• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Danny Manning Credibility Watch

I don't think he was saying that Manning was near the coach that Tomlin is, just that his philosophy tends to be the same.
 
Shorty said:
I have a nagging feeling we are going to rue the Clemson loss even more come March.
Click to expand...

If it's the difference between NCAA and NIT, that means we're on the bubble, which means the season was an unmitigated success (especially after our start to ACC play).
 
Amazing the difference it makes in so-called "coaching" when the team makes free throws down the stretch and handles the basketball better! Coaches can't make the plays on the court and when we make the dumb passes we seem to make at times, it just doesn't help! Last night we limited our turnovers to 9 and shot 27-33 from the line! That will win you a lot of games and make any coach look better. Like Coach Manning said way earlier, the first thing he had to do was recruit better shooters and he has. By the time they get to college, there is not much improving on their shooting skills [just the shots they take]
 
Shorty said:
I have a nagging feeling we are going to rue the Clemson loss even more come March.
Click to expand...

Yeah if we get to 8-10 by beating State twice, Pitt, Cuse, BC and GT I could see that game keeping us out.

The only way we get in without beating a top 25 team is throwing in a win against VT and then winning our first game in Brooklyn against a fellow bubble team. That would probably put us around 30 in KP, .500 in ACC, ~20 in RPI and no bad losses. In that case I think the committee would have to ignore us going 0-fer against top 25 teams.
 
RChildress107 said:
The only way we get in without beating a top 25 team is throwing in a win against VT and then winning our first game in Brooklyn against a fellow bubble team. That would probably put us around 30 in KP, .500 in ACC, ~20 in RPI and no bad losses. In that case I think the committee would have to ignore us going 0-fer against top 25 teams.
Click to expand...

I can't really see a team with that resume getting left out, TBH.

Our SOS is gonna be silly good non-conf and conf. That weighs heavily. As a result I don't think our goose would be cooked at even 8-10. Would be harder, for sure, but not impossible.

Will need to pick up some RPI top 50 wins -- currently we've beaten every non-top 50 team we've played, and lost to every top 50 team we've played. But to get to 8-10 or 9-9 that would surely occur
 
Last edited:
Syracuse last year is a similar example to us.

They went 19-12 (9-9) against the 17th toughest schedule. Only had two top 20 wins all year. They made the tourney and made the Final Four.

I think we would get in at 18-12 (8-10) if we win all we are supposed to and lose all we are supposed to.
 
CantStandYa said:
Credit where credit is due. We had a sound plan on both sides of the ball last night and Manning managed a difficult foul situation exceptionally well. Collins was superb in the way he played careful, but not loose, defense with his fouls late in the second half, and that's a credit to both him and the staff. We withstood a number of rallies from a talented Miami team, but never let them get closer than six (and often responded with rallies of our own). The latter was certainly missing from the FSU and Clemson debacles.

I'd like to see if the team can translate the positives from last night (and the second half of the UNC game) to a road atmosphere. We have a perfect opportunity to do so this weekend. Maybe this isn't the same old Wake Forest team that can't win on the road, or maybe it is.

On a completely different subject, that game was near unwatchable. Every trip down the floor, for both offenses, seemed to result in a whistle. If that's what college basketball is turning into, I might have to suck it up and check out the NBA.
Click to expand...

NCAA needs to address this in the offseason. The point of emphasis on calling fouls close on cutting and dribble penetration is making the game almost unwatchable. Who wants to watch a FT shooting competition with no flow?
 
Deacsfan27 said:
Syracuse last year is a similar example to us.

They went 19-12 (9-9) against the 17th toughest schedule. Only had two top 20 wins all year. They made the tourney and made the Final Four.

I think we would get in at 18-12 (8-10) if we win all we are supposed to and lose all we are supposed to.
Click to expand...

18-12 would be 9-9 in conference. Perhaps if we go 17-13 (8-10) and win a game or two in the ACCT we get in. Bottom line is that we need at least 2 ACC road wins, probably 3, given the Clemson loss.
 
'cuse did have 5 RPI top 50 wins. However some of their other numbers were worse -- not sure doof if you're using Kenpom numbers but 'cuse's nitty-gritty overall SOS was 39 and their non-conf SOS was 122. Wake's are currently 4th and 15th.

A better comp may be Pitt last year. They only won 2 RPI top 50 games (@ ND and vs. Duke), played the 183rd non-conf SOS, went 9-9 in conference, yet made the field as a 10 seed
 
wsc8521s said:
I can't really see a team with that resume getting left out, TBH.

Our SOS is gonna be silly good non-conf and conf. That weighs heavily. As a result I don't think our goose would be cooked at even 8-10. Would be harder, for sure, but not impossible.

Will need to pick up some RPI top 50 wins -- currently we've beaten every non-top 50 team we've played, and lost to every top 50 team we've played. But to get to 8-10 or 9-9 that would surely occur
Click to expand...

Does anyone know how much the committee still relies on RPI vs more sophisticated rankings like Kenpom?
 
Wake's OOC SOS was much more difficult than Pitt last year. It comes down to whether or not teams are rewarded for playing very good teams on neutral and road sites (both OOC or in conference) or winning them. On the extremes it doesn't matter but if a bubble team loses 14 games because it plays in one of the hardest conferences in the country and all the losses are to top 50 teams, should they be kept out because they struggled heavily against top teams but beat everyone around and below them - indicating that they likely played to their position (roughly the 35-40th best team in the nation)?
 
wsc8521s said:
'cuse did have 5 RPI top 50 wins. However some of their other numbers were worse -- not sure doof if you're using Kenpom numbers but 'cuse's nitty-gritty overall SOS was 39 and their non-conf SOS was 122. Wake's are currently 4th and 15th.

A better comp may be Pitt last year. They only won 2 RPI top 50 games (@ ND and vs. Duke), played the 183rd non-conf SOS, went 9-9 in conference, yet made the field as a 10 seed
Click to expand...

I think we'd still need to win a game in the ACC tourney if we go 8-10. And if that win is against BC or GT (though I think that's unlikely given how the seeding is likely to work out) I'd be very nervous. It also won't help that we finish @Clemson, @ Duke, Pitt, UL, @VT and could be looking at a 1-4 finish down the stretch.

I think there's an outside chance that this team could get hot down the stretch as it's confidence in closing out games grows. If that happens we could be looking at a 20 win team coming out of the ACC tournament.
 
We must win out at home, which would give us two top-20 (or better) wins against Duke and Louisville. Win 2 on the road (out of NCSU, SU, BC, VT) and we go 9-9. Pretty simple and not an easy task, but we have improved throughout ACC play and should continue to improve.
 
Buttermaker said:
NCAA needs to address this in the offseason. The point of emphasis on calling fouls close on cutting and dribble penetration is making the game almost unwatchable. Who wants to watch a FT shooting competition with no flow?
Click to expand...

I agree but I'm not sure the NCAA is interested in revising. From what I remember, the plan was to suffer through some bad basketball and eventually the coaches and players would adjust and then there would be a much more free-flowing offensive product. Whether that's true or not, who knows...but a 75 minute second half is pretty miserable.
 
Here are the teams we've lost to, by current KP ranking (Wake is #36):

#2 Villanova (18-1)
#5 UVA (14-3)
#6 UNC (17-3)
#18 FSU (17-2)
#25 Xavier (13-5)
#30 Clemson (11-6)
#31 Northwestern (15-4)

Our best win: #34 Miami-FL (12-5)

And for what it's worth, by RPI (Wake is #24):

#1 Villanova (18-1)
#9 FSU (17-2)
#10 UNC (17-3)
#16 UVA (14-3)
#21 Xavier (13-5)
#39 Northwestern (15-4)
#42 Clemson (11-6)

Our best win: #57 Charleston (14-4)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top