Record: 20-8
Big 12: 9-6
SOS: 74
RPI: 55
KenPom: 46
BPI: 47
Good wins: vs. TCU, @Baylor, @UT (vs. OU is close)
Bad Losses: None, Tulsa RPI up to 78
To me, K-State is an 8-seed right now.
I'm really not just saying this because it benefits K-State, but I think the committee needs to be careful with the computer metrics in a situation like this. Texas, for example, is still ahead of K-State in all three of these rankings despite being swept by the Wildcats and three games behind them in apples to apples league play. I think the non-league is important and should matter, but what's done in an 18-game, round robin conference format is a much better indicator of who a better team is than any computer formula. I'm not saying seeds and teams should be picked just based off conference standings. But, when a gap is so large in the sense of overall record, conference standing, etc... that's what should end up mattering more.
Big 12: 9-6
SOS: 74
RPI: 55
KenPom: 46
BPI: 47
Good wins: vs. TCU, @Baylor, @UT (vs. OU is close)
Bad Losses: None, Tulsa RPI up to 78
To me, K-State is an 8-seed right now.
I'm really not just saying this because it benefits K-State, but I think the committee needs to be careful with the computer metrics in a situation like this. Texas, for example, is still ahead of K-State in all three of these rankings despite being swept by the Wildcats and three games behind them in apples to apples league play. I think the non-league is important and should matter, but what's done in an 18-game, round robin conference format is a much better indicator of who a better team is than any computer formula. I'm not saying seeds and teams should be picked just based off conference standings. But, when a gap is so large in the sense of overall record, conference standing, etc... that's what should end up mattering more.
