I think that we are closer to a multi bid league than I originally thought. We got what, 3 teams into the NIT?

So Miss and La Tech are making our conference look good right now. Thank you guys. I think we get 2 bids next year, but I would love to see us turn into a 3-4 bid league.

I think 2 bids is a realistic goal for next season, and we might be able to push a 3rd team in if we are on the not-screwed side of the bubble.

3-4 a few years from now could be possible I guess. If the East can build up a "big three" a la UTEP-USM-LT then I don't see why not. MT-WKU-Charlotte? Sub in ODU? I don't think Floridas Atlantic or International will be up to speed for a while, but I like surprises. And I'm assuming that it will take Marshall a few years to build back up with the new coach and all.

Our showing in the NIT can't hurt us next year in getting at large berths - USM and Tech doing good so far. I really hope Georgetown beats FSU - would be a really big home game for us

Cannot help but think of a game last year versus #1 seed UVA (who is destroying Memphis) during ODU's worst season in a generation. the difference between success and failure is pretty small. Virginia's loss to ODU last year literally kept them out of the NCAAs last year.

(03-23-2014 10:08 PM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  Cannot help but think of a game last year versus #1 seed UVA (who is destroying Memphis) during ODU's worst season in a generation. the difference between success and failure is pretty small. Virginia's loss to ODU last year literally kept them out of the NCAAs last year.

It is a game of inches, emotions and momentum. Thanks for the post, fun to watch again.

4 bids is a pipe dream for CUSA, but I do think 2 is a realistic goal. I would be pretty happy with being consistently a 2 bid conference because that would also mean we'd occasionally get a third team in.

Simply being a 2 bid league improves perception quite a bit. The WCC gets a fair amount of respect from analysts and the committee.

If the conference as a whole schedules ooc better/smarter next season, I think 3 of the following could make the big dance because all these teams will have plenty back to make some noise:

UTEP, LTU, ODU, Charlotte.

In addition to those 4 I expect USM to reload rather than rebuild and also WKU.

So I'm looking for 3 in the tourney next year. Hope for some improvement in the rest of the conference because that would help a great deal for conference rpi and respect.

(03-24-2014 09:00 AM)Niner National Wrote:  4 bids is a pipe dream for CUSA, but I do think 2 is a realistic goal. I would be pretty happy with being consistently a 2 bid conference because that would also mean we'd occasionally get a third team in.

Simply being a 2 bid league improves perception quite a bit. The WCC gets a fair amount of respect from analysts and the committee.

Yeah, 4 bids every year is a lot. I wouldn't say anyone is an annual 4 bid conference except maybe the ACC and B1G. The SEC had 3 this year (and 1 scraped its way in), and I remember a few years ago the P12 barely got 2 in. (I think UCLA won the conference at right around .500 and was the 2nd bid maybe?)

Point being, I think being a 2+ conference is doable. (Plus means potential for either more bids or FF. 2 pluses means perennial championship contenders.) That would put us on my "high major" level:

High Power: 5+ (B1G, ACC)
Middle Power: 4+ (SEC, P12, AAC, B12)
Low Power: 3+ (BE, A10)
High Major: 2+ (WCC, MW)
Mid Major: 1+ (CUSA, MAC, MVC, Horizon, CAA)
Low Major: 1 (everyone else)

This list is a lot more fluid than it used to be, but most conferences have a ceiling and a floor. I think our floor is 1+, where we are. I think our ceiling could be 3+ (that would take a lot of work.) Being a 2+ year in and year out is a solid goal.

(03-24-2014 09:16 AM)herdfan2013 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:00 AM)Niner National Wrote:  4 bids is a pipe dream for CUSA, but I do think 2 is a realistic goal. I would be pretty happy with being consistently a 2 bid conference because that would also mean we'd occasionally get a third team in.

Simply being a 2 bid league improves perception quite a bit. The WCC gets a fair amount of respect from analysts and the committee.

Yeah, 4 bids every year is a lot. I wouldn't say anyone is an annual 4 bid conference except maybe the ACC and B1G. The SEC had 3 this year (and 1 scraped its way in), and I remember a few years ago the P12 barely got 2 in. (I think UCLA won the conference at right around .500 and was the 2nd bid maybe?)

Point being, I think being a 2+ conference is doable. (Plus means potential for either more bids or FF. 2 pluses means perennial championship contenders.) That would put us on my "high major" level:

High Power: 5+ (B1G, ACC)
Middle Power: 4+ (SEC, P12, AAC, B12)
Low Power: 3+ (BE, A10)
High Major: 2+ (WCC, MW)
Mid Major: 1+ (CUSA, MAC, MVC, Horizon, CAA)
Low Major: 1 (everyone else)

This list is a lot more fluid than it used to be, but most conferences have a ceiling and a floor. I think our floor is 1+, where we are. I think our ceiling could be 3+ (that would take a lot of work.) Being a 2+ year in and year out is a solid goal.

With the loss of Louisville from the AAC, I think they'd move down to the Low Power (3+) on your list moving forward. Cincy, UConn, and Memphis are generally gonna be a given most years and occasionally one other but I don't see 4 regularly in the tourney from the AAC in the future.

Yeah, I too think AAC is 3+. They'll certainly have 4 bid years, but they'll have 3 bid years as well.

Yeah, this list was this year. Louisville, UConn, Cinci, Memphis plus (SMU, history of Houston/Temple, championship potential from the first three) had me list it as 4+. Take UL out and its 3+. I also contradicted myself with P12, SEC being 4+, but I can't say that a league with 2 perennial championship contenders and 3 current Sweet 16 teams is a low power, even if we own them on their own floor.

(03-24-2014 09:04 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  If the conference as a whole schedules ooc better/smarter next season, I think 3 of the following could make the big dance because all these teams will have plenty back to make some noise:

UTEP, LTU, ODU, Charlotte.

In addition to those 4 I expect USM to reload rather than rebuild and also WKU.

So I'm looking for 3 in the tourney next year. Hope for some improvement in the rest of the conference because that would help a great deal for conference rpi and respect.

I think the following teams are in the conversation next year:

UTEP
La Tech
ODU
Charlotte
USM
MTSU
WKU
UAB

I think that will be the case most years. We really need Marshall and Rice to make strides toward respectability. If we could get a majority of the conference into the top 200, it's going to help everybody.

I know we really don't know schedules yet, but right now UAB supposedly has:
@UNC
Atlantis
LSU
@Chattanooga

If we can add another 3-4 games against solid mid majors or power conference teams, that OOC schedule will be exactly what we need to get from most of the top teams in the conference.

I think as a conference, our entire body of work OOC will determine how many bids we get. If UAB and Charlotte had finished 13-3/12-4 in conference this year, I think the conference would have been looked at differently. Our conference's claim to fame wound up being La Tech's win at Oklahoma. It was a great win, but ultimately there just wasn't enough there among the top teams in the conference.

As fast as I hope our best teams advance, blazers had a point about Marshall, Rice, et al striding back towards respectability. If we can get the back end of the conference into the top 250 or even the top 200, then that will give the conference a boost in general perception. Hopefully the new head coaches at Rice and Marshall can right their ships and begin climbing higher in the RPI bucket.

(03-24-2014 09:28 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:16 AM)herdfan2013 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:00 AM)Niner National Wrote:  4 bids is a pipe dream for CUSA, but I do think 2 is a realistic goal. I would be pretty happy with being consistently a 2 bid conference because that would also mean we'd occasionally get a third team in.

Simply being a 2 bid league improves perception quite a bit. The WCC gets a fair amount of respect from analysts and the committee.

Yeah, 4 bids every year is a lot. I wouldn't say anyone is an annual 4 bid conference except maybe the ACC and B1G. The SEC had 3 this year (and 1 scraped its way in), and I remember a few years ago the P12 barely got 2 in. (I think UCLA won the conference at right around .500 and was the 2nd bid maybe?)

Point being, I think being a 2+ conference is doable. (Plus means potential for either more bids or FF. 2 pluses means perennial championship contenders.) That would put us on my "high major" level:

High Power: 5+ (B1G, ACC)
Middle Power: 4+ (SEC, P12, AAC, B12)
Low Power: 3+ (BE, A10)
High Major: 2+ (WCC, MW)
Mid Major: 1+ (CUSA, MAC, MVC, Horizon, CAA)
Low Major: 1 (everyone else)

This list is a lot more fluid than it used to be, but most conferences have a ceiling and a floor. I think our floor is 1+, where we are. I think our ceiling could be 3+ (that would take a lot of work.) Being a 2+ year in and year out is a solid goal.

With the loss of Louisville from the AAC, I think they'd move down to the Low Power (3+) on your list moving forward. Cincy, UConn, and Memphis are generally gonna be a given most years and occasionally one other but I don't see 4 regularly in the tourney from the AAC in the future.

SMU is probably going to win the AAC next year. Secondly, for whatever reason people keep forgetting about Temple. There are just down this year, but they will probably be back next year because they have some player; they are just young. So the
AAC is going to be 4+ for a while.

(03-24-2014 09:55 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:28 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  With the loss of Louisville from the AAC, I think they'd move down to the Low Power (3+) on your list moving forward. Cincy, UConn, and Memphis are generally gonna be a given most years and occasionally one other but I don't see 4 regularly in the tourney from the AAC in the future.

SMU is probably going to win the AAC next year. Secondly, for whatever reason people keep forgetting about Temple. There are just down this year, but they will probably be back next year because they have some player; they are just young. So the
AAC is going to be 4+ for a while.

I see what you're saying. Yes, some teams could return to prominence (as with any conference) but looking at the big picture, the AAC is losing a National Championship caliber program (Louisville) and a bad Rutgers team and replacing those with two weak teams (ECU and Tulane) and a Tulsa team that has some history and did well this year. It's a net loss for the AAC. Their rpi will suffer with the loss of Louisville ...and ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa will not negate the loss of Louisville.

(03-24-2014 09:38 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:04 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  If the conference as a whole schedules ooc better/smarter next season, I think 3 of the following could make the big dance because all these teams will have plenty back to make some noise:

UTEP, LTU, ODU, Charlotte.

In addition to those 4 I expect USM to reload rather than rebuild and also WKU.

So I'm looking for 3 in the tourney next year. Hope for some improvement in the rest of the conference because that would help a great deal for conference rpi and respect.

I think the following teams are in the conversation next year:

UTEP
La Tech
ODU
Charlotte
USM
MTSU
WKU
UAB

I think that will be the case most years. We really need Marshall and Rice to make strides toward respectability. If we could get a majority of the conference into the top 200, it's going to help everybody.

I know we really don't know schedules yet, but right now UAB supposedly has:
@UNC
Atlantis
LSU
@Chattanooga

If we can add another 3-4 games against solid mid majors or power conference teams, that OOC schedule will be exactly what we need to get from most of the top teams in the conference.

I think as a conference, our entire body of work OOC will determine how many bids we get. If UAB and Charlotte had finished 13-3/12-4 in conference this year, I think the conference would have been looked at differently. Our conference's claim to fame wound up being La Tech's win at Oklahoma. It was a great win, but ultimately there just wasn't enough there among the top teams in the conference.

I think I'd have to go with Charlotte's win over Big 10 champion Michigan as the conference's claim to fame in OOC this year.

I'd probably go with UAB over UNC next because they got a lot more national attention than La Tech over OK.

(03-24-2014 10:22 AM)Niner National Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:38 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:04 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  If the conference as a whole schedules ooc better/smarter next season, I think 3 of the following could make the big dance because all these teams will have plenty back to make some noise:

UTEP, LTU, ODU, Charlotte.

In addition to those 4 I expect USM to reload rather than rebuild and also WKU.

So I'm looking for 3 in the tourney next year. Hope for some improvement in the rest of the conference because that would help a great deal for conference rpi and respect.

I think the following teams are in the conversation next year:

UTEP
La Tech
ODU
Charlotte
USM
MTSU
WKU
UAB

I think that will be the case most years. We really need Marshall and Rice to make strides toward respectability. If we could get a majority of the conference into the top 200, it's going to help everybody.

I know we really don't know schedules yet, but right now UAB supposedly has:
@UNC
Atlantis
LSU
@Chattanooga

If we can add another 3-4 games against solid mid majors or power conference teams, that OOC schedule will be exactly what we need to get from most of the top teams in the conference.

I think as a conference, our entire body of work OOC will determine how many bids we get. If UAB and Charlotte had finished 13-3/12-4 in conference this year, I think the conference would have been looked at differently. Our conference's claim to fame wound up being La Tech's win at Oklahoma. It was a great win, but ultimately there just wasn't enough there among the top teams in the conference.

I think I'd have to go with Charlotte's win over Big 10 champion Michigan as the conference's claim to fame in OOC this year.

I'd probably go with UAB over UNC next because they got a lot more national attention than La Tech over OK.

It was but as soon as Charlotte crapped the bed in conference it was forgotten. That is why everyone talked about La Tech's victory, because it was relevant.

(03-24-2014 10:43 AM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 10:22 AM)Niner National Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:38 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:04 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  If the conference as a whole schedules ooc better/smarter next season, I think 3 of the following could make the big dance because all these teams will have plenty back to make some noise:

UTEP, LTU, ODU, Charlotte.

In addition to those 4 I expect USM to reload rather than rebuild and also WKU.

So I'm looking for 3 in the tourney next year. Hope for some improvement in the rest of the conference because that would help a great deal for conference rpi and respect.

I think the following teams are in the conversation next year:

UTEP
La Tech
ODU
Charlotte
USM
MTSU
WKU
UAB

I think that will be the case most years. We really need Marshall and Rice to make strides toward respectability. If we could get a majority of the conference into the top 200, it's going to help everybody.

I know we really don't know schedules yet, but right now UAB supposedly has:
@UNC
Atlantis
LSU
@Chattanooga

If we can add another 3-4 games against solid mid majors or power conference teams, that OOC schedule will be exactly what we need to get from most of the top teams in the conference.

I think as a conference, our entire body of work OOC will determine how many bids we get. If UAB and Charlotte had finished 13-3/12-4 in conference this year, I think the conference would have been looked at differently. Our conference's claim to fame wound up being La Tech's win at Oklahoma. It was a great win, but ultimately there just wasn't enough there among the top teams in the conference.

I think I'd have to go with Charlotte's win over Big 10 champion Michigan as the conference's claim to fame in OOC this year.

I'd probably go with UAB over UNC next because they got a lot more national attention than La Tech over OK.

It was but as soon as Charlotte crapped the bed in conference it was forgotten. That is why everyone talked about La Tech's victory, because it was relevant.

There wasn't much discussion about La Tech's resume from what I saw. Just some brief mentions, but no in depth analysis.

Charlotte on the other hand got lots of press for being Michigan's worst loss when discussing potential seedings.

(03-24-2014 10:43 AM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 10:22 AM)Niner National Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:38 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-24-2014 09:04 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  If the conference as a whole schedules ooc better/smarter next season, I think 3 of the following could make the big dance because all these teams will have plenty back to make some noise:

UTEP, LTU, ODU, Charlotte.

In addition to those 4 I expect USM to reload rather than rebuild and also WKU.

So I'm looking for 3 in the tourney next year. Hope for some improvement in the rest of the conference because that would help a great deal for conference rpi and respect.

I think the following teams are in the conversation next year:

UTEP
La Tech
ODU
Charlotte
USM
MTSU
WKU
UAB

I think that will be the case most years. We really need Marshall and Rice to make strides toward respectability. If we could get a majority of the conference into the top 200, it's going to help everybody.

I know we really don't know schedules yet, but right now UAB supposedly has:
@UNC
Atlantis
LSU
@Chattanooga

If we can add another 3-4 games against solid mid majors or power conference teams, that OOC schedule will be exactly what we need to get from most of the top teams in the conference.

I think as a conference, our entire body of work OOC will determine how many bids we get. If UAB and Charlotte had finished 13-3/12-4 in conference this year, I think the conference would have been looked at differently. Our conference's claim to fame wound up being La Tech's win at Oklahoma. It was a great win, but ultimately there just wasn't enough there among the top teams in the conference.

I think I'd have to go with Charlotte's win over Big 10 champion Michigan as the conference's claim to fame in OOC this year.

I'd probably go with UAB over UNC next because they got a lot more national attention than La Tech over OK.

It was but as soon as Charlotte crapped the bed in conference it was forgotten. That is why everyone talked about La Tech's victory, because it was relevant.

Yeah, that's what I meant. I said our claim to fame rather than best win because of this. Had UAB and Charlotte not sucked in conference play, those wins would have meant a lot more than they ultimately did for us. If Southern Miss and La Tech were competing with Charlotte and UAB rather than Tulsa and MTSU, the conference could have received some more respect in the at large discussion.

Temple UConn, Cincy Memphis and a rising SMU will get the benefit of the doubt against Conf USA teams. Three of these AAC teams will be ranked to start the season vs none for Conf USA. Plus with no tv market the conf will struggle to make noise nationally. With The AAC tv contract on ESPN , the conference will gave many opportunities to show what they can do. If Conf USA is going to get two teams in next year their OOC win percentage gas to be great.