without looking at the numbers, I'd say OUT.
Those numbers are ONLY ONE measurement, and are NOT the deciding factor (or should not be), since some teams get more tries at Quad 1 wins simply based on the conf that they are in (like OSU), while other teams have a hard time even scheduling teams that represent Quad 1. Perhaps Quad 1 PERCENTAGE would be a better measurement than "wins".
Finishing 8th in your conference and losing badly to a team like Texas in post season should be enough to get passed over, IMHO.
but really, what difference does it make, the tournament is so diluted now roughly 1/5th of the 350 D1 teams get invites. Our last invite we got smashed by a non-relevant team, who had one of our former players, while we had the #1 NBA draft player.
..... but then, I am one who firmly believes that NO CONFERENCE should get more than half of their teams into any national tournament. the only way we can truly ever no if those other teams are worthy of a chance is to let them in, since we already know that teams who finished lower than 50% in their conference do not have what it takes.
maybe if those categories above had some "weighting" value assigned to them it might be more relevant. The current way to evaluate worthiness is not adequate. For example, SOS should not be a stand-alone category, it should be paired with your actual record to produce some value. Who cares if you had a tough SOS if you didn't win enough of them. Should is matter more if you had a weaker SOS but won them all? This decision should be converted into some mathematical formula for easy assessment, IMO.
Those numbers are ONLY ONE measurement, and are NOT the deciding factor (or should not be), since some teams get more tries at Quad 1 wins simply based on the conf that they are in (like OSU), while other teams have a hard time even scheduling teams that represent Quad 1. Perhaps Quad 1 PERCENTAGE would be a better measurement than "wins".
Finishing 8th in your conference and losing badly to a team like Texas in post season should be enough to get passed over, IMHO.
but really, what difference does it make, the tournament is so diluted now roughly 1/5th of the 350 D1 teams get invites. Our last invite we got smashed by a non-relevant team, who had one of our former players, while we had the #1 NBA draft player.
..... but then, I am one who firmly believes that NO CONFERENCE should get more than half of their teams into any national tournament. the only way we can truly ever no if those other teams are worthy of a chance is to let them in, since we already know that teams who finished lower than 50% in their conference do not have what it takes.
maybe if those categories above had some "weighting" value assigned to them it might be more relevant. The current way to evaluate worthiness is not adequate. For example, SOS should not be a stand-alone category, it should be paired with your actual record to produce some value. Who cares if you had a tough SOS if you didn't win enough of them. Should is matter more if you had a weaker SOS but won them all? This decision should be converted into some mathematical formula for easy assessment, IMO.