 in OT non-conf)
W/L vs 51-100: 4-2
W/L vs 101-200: 4-2
W/L vs 201+: 6-0
Last 12: 6-6
Road Record: 5-8
Neutral Court Record: 0-2
Vs Auto Qualifiers in NCAA: 1-2
Vs NCAA Teams: 5-9

Resume #2

Overall Record: 20-8
Conference Record/Place: 12-6/tied 2nd
RPI: 21
SOS: 46
Conf RPI: 6
Conf Trny Record: 0-1, L as #3 seed
W/L vs 1-25 RPI: 1-2
W/L vs 1-50: 4-8 (road @ 25 in-conference, home vs 29 in-conf, home vs 33 in-conf, home vs 39 in-conf) {best non-con win @ 53}
W/L vs 51-100: 1-0
W/L vs 101-200: 10-0
W/L vs 201+: 5-0
Last 12: 8-4
Road Record: 8-5
Neutral Court Record: 0-0
Vs Auto Qualifiers in NCAA: 3-1
Vs NCAA Teams: 5-7

[Stryker]

I would always pick number 2 with those stats.

[pfunk880]

Number 2.

[MacabreMob]

I will reveal the teams and how they got seeded tomorrow.

[Tulsa Brave]

#1 should never have gotten in and not only did they get in, but their seed was ridiculous.

#2 is not from this season...I finally figured out who it was...

[tornado]

Barry Hinson would easily get the right answer on this one

[MacabreMob]

Guess I can't fool all you guys....

Resume #1

9 Seeded Oregon in 2008

Resume #2

Missouri State in 2006 that got a 2 seed in the NIT

[Bravesfan]

I could see a case for Oregon (after some bubble teams and MSU of course). But an 8 seed? Maybe a 12 or 13 at best. Typical BCS bias there.

[TheAsianSensation]

Be careful - in 2006, the cutline for at-large teams was stricter than it was in 2008.

MSU 2006 would've made the 2008 field. You can't assume BCS bias from this example just because comparing resumes of different years isn't fair.

[georgethedog]

Be careful - in 2006, the cutline for at-large teams was stricter than it was in 2008.

MSU 2006 would've made the 2008 field. You can't assume BCS bias from this example just because comparing resumes of different years isn't fair.

Sure, but when you have a good looking redhead as your avatar you can say whatever you want!!!

[pfunk880]

Be careful - in 2006, the cutline for at-large teams was stricter than it was in 2008.

MSU 2006 would've made the 2008 field. You can't assume BCS bias from this example just because comparing resumes of different years isn't fair.

Very true. The bubble this year was extremely soft. I don't think anyone left out had a legitimate gripe.