Kentucky has 2 Quad 1 wins. A&M remains quad 2
- Thread starter ukhoops1
- Start date
stupidity that a&m is not a quad 1 win with 11-2 conference record.
They played terrible non conference schedule and took really bad losses.
i understand that but you and i can see that they have been playing good ball when they got into conference
If TAMU wins Sat @ Missouri, not an easy game, that would be another Q1 win for them, and likely put them in top 30, giving us a Q1 win. TAMU also has a tough one at Miss St, and then play UT and Bama both at home. They will probably have to win one of those last 2.
Obviously UT is a chance for a Q1 win for us, and I think it helps a little that they just played Bama (& won), so maybe they will have a bit of a let up (or at least maybe not play out of their asses vs us).
Auburn may be tough for that to be a Q1 win, because if we beat them, that drops them. Wins over Vandy & Ole Miss won't help them. So for them to remain a Q1 win if we beat them, they will have to either beat UT or win at Bama.
And then hopefully with the Castleton injury, assuming we beat Florida (a Q1 game), they don't totally hit the skids and lose like 4 of 5 and drop from 51 to 76+.
It hasn't hurt Clemson
Oh my God we’ve got a quad!!!!
Soon well be on the level of Tennessee Basketball!! Thanks Calipari!!
Soon well be on the level of Tennessee Basketball!! Thanks Calipari!!
Good point. Everyone clamoring that so and so became a quad after we played, well state can’t be a quad 1 for long. Honestly I think they’re worse than their record. Definitely gonna lose more games.
I told my son we won this morning when he got up, he was surprised. lol. that's where we are
Am I correct in thinking, for example, if Mississippi State lost every game from now on and dropped a ton, could our win fall to a quad 2 win? Hopefully I explained that.
Not that I'm defending the quality of the formula itself, but it's a computer ranking. So there's no conspiracy or subjectivity involved.
You are. That's not likely to happen to them. But Florida could making our road game with them next week not a Q1, given they are closer to 75 than Miss St and they just lost Castleton
Yes. I guess it depends where teams end the season for what is considered quad 1-4. So Miss St could drop, but on the flip side Texas AM could rise to a Q1.
We don’t all hate it. There’s several who don’t care as long as UK remains with Calipari. Look around, they’ve been crawling out of the woodwork since yesterday.
This bullshit doesn’t matter man. You’re spending too much time looking at insignificant things.
What matters is we’ve already butchered very important records this season; like losing to teams like Kansas, AGAIN. our records are failing, our prestige is falling.
The only thing we should be doing is calling for firings.
Their loss to us dropped them from 40 to 44. If stay top 75 it remains a Q1 win for us.
And their remaining schedule looks pretty easy (TAMU & USC at home, at Ole Miss & Vandy & Missouri). I doubt they do worse than 3-2 in those games, certainly not worse than 2-3. I guess a USC loss at home and 2 more losses could drop them to Q2.
Maybe it's by virtue of not usually being on the bubble and not having to worry as much, but I have some serious reservations about the entire "quad" win/loss system currently in place.
Yeah, I get the South Carolina loss was terrible, but is there any type of reliable metric to compare quad wins and losses? For example, is one single Quad 4 loss better, as bad, or worse than two quad-3 losses? I have no idea. There are arguments for both, but which prevails? How do injuries play a role? They're supposed to be taken into consideration, but are they really, and what impact do they truly have?
Quad 1 wins also don't make a ton of sense to me the more I think about it. It is kind of bizarre that a win at Tennessee is weighted the same as a win against Texas A&M at home (assuming they move into the top 30). That win at Tennessee is one of the best wins by anyone in the country. Conversely, Texas A&M at home is nowhere near as impressive, but still may be weighted the same regardless.
Not to mention, until the dust settles at the end of the year, no team is truly sure of how many different quad wins and losses they have. Maybe I may have missed some sort of guide or explanation, but despite this quad system producing a lot of interesting data, is there any consistency in how the data is evaluated? My guess is no, it is subject to the whims of people on the committee and how they wish to utilize it, but to be fair, I don't know for sure.
Yeah, I get the South Carolina loss was terrible, but is there any type of reliable metric to compare quad wins and losses? For example, is one single Quad 4 loss better, as bad, or worse than two quad-3 losses? I have no idea. There are arguments for both, but which prevails? How do injuries play a role? They're supposed to be taken into consideration, but are they really, and what impact do they truly have?
Quad 1 wins also don't make a ton of sense to me the more I think about it. It is kind of bizarre that a win at Tennessee is weighted the same as a win against Texas A&M at home (assuming they move into the top 30). That win at Tennessee is one of the best wins by anyone in the country. Conversely, Texas A&M at home is nowhere near as impressive, but still may be weighted the same regardless.
Not to mention, until the dust settles at the end of the year, no team is truly sure of how many different quad wins and losses they have. Maybe I may have missed some sort of guide or explanation, but despite this quad system producing a lot of interesting data, is there any consistency in how the data is evaluated? My guess is no, it is subject to the whims of people on the committee and how they wish to utilize it, but to be fair, I don't know for sure.
Last edited:
3 losses and they’re definitely a Q2.
This whole system is stupid. Q1 makes it sound relevant, it’s really not. And they value who’s beaten you more than who you’ve beaten, it’s just stupid.
Mississippi state is not a very good team, period. It doesn’t mean much for our guys as this is Kentucky and that should usually be a 10+ point win for a state team like that.
I hate the whole system.
MissSt had won 5 straight including over TCU. So they would have to totally face plant to drop out if the top 75 being they sit at 44 right behind us and have 3 Quad 1 wins and zero Quad 3 or 4 losses. I doubt they drop 32+ spots this late.
But they have no quad 4 losses.
Lol how long is everyone gonna play in this quad nonsense?
I’m telling y’all it’s just stupid.
Portals and quads…… I miss real college basketball.
makes one wonder about the programmers. Cheating nerds!
My point is that the system is horrifically flawed then. We could play a top team, like Tennessee, and have a strong Q1 win and the next day, their best player could blow a knee and be out. The reverse can also happen.
It seems irrational and arbitrary to award quad wins at the seasons end instead of when the game is played.
No one ever said it made any sense.
At the end of the day, the selection committee just does whatever the hell they want to.
The Quad system is not my criteria, it’s the criteria the committee uses.
I only point out UNC to simply show I can see no reasonable reason they have an NCAA tournament resume, at all. Their best win is against #38 NC St at home. They have lost every opportunity for a big win.
I’m not opining on whether we belong in, though I don’t think a quad 4 loss is as big as having 0 big wins. Either way, objectively at this point I’m not sure what metrics put UNC in the tourney.
