BC: 79% Probable for the Dance

[Art Vandelay]

Right now BC and Harvard are back to back in the RPI - with BC at 43 and Harvard at 44.

If the RPI stays close (5 - 10 slots) and Princeton wins the Ivy, I can see Harvard getting in over BC. The head to head win will give the committee justification to make the Ivy a 2 bid conference. Which, I think they would have a predisposition to do.

I did notice that too, however one would think that by the time the tourney comes around the RPI will change significantly in BC's favor. I really can't imagine the Ivy league getting 2 bids.

Pedro I was replying to Eepstein when you posted, but same question to you? If the RPI is close you don't think the committee would like to make the Ivy a two bid conference? Makes for novelty every once in a while, and allows the committe to say that a deserving outlier from a non Tier 1 conference can make it.

Dickie V would be all over the Ivy's Baby!

No, I don't, and no, I don't think Harvard's RPI will stay that high. Your point is a valid one, but I don't think the NCAA cares that much about the Ivies. If this were the OVC or the WCC, then you might have something.

Harvard only has 6 games left and assuming they win most of those, which they should) how much do you think their RPI will drop? After UNC we don't play anyone that really helps our RPI either. If we endup with close to the same RPI as Harvard I could see them getting in over us.

[NotoriousOrange]

I don't think Harvard's RPI will stay that high either because the Ivy League is not very good.

But if it is head to head with BC for the final slot, & they are within 5-10 RPI - the committee looks at this year's 9 point loss at home and remembers last year's 7 point loss - I think Harvard gets the nod

[NotoriousOrange]

Right now BC and Harvard are back to back in the RPI - with BC at 43 and Harvard at 44.

If the RPI stays close (5 - 10 slots) and Princeton wins the Ivy, I can see Harvard getting in over BC. The head to head win will give the committee justification to make the Ivy a 2 bid conference. Which, I think they would have a predisposition to do.

I did notice that too, however one would think that by the time the tourney comes around the RPI will change significantly in BC's favor. I really can't imagine the Ivy league getting 2 bids.

Pedro I was replying to Eepstein when you posted, but same question to you? If the RPI is close you don't think the committee would like to make the Ivy a two bid conference? Makes for novelty every once in a while, and allows the committe to say that a deserving outlier from a non Tier 1 conference can make it.

Dickie V would be all over the Ivy's Baby!

No, I don't, and no, I don't think Harvard's RPI will stay that high. Your point is a valid one, but I don't think the NCAA cares that much about the Ivies. If this were the OVC or the WCC, then you might have something.

The Ivy League is not highly rated - but I think the committee would assist 4 "Brand" names from the conference whenever possible. Those four are:

Penn
Princeton
Harvard
Yale

You could argue Cornell based on last year but I don't think they get the push like the others do

[pick6pedro]

Right now BC and Harvard are back to back in the RPI - with BC at 43 and Harvard at 44.

If the RPI stays close (5 - 10 slots) and Princeton wins the Ivy, I can see Harvard getting in over BC. The head to head win will give the committee justification to make the Ivy a 2 bid conference. Which, I think they would have a predisposition to do.

I did notice that too, however one would think that by the time the tourney comes around the RPI will change significantly in BC's favor. I really can't imagine the Ivy league getting 2 bids.

Pedro I was replying to Eepstein when you posted, but same question to you? If the RPI is close you don't think the committee would like to make the Ivy a two bid conference? Makes for novelty every once in a while, and allows the committe to say that a deserving outlier from a non Tier 1 conference can make it.

Dickie V would be all over the Ivy's Baby!

I guess it really depends on whether you're starting from the aspect of seeding the tournament this moment or whether you are basing on predicitions about how the rest of the season will play out. In the first, I could see it, but in the 2nd (which is how I usually evaluate tourney bids) not at all.

[auggiebc]

We have 4 very winnable games left. That puts us at 10 conference wins and 20 wins overall heading into the ACCT.

It is amazinig to think that on Feb 15th, we still control our own destiny. Beat 4 teams which we are more than capable of beating and we're dancing.

[eepstein0]

Right now BC and Harvard are back to back in the RPI - with BC at 43 and Harvard at 44.

If the RPI stays close (5 - 10 slots) and Princeton wins the Ivy, I can see Harvard getting in over BC. The head to head win will give the committee justification to make the Ivy a 2 bid conference. Which, I think they would have a predisposition to do.

I did notice that too, however one would think that by the time the tourney comes around the RPI will change significantly in BC's favor. I really can't imagine the Ivy league getting 2 bids.

Pedro I was replying to Eepstein when you posted, but same question to you? If the RPI is close you don't think the committee would like to make the Ivy a two bid conference? Makes for novelty every once in a while, and allows the committe to say that a deserving outlier from a non Tier 1 conference can make it.

Dickie V would be all over the Ivy's Baby!

No, I don't, and no, I don't think Harvard's RPI will stay that high. Your point is a valid one, but I don't think the NCAA cares that much about the Ivies. If this were the OVC or the WCC, then you might have something.

+1 on on these, the Ivy League is not getting 2 teams.

[2008Eagle]

Right now BC and Harvard are back to back in the RPI - with BC at 43 and Harvard at 44.

If the RPI stays close (5 - 10 slots) and Princeton wins the Ivy, I can see Harvard getting in over BC. The head to head win will give the committee justification to make the Ivy a 2 bid conference. Which, I think they would have a predisposition to do.

I have a really hard time believing Harvard would get an at-large before BC, even if we lost to them this season.

If the RPI is close you don't think the committee would like to make the Ivy a two bid conference?

Harvard's strength of schedule will be their death. As of today they're 169th and probably going to get worse.

[2001Eagle]

Another mention from ESPN's Pat Forde.....

Now the other end of the bracket
The Minutes examines the one game that could make a bubble team's season and the one game that could break it, for 11 squads from 11 different conferences:

[+] EnlargeAP Photo/Mary Schwalm
The Minutes advises Boston College not to repeat its 32-point pasting at the hands of North Carolina if the Eagles don't want to see their bubble hopes deflated.

Boston College (17)
Record: 16-9 overall, 6-5 in the ACC. Includes a 3-1 record against fellow ACC bubble dwellers Maryland, Clemson and Virginia Tech.

Computers: 43 RPI, 58 Sagarin, 68 Pomeroy.

Make the season with: A win at North Carolina on Saturday. Given the fact that the Eagles lost to the Tar Heels by 32 at home, don't get your hopes up. Beating Virginia Tech on March 1 in Blacksburg for a season sweep would be a solid consolation prize.

Break the season with: Losses to either bad Virginia on the road Feb. 26 or pitiful Wake Forest at home March 6 would be killers.

[eepstein0]

The above is correct. We've got to win the easy games at worst. Maybe steal one of the two tough road games remaining.

[HJS]

We have 4 very winnable games left. That puts us at 10 conference wins and 20 wins overall heading into the ACCT.

It is amazinig to think that on Feb 15th, we still control our own destiny. Beat 4 teams which we are more than capable of beating and we're dancing.

Second or third time I've seen this in the thread. Why is it so "amazing"?

From the "Skinner is out" article from the Globe:
Next season also factored into the timing of this decision, the sources added. Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change, the Eagles will bring back their top four scorers and top five rebounders, with forward Tyler Roche (7.2 points per game) the only graduating senior. With so much experience coming back, and a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November, there’s a strong possibility that the Eagles improve on their 15-16 season. If DeFilippo were inclined to switch coaches, the sources said, it might be more difficult if the Eagles performed well with Skinner in charge next season.
http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/m ... all_coach/

[claver2010]

We have 4 very winnable games left. That puts us at 10 conference wins and 20 wins overall heading into the ACCT.

It is amazinig to think that on Feb 15th, we still control our own destiny. Beat 4 teams which we are more than capable of beating and we're dancing.

Second or third time I've seen this in the thread. Why is it so "amazing"?

From the "Skinner is out" article from the Globe:
Next season also factored into the timing of this decision, the sources added. Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change, the Eagles will bring back their top four scorers and top five rebounders, with forward Tyler Roche (7.2 points per game) the only graduating senior. With so much experience coming back, and a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November, there’s a strong possibility that the Eagles improve on their 15-16 season. If DeFilippo were inclined to switch coaches, the sources said, it might be more difficult if the Eagles performed well with Skinner in charge next season.
http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/m ... all_coach/

There you go.

Edit: There's a limit on font size? Uh oh someone isn't going to be happy...

Edit #2 increased font isn't showing up. Here you go HJS:
1) Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change
2) a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November

[HJS]

We have 4 very winnable games left. That puts us at 10 conference wins and 20 wins overall heading into the ACCT.

It is amazinig to think that on Feb 15th, we still control our own destiny. Beat 4 teams which we are more than capable of beating and we're dancing.

Second or third time I've seen this in the thread. Why is it so "amazing"?

From the "Skinner is out" article from the Globe:
Next season also factored into the timing of this decision, the sources added. Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change, the Eagles will bring back their top four scorers and top five rebounders, with forward Tyler Roche (7.2 points per game) the only graduating senior. With so much experience coming back, and a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November, there’s a strong possibility that the Eagles improve on their 15-16 season. If DeFilippo were inclined to switch coaches, the sources said, it might be more difficult if the Eagles performed well with Skinner in charge next season.
http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/m ... all_coach/

There you go.

Edit: There's a limit on font size? Uh oh someone isn't going to be happy...

Edit #2 increased font isn't showing up. Here you go HJS:
1) Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change
2) a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November

I don't think losing transfers and recruits because of a coaching change means the coach gets a pass (see Rodriguez, Rich). A head coach needs to own every piece of the program he inherits from the moment he arrives. Similarly, if BC makes the NCAAs this year or next, you can't taint it by saying "he did that with Reggie... who wasn't his recruit." If D thought Ravenal or Sanders or Noreen were worth keeping, he should have convinced them to stay. If losing a player like Sanders was addition by subtraction (as many have stated), then we should be better as a result.

[claver2010]

We have 4 very winnable games left. That puts us at 10 conference wins and 20 wins overall heading into the ACCT.

It is amazinig to think that on Feb 15th, we still control our own destiny. Beat 4 teams which we are more than capable of beating and we're dancing.

Second or third time I've seen this in the thread. Why is it so "amazing"?

From the "Skinner is out" article from the Globe:
Next season also factored into the timing of this decision, the sources added. Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change, the Eagles will bring back their top four scorers and top five rebounders, with forward Tyler Roche (7.2 points per game) the only graduating senior. With so much experience coming back, and a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November, there’s a strong possibility that the Eagles improve on their 15-16 season. If DeFilippo were inclined to switch coaches, the sources said, it might be more difficult if the Eagles performed well with Skinner in charge next season.
http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/m ... all_coach/

There you go.

Edit: There's a limit on font size? Uh oh someone isn't going to be happy...

Edit #2 increased font isn't showing up. Here you go HJS:
1) Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change
2) a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November

I don't think losing transfers and recruits because of a coaching change means the coach gets a pass (see Rodriguez, Rich). A head coach needs to own every piece of the program he inherits from the moment he arrives. Similarly, if BC makes the NCAAs this year or next, you can't taint it by saying "he did that with Reggie... who wasn't his recruit." If D thought Ravenal or Sanders or Noreen were worth keeping, he should have convinced them to stay. If losing a player like Sanders was addition by subtraction (as many have stated), then we should be better as a result.

Football is apples and oranges. It would be like Dick Rod losing 40 players off his team and holding him responsible for results in the 1st year (even though most meeechigan fans are stupid enough to do so).

I most certainly think Donahue gets some time to put in his own players and system. The fact that we're in contention for the NCAAs in his first year, with maybe 4 ACC level players on this team is impressive.

[HJS]

We have 4 very winnable games left. That puts us at 10 conference wins and 20 wins overall heading into the ACCT.

It is amazinig to think that on Feb 15th, we still control our own destiny. Beat 4 teams which we are more than capable of beating and we're dancing.

Second or third time I've seen this in the thread. Why is it so "amazing"?

From the "Skinner is out" article from the Globe:
Next season also factored into the timing of this decision, the sources added. Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change, the Eagles will bring back their top four scorers and top five rebounders, with forward Tyler Roche (7.2 points per game) the only graduating senior. With so much experience coming back, and a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November, there’s a strong possibility that the Eagles improve on their 15-16 season. If DeFilippo were inclined to switch coaches, the sources said, it might be more difficult if the Eagles performed well with Skinner in charge next season.
http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/m ... all_coach/

There you go.

Edit: There's a limit on font size? Uh oh someone isn't going to be happy...

Edit #2 increased font isn't showing up. Here you go HJS:
1) Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change
2) a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November

I don't think losing transfers and recruits because of a coaching change means the coach gets a pass (see Rodriguez, Rich). A head coach needs to own every piece of the program he inherits from the moment he arrives. Similarly, if BC makes the NCAAs this year or next, you can't taint it by saying "he did that with Reggie... who wasn't his recruit." If D thought Ravenal or Sanders or Noreen were worth keeping, he should have convinced them to stay. If losing a player like Sanders was addition by subtraction (as many have stated), then we should be better as a result.

Football is apples and oranges. It would be like Dick Rod losing 40 players off his team and holding him responsible for results in the 1st year (even though most meeechigan fans are stupid enough to do so).

I most certainly think Donahue gets some time to put in his own players and system. The fact that we're in contention for the NCAAs in his first year, with maybe 4 ACC level players on this team is impressive.

I don't. The ACC in BB this year is like the NBE was in football. It is comforting that we have seen glimpses of brilliance in his coaching. However, we have also seen flaws. I expected to be competing for the NCAAs with this talent (Jesus Christ... NOT making the NCAAs LAST YEAR with pretty much same talent is what got Skinner fired). Next year, however... is different. If we are legitimately competing for the NCAAs then, it would be an incredible accomplishment.

[twballgame9]

I am in 100% agreement with HJS on all but the next year part. I will reserve judgment on what that team should do until I have seen someone from the new class other than Anderson play.

But I agree that the "this is amazing" shit is overstated, and that anyone who says "Sanders and Ravenel were useless fat loads" and "It's amazing because they are doing it without Sanders and Ravenel!" are utterly contradicting each other.

Fact: Team is going to win about 20 games, exactly what I expected them to win.

Fact: They are doing it without 2 transfers, and thus no depth.

Fact: They are doing it in a horribly down year for the conference.

Opinion: The Don is doing a good job, promising for the future, but certainly nothing amazing.

Opinion: Al did a shitty coaching job last year (though I still think he was fired prematurely for the reason that article articulates - he probably would have won a bunch this year if he had stayed).

[Logitano]

We have 4 very winnable games left. That puts us at 10 conference wins and 20 wins overall heading into the ACCT.

It is amazinig to think that on Feb 15th, we still control our own destiny. Beat 4 teams which we are more than capable of beating and we're dancing.

Second or third time I've seen this in the thread. Why is it so "amazing"?

From the "Skinner is out" article from the Globe:
Next season also factored into the timing of this decision, the sources added. Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change, the Eagles will bring back their top four scorers and top five rebounders, with forward Tyler Roche (7.2 points per game) the only graduating senior. With so much experience coming back, and a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November, there’s a strong possibility that the Eagles improve on their 15-16 season. If DeFilippo were inclined to switch coaches, the sources said, it might be more difficult if the Eagles performed well with Skinner in charge next season.
http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/m ... all_coach/

There you go.

Edit: There's a limit on font size? Uh oh someone isn't going to be happy...

Edit #2 increased font isn't showing up. Here you go HJS:
1) Assuming no players transfer as a result of the coaching change
2) a three-player incoming recruiting class signed in November

I don't think losing transfers and recruits because of a coaching change means the coach gets a pass (see Rodriguez, Rich). A head coach needs to own every piece of the program he inherits from the moment he arrives. Similarly, if BC makes the NCAAs this year or next, you can't taint it by saying "he did that with Reggie... who wasn't his recruit." If D thought Ravenal or Sanders or Noreen were worth keeping, he should have convinced them to stay. If losing a player like Sanders was addition by subtraction (as many have stated), then we should be better as a result.

Football is apples and oranges. It would be like Dick Rod losing 40 players off his team and holding him responsible for results in the 1st year (even though most meeechigan fans are stupid enough to do so).

I most certainly think Donahue gets some time to put in his own players and system. The fact that we're in contention for the NCAAs in his first year, with maybe 4 ACC level players on this team is impressive.

I don't. The ACC in BB this year is like the NBE was in football. It is comforting that we have seen glimpses of brilliance in his coaching. However, we have also seen flaws. I expected to be competing for the NCAAs with this talent (Jesus Christ... NOT making the NCAAs LAST YEAR with pretty much same talent is what got Skinner fired). Next year, however... is different. If we are legitimately competing for the NCAAs then, it would be an incredible accomplishment.

Your argument is fatally flawed. This is not pretty much the same talent as last year. Sanders has not been properly replaced or even close to that and you know this. Some a-holes or I should say OJ wants to say our friend sitting up in fairfield county sucked and we are supremely better off without him is totally wrong. Even if he played at half speed like he did last year we miss that big time. If we were in this exact same spot with captain cheesesteak remaining with the program this would be a much better argument for you to pick. My understanding is that the Don did not tell him to leave or even want him to leave. I could be wrong but Sanders wanted nothing to do with the new staff so he left because they challenged him to try hard. Could the Don have begged him to stay? Possibly but do you want a coach begging that type of person not to make a terrible decision for himself?

[HJS]

Could the Don have begged him to stay? Possibly but do you want a coach begging that type of person not to make a terrible decision for himself?

I want a coach who wins. End of discussion.

[MattTheEagle]

I think our chances at NCAA Tournament are much less than 79% although I am closely following BC hoops and really hope they can either beat UNC or VTech away, but I really think we will pretty much have to win one of those games to make the tournament (in addition to having to winning all of: Miami, Virginia and Wake) anything short of that would require a very good ACC tournament appearance. So while I think it is definitely possible we make the tournament this March, I wouldn't say it is probable.

That being said I am happy with what Donahue is doing with this program and I really really like the direction BC is heading. Donahue basically joined the Eagles heading into the 2010-2011 season with 7 scholarship players and just to get some bodies, had to fill his roster over the summer after everyone had already signed LOIs. As a result, he got two last-minute recruits who did not receive any serious looks from high major schools but needed people to give his team any depth whatsoever. So basically I do not understand how your expectations can be too high when someone takes over the program and goes into the summer season with only 7 scholarship players on your roster especially when all of whom were on the team last (plus 3 others) and the team still only wins 15 games (not to mention outside of Duke the ACC wasn't all that great last year either).

Now as for HJS's embedded argument that Donahue should have kept all his guys from transfers as well as the incoming recruits. Donahue wanted to implement a new system and essentially had high expectations of his players wanting them to put in the extra time to work on their shots, more regular practices and off-season conditioning. A couple players were unwilling to put in the work and Donahue was not willing to compromise/did not want to coach players who did not want to be part of a new brand of BC basketball. Fortunately, at least 6 players quickly embraced what Donahue's new vision for the program and really wanted to work hard at improving. I know at least a couple of players have worked extremely hard on improving their game in the offseason and it shows. From what I have heard, during the year Donahue has been practicing regularly which includes watching about 1 hour of film a day. For the most part, I have seen a great deal of improvement and in a very good way our players who stuck around do not look the same as they did last year. I also believe that Donahue very much wanted Kevin Noreen to stick with the Eagles but ultimately with the flood of national attention, he saw BC as rebuilding with a coach he wasn't too familiar and by decommitting he pretty had the option to go anywhere else in the country. Nonetheless, if I were to guess, I would say Noreen is seriously regretting his decision to abandon BC in favor of West Virginia. Then again, at the time the decision seemed to make logical sense and I do not think there was much Donahue could do to get Noreen to stay other than not allowing him to opt out of his LOI which would have been a poor move hurting the program's reputation and success by keeping someone who did not want to stay with the Eagles and would not have worked to buy into Donahue's system.

If Donahue makes the tournament this year I will be extremely happy. I do not think it is hypocritical when I also say that if Skinner had still been coaching and did not make the tournament this year I would have been very disappointed after 13 years with his 9 veteran players under him and 3 incoming players.

Basically the difference for the 2010-2011 expectations is accounted for by:
Skinner => Donahue
9 veterans => 7 veterans who must adjust to a brand of ball different from the last 2 or 3 years under the old coach
3 incoming freshman for a recruiting class Skinner had all the time in the world to recruit => 2 last-minute recruits


If Donahue had a largely veteran team with his guys I would expect that Donahue not only going to the NCAA tournament but winning at least a game or two in it. Not even going to the NCAA would lead me to be very disappointed (like I would have been with Skinner with his 9 veterans and 3 recruits had he not made the tournament).

I feel like if HJS is going to try to argue this it isn't anything more than a game of devil's advocate.

[twballgame9]

That's a lot of words.