(03-21-2014 01:43 PM)bcunn3128 Wrote:  I'd like to see us play some A-10 schools...they are the "darlings" of the NCAA Selection Commitee...beat some of them and maybe a MAC school gets more attention.

+1


A-10 got what, like 6 teams in this year??

And so far how many of those A-10 Schools are still in it?

I dont know why the committee loves the A-10 so much.

(03-24-2014 09:01 AM)rocketinchitown Wrote:  And so far how many of those A-10 Schools are still in it?

I dont know why the committee loves the A-10 so much.

I believe they have just as many as the ACC has. The same ACC that coach K (from Dook) said was way better than the A10, even though the A10 is 10-8 vs. ACC this year.

(03-24-2014 10:52 AM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:01 AM)rocketinchitown Wrote:  And so far how many of those A-10 Schools are still in it?

I dont know why the committee loves the A-10 so much.

I believe they have just as many as the ACC has. The same ACC that coach K (from Dook) said was way better than the A10, even though the A10 is 10-8 vs. ACC this year.

Yeah- Dayton is the lone rep still left. Virginia is the lone rep from the ACC.

Big 10, Big 12, PAC 12, SEC are leading the way in the sixteen.

(03-20-2014 05:14 PM)Rocket A Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 04:34 PM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 03:03 PM)Rocket A Wrote:  I would like to see coach TK schedule up next year. Take on the philosophy, play anyone, anywhere, anytime. I believe playing a more difficult non-conference schedule, has you better prepared for conference & tournament play. UT needs to be willing to go on the road and play some 1 and dones, especially if they are getting 3 home games out of the 2K Classic, against what will likely be lesser competition. Would love to see Toledo try and schedule a game against, Dayton, XU, UC, P1G teams, even games against the A-10 or MVC.

They are scheduling up next year. Playing @ Dook and @ Michigan in December, according to tweets from Ryan Autullo.

That is only 2 games. @ Duke is like @ Kansas this year. BC was supposed to be better, so obviously @ scUM is an upgrade, but there are something like 12-13 non conference games. 2 games isn't going to improve the overall schedule. Need to schedule more high mid-majors, or middle of the pack majors. Would like to see at least 4 of those type of opponents in the non conference schedule.

The MAC will only get the automatic bid in the NCAA because, again a good team like WMU got blasted by SYR. The same thing can be said about UT, in the NIT. If we want a better chance we must move to better league, because the MAC is considered a very WEAK league.

(03-24-2014 02:11 PM)FrickerRon Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 05:14 PM)Rocket A Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 04:34 PM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 03:03 PM)Rocket A Wrote:  I would like to see coach TK schedule up next year. Take on the philosophy, play anyone, anywhere, anytime. I believe playing a more difficult non-conference schedule, has you better prepared for conference & tournament play. UT needs to be willing to go on the road and play some 1 and dones, especially if they are getting 3 home games out of the 2K Classic, against what will likely be lesser competition. Would love to see Toledo try and schedule a game against, Dayton, XU, UC, P1G teams, even games against the A-10 or MVC.

They are scheduling up next year. Playing @ Dook and @ Michigan in December, according to tweets from Ryan Autullo.

That is only 2 games. @ Duke is like @ Kansas this year. BC was supposed to be better, so obviously @ scUM is an upgrade, but there are something like 12-13 non conference games. 2 games isn't going to improve the overall schedule. Need to schedule more high mid-majors, or middle of the pack majors. Would like to see at least 4 of those type of opponents in the non conference schedule.

The MAC will only get the automatic bid in the NCAA because, again a good team like WMU got blasted by SYR. The same thing can be said about UT, in the NIT. If we want a better chance we must move to better league, because the MAC is considered a very WEAK league.

Truthfully, I think its preception.

UMASS- a sixth seed barely registered quality wins. They were in the A-10 and started the year off hot but then tapered off. They got in AND a sixth seed because of the A-10.

Also UMASS has a basketball history so they were rewarded for that.

Shows the committee was wrong about them giving em a 6th Seed.

I stated from the beginning they were over-rated and undeserving of a 6th seed.

But I think after several successful seasons, Toledo or another MAC team could have the same impact.

OU has a basketball presence with the committee and could get in as an at-large with a worthy profile I believe.

And I dont mean to heckle just UMASS. I think its the preception of the A-10 conference.

With Butler in the final several years ago, success of Xavier and they moved up I think has bolstered the conference and now St Louis several years in a row. etc.

They've had stable programs.

(03-24-2014 10:52 AM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:01 AM)rocketinchitown Wrote:  And so far how many of those A-10 Schools are still in it?

I dont know why the committee loves the A-10 so much.

I believe they have just as many as the ACC has. The same ACC that coach K (from Dook) said was way better than the A10, even though the A10 is 10-8 vs. ACC this year.

Very impressive stat.

we did schedule good mid majors this yr. robert morris was an nit team. stony brook was expected to be an ncaa team and won 20 games. cleve st won 20. detroit is usually good. sam houston was 20 win team. ark st was top 4 in their league etc.... its tough to guess who will be the best mid majors.

i think the goal is to sched middle of the pack name conf teams and beat them, but the ncaa can still find a reason not to invite you to their dance

(03-24-2014 10:26 PM)pono Wrote:  we did schedule good mid majors this yr. robert morris was an nit team. stony brook was expected to be an ncaa team and won 20 games. cleve st won 20. detroit is usually good. sam houston was 20 win team. ark st was top 4 in their league etc.... its tough to guess who will be the best mid majors.

i think the goal is to sched middle of the pack name conf teams and beat them, but the ncaa can still find a reason not to invite you to their dance

I think the reason this year was that we weren't good enough. Looking at how the MAC teams have done in the post-season this year, do you think anyone on the NCAA selection committee is thinking, "Damn, how did we not give Toledo an at large bid?" No, I don't think so either. We had a terrific season, but in the end, it was not worthy of a bid.