Especially a 2OT game against the runner up who also barely lost, and we will actually be rewarded as a "good loss". This was discussed nationally at length regarding the Gonzaga/Creighton (I believe) OT game that the Zags lost. Either last year or the year before. The "experts" all agreed that the loss would have zero bearing on the two seeds because the committee would see that both teams are essentially equal. (The fact that it was away for the Zags was critical in that discussion. They said that was worth one point.)

This is why SOS is so important and why the best conferences put so many double digit loss teams in after beating each other up.

They will see it as:

1 Top 100 (or whatever Chaminade ends up at) extremely dominate W

1 Top 25 double overtime "quality" loss

1 Top 50 overtime "quality" loss

Tourney results: BYU is one, maybe two wrungs below SDSU and AZ. A very good showing. Plus, BYU seems to be getting a lot of love by the committee the past 7 years or so. They are also very high on KC so it's imperative he is healthy at tourney time or our losses won't count as much. (Remember that losing Davies cost us at least one seed our Sweet 16 year as well as how we were penalized last year for losing KC at the end)

But we DO need a signature win, especially two, to give the committee an opportunity to even review those games. A dozen quality losses won't matter if we don't have some quality wins.

Vs college football where the difference between 5 OT losses by a field goal is the difference between playing for a NC and missing a bowl game and the coach being fired, even though all 5 of those losses came against top ten teams. (SEC) Even though that team could probably be competitive in a NC game or win a BCS game. Instead, a Hawaii gets the game and gets crushed by Georgia.

Gotta get back to work. Go Cougs!