(03-06-2014 11:00 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  Congratulations to our Miners. Who would have thought that after we lost 3, yes 3, guards that we still would have been in the thick of things and wound up a 5 seed. You can't sneeze at a 12-4 conference record. Man, if things had been different I can't see why we couldn't have won the whole shebang with fresh guards. We only had one, amazing.

CUSA fans also forget that LA Tech lost it's leading scorer and best player waaay back on January 14th. Yet, the Bulldogs kept winning and winning. I think the team did a remarkable job plugging that big 15 points per game hole.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketba...t-68-weeks

You have to respect what UTEP did after such a turbulent off the court season. Same goes for Tulsa, who really ground out a share of this championship in the back half of the season.

(03-06-2014 10:58 PM)southernmiss4ever Wrote:  I hate USM's draw.

Tell me about it. We face the host team that we beat on our court. But now we play on their court. If we win that one, we probably face the #1 seed. We won't have any easy games.

On the good side, if we make the final we are probably in the NCAA tourney.

(03-06-2014 10:59 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  Is it just me or does the 1 seed have the toughest draw of the 4.

Negative. Barring upsets, Southern Miss faces #5 UTEP and then #1 La Tech. If we beat Tech, we face either Tulsa or MTSU. Again, barring upset, we play only top 5 teams.

At least Tech gets a game against the #8 seed.

(03-06-2014 11:00 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:47 PM)Funslinger Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:42 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:29 PM)Funslinger Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:05 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  No. Only the #1 seed, which I suspect is La Tech.

After doing some research, it looks like that may not be the case.. If one of the top 4 wins the tournament, it gets both auto bids. If a 5 seed or lower wins the tourney, the top 4 team that advances the farthest gets the NIT auto bid.

NIT has never done that before, so unless the rules have changed that would be something new. Last year's by laws read like this...

The regular-season champion of any NCAA Division I conference (as determined by the conference’s tie-break protocol) not otherwise selected to the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Championship will secure an automatic qualification to the National Invitation Tournament.

They have also stated publicly in the past that only one team from each conference is eligible to earn the automatic bid. Too tired to go find a link for that. Feel free.

In 2010, Jacksonville got the Atlantic Sun auto bid even though they weren't the #1 seed.

Jacksonville split the Atlantic Sun regular season title with Campbell, Lipscomb and Belmont, but the conference tournament was won by fifth-seeded East Tennessee State. The Dolphins earned the automatic NIT bid by advancing the furthest of the four in the Atlantic Sun tournament even though Lipscomb was the #1 seed in the tournament.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Nation...qualifiers

So, the rule must've been changed since 2010.

Not a rule change in the NIT. Remember, the NIT's rule says they will follow the formula the conference uses to determine the automatic bid. The A-Sun uses a different methodology than most other conferences for breaking that tie. The A-Sun's methodology is the regular-season champion who advances furthest in the conference tournament will get the NIT automatic bid.

C-USA uses the mini-conference methodology as has already been posted here on the board in the past week.

The Atlantic Sun had to use some form of tiebreaker to seed the teams for the tournament. Are you saying that the Atlantic Sun has it specified in writing that the first place team that advances the farthest gets the auto? If so, that's a dumb move. It basically eliminates the NIT auto bid unless a team not in first wins the tournament.

(03-06-2014 11:08 PM)papa_dawg Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 11:05 PM)Funslinger Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:47 PM)papa_dawg Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:45 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:40 PM)papa_dawg Wrote:  Auto or not, someone is going to the NIT because frankly the top half of CUSA is just that good. I got 5 that someone gets in even if Tech wins the tournament.

I don't think there is any question about that. People continue to get hung up on the automatic bid.

I think we'll probably get two in the NIT especially if we only get one in the NCAA. I won't be at all surprised if we have the four co-champs all in the postseason (two in the NCAA and two in the NIT).

This!

There is a good reason for that. In 2011, Southern Miss didn't get an NIT bid despite being 19-10 with an RPI of 63. While a 17-14 California with an RPI of 76 got in as an at-large team.

Meh. I get that. But what we are saying is that USM is a lot better than 19-10 and so is LT, MT, Tulsa and UTEP. This year it is highly unlikely that it will be as necessary.

Granted, but it never hurts to have the auto so you don't have to watch the selection show hoping to get one.

(03-06-2014 11:20 PM)Funslinger Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 11:00 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:47 PM)Funslinger Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:42 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 10:29 PM)Funslinger Wrote:  After doing some research, it looks like that may not be the case.. If one of the top 4 wins the tournament, it gets both auto bids. If a 5 seed or lower wins the tourney, the top 4 team that advances the farthest gets the NIT auto bid.

NIT has never done that before, so unless the rules have changed that would be something new. Last year's by laws read like this...

The regular-season champion of any NCAA Division I conference (as determined by the conference’s tie-break protocol) not otherwise selected to the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Championship will secure an automatic qualification to the National Invitation Tournament.

They have also stated publicly in the past that only one team from each conference is eligible to earn the automatic bid. Too tired to go find a link for that. Feel free.

In 2010, Jacksonville got the Atlantic Sun auto bid even though they weren't the #1 seed.

Jacksonville split the Atlantic Sun regular season title with Campbell, Lipscomb and Belmont, but the conference tournament was won by fifth-seeded East Tennessee State. The Dolphins earned the automatic NIT bid by advancing the furthest of the four in the Atlantic Sun tournament even though Lipscomb was the #1 seed in the tournament.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Nation...qualifiers

So, the rule must've been changed since 2010.

Not a rule change in the NIT. Remember, the NIT's rule says they will follow the formula the conference uses to determine the automatic bid. The A-Sun uses a different methodology than most other conferences for breaking that tie. The A-Sun's methodology is the regular-season champion who advances furthest in the conference tournament will get the NIT automatic bid.

C-USA uses the mini-conference methodology as has already been posted here on the board in the past week.

The Atlantic Sun had to use some form of tiebreaker to seed the teams for the tournament. Are you saying that the Atlantic Sun has it specified in writing that the first place team that advances the farthest gets the auto? If so, that's a dumb move. It basically eliminates the NIT auto bid unless a team not in first wins the tournament.

Yes, and arguably it's as fair as any other tiebreaker.

Basically, they don't use who gets the #1 seed as the tiebreaker for who gets the autobid. They use whoever wins the most games in the conference tournament for tiebreaking who gets the autobid to the NIT.

I'm not sure if it's happened before in the A-Sun, but I assume if one of the teams in the regular season tie goes on to win the conference tournament they default to the next team that tied who won the second most. I believe I mispoke earlier. Every conference gets an automatic bid to the NIT, so in our case even if La Tech wins the conference tournament C-USA will still get an automatic bid to the NIT which in our scenario would be Tulsa.

In the A-Sun they reward the team that wins the most tournament games. In C-USA, it's decided by tiebreak policy unless the league decides to do like they did for the home field for the championship game in football. They could come up with a whole new policy on the fly for all we know particularly since this has never happened before. In 2004, every team that tied for the regular season title got into the NCAA Tournament.

MT becomes only second school (Cincy in '99) to own at least a share of both men's and women's titles. Throw in the fact we were a TD away from the East division crown in football and I'd say we've had a hell of a first year in CUSA, and have definitely proven we belong here.

I don't recall anyone saying MTSU didn't belong here.

(03-07-2014 10:31 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  I don't recall anyone saying MTSU didn't belong here.

Wasn't necessarily calling anyone in particular out. I do know there were skeptics when we were mentioned as a potential candidate for CUSA.

It was always about markets... lol (for the most part)

(03-07-2014 10:31 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  I don't recall anyone saying MTSU didn't belong here.

There were several that voiced disapproval of our selection .

(03-07-2014 10:57 AM)TeKERaider Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 10:31 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  I don't recall anyone saying MTSU didn't belong here.

There were several that voiced disapproval of our selection .

It goes with the territory. Some folks said UAB, or ECU didn't belong in the original C-USA, but did pretty well. UCF & Tulsa too.
Some folks didn't want USM in the Metro Conference either.
It's great to celebrate success, but remember, any C-USA team is usually one coach being hired away, from being competative to non-competative.
We know first hand.
So enjoy it, & not let other things ruin the moment.

(03-07-2014 10:57 AM)TeKERaider Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 10:31 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  I don't recall anyone saying MTSU didn't belong here.

There were several that voiced disapproval of our selection .

I can tell you that 'this' poster was all in for you guys....then/now, damn glad to have you.

(03-07-2014 10:40 AM)MTowho Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 10:31 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  I don't recall anyone saying MTSU didn't belong here.

Wasn't necessarily calling anyone in particular out. I do know there were skeptics when we were mentioned as a potential candidate for CUSA.

Really? I seem to remember... "Memphis is leaving? Who do we grab? MTSU!!! Fills the void geographically and better in football!"

They were pretty much everyone's #2 choice (behind ODU, who had massive support on the boards.)

In fact, the people who were disapproving of MTSU... were.. wait for this.. .WKU fans. (hey, whattaya know, you get to make 'em eat those words next season :) )

(03-07-2014 10:28 AM)MTowho Wrote:  MT becomes only second school (Cincy in '99) to own at least a share of both men's and women's titles. Throw in the fact we were a TD away from the East division crown in football and I'd say we've had a hell of a first year in CUSA, and have definitely proven we belong here.

it appears you also earned the crown in the eastern division back-patting category.

(03-07-2014 11:18 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 10:28 AM)MTowho Wrote:  MT becomes only second school (Cincy in '99) to own at least a share of both men's and women's titles. Throw in the fact we were a TD away from the East division crown in football and I'd say we've had a hell of a first year in CUSA, and have definitely proven we belong here.

it appears you also earned the crown in the eastern division back-patting category.

dah beed is back.....was wondering how long it would take....

(03-07-2014 11:23 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 11:18 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 10:28 AM)MTowho Wrote:  MT becomes only second school (Cincy in '99) to own at least a share of both men's and women's titles. Throw in the fact we were a TD away from the East division crown in football and I'd say we've had a hell of a first year in CUSA, and have definitely proven we belong here.

it appears you also earned the crown in the eastern division back-patting category.

dah beed is back.....was wondering how long it would take....

Not very long! WKU's gonna be in it for the long run before long, better get re-adjusted to his quips...

(03-07-2014 11:26 AM)Ole Blue Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 11:23 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 11:18 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 10:28 AM)MTowho Wrote:  MT becomes only second school (Cincy in '99) to own at least a share of both men's and women's titles. Throw in the fact we were a TD away from the East division crown in football and I'd say we've had a hell of a first year in CUSA, and have definitely proven we belong here.

it appears you also earned the crown in the eastern division back-patting category.

dah beed is back.....was wondering how long it would take....

Not very long! WKU's gonna be in it for the long run before long, better get re-adjusted to his quips...

right on....me thinks I can like it....

(03-07-2014 11:33 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 11:26 AM)Ole Blue Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 11:23 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 11:18 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 10:28 AM)MTowho Wrote:  MT becomes only second school (Cincy in '99) to own at least a share of both men's and women's titles. Throw in the fact we were a TD away from the East division crown in football and I'd say we've had a hell of a first year in CUSA, and have definitely proven we belong here.

it appears you also earned the crown in the eastern division back-patting category.

dah beed is back.....was wondering how long it would take....

Not very long! WKU's gonna be in it for the long run before long, better get re-adjusted to his quips...

right on....me thinks I can like it....

It took me a while but I saw the light sometime early last year.