(02-14-2015 04:11 PM)2Buck Wrote:  

(02-14-2015 03:03 PM)jmuwyhamhgawd Wrote:  

(02-14-2015 12:05 PM)2Buck Wrote:  Sorry to say, but teams in the P5 deserve to be ranked above teams in lower conferences with more wins. I think those teams are better and always do better in the tournament. JMU may (hopefully) be an exception but while mid-major teams are running through their conferences these P5 teams are beating on each other and getting better against a higher level of competition. Why do you think mid-pack P5 teams almost always clean house in the secondary tournies (NIT, etc)? Look at our loss to Vandy for case in point.

Our ladies have to go from playing smaller, slower, less talented/coached players in conference play to the NCAAs where they're suddenly thrown into games against teams running at another level. We do have a chance to do well (and I hope they do!), but our conference play is not preparing them for what lies ahead.

I think everyone agrees that when the gap is only a couple wins, the P5 team should probably be ranked over the mid-major. Obviously there is a tipping point to that, though, otherwise every P5 team would be ranked over every mid-major. For what it's worth, JMU's RPI (impartial) is better than Stanford's.

Not really sure how you come to your conclusion that mid-majors always get waxed against P5 teams. How does us losing to Vandy prove your point when we also beat UCLA and Pitt? And as for mid-majors always losing in the secondary tourneys, a quick 5-minute look through wikipedia showed me that over the last five years, exactly half of WNIT final four participants were from non-P5 conferences (including Drexel winning the whole thing in 2013 and JMU being runners-up in 2012).

Not saying P5 always beats others at all. Just saying when comparing a team that's maybe 3rd or 4th in a P5 conference they're usually going to be a better team than all except a handful of mid-majors. Not all P5 conferences are even equal. Yes, a team like Princeton or Green Bay or JMU can beat middle of the pack P5 and occasionally beat a top 25 P5 but on the whole P5s usually get better talent and certainly get better tested from their conference play.

Cough Cough Horsesh*t. You said exactly that in your first post.

I'm glad to read Ham and others are stepping in to push back against your mistaken notion (which you continue to defend).

(02-14-2015 04:52 PM)Longhorn Wrote:  I strongly disagree with both points. I neither agree that the P5 "mid-pack teams clean house in the NIT" against JMU or CAA competition, nor do I think a close mid-season loss on the road to a good SEC team means much of anything...other than it proves JMU WBB does challenge itself with a tough regular season schedule.

Right. You're telling me all I need to know about your "knowledge". Calling Vandy a "good" SEC team contradicts your entire argument. You call them a good team? By SEC standards they're not even middle of the pack at 4-7 in conference play! Compare them to an equivalent CAA team (UNC Wilmington or W&M) and you you think that's parity in terms of competition and prepping a team to play in the NCAAs?

I DO think Vandy is a good team. They just play MUCH tougher competition than CAA and their record reflects that. They beat the CAA's best regardless of how you try to marginalize it (tough, on road, mid-season, whatever).

So to prove my point, if JMU were in SEC with a 17-6 record due to 5 loses in the SEC they deserve to be ranked higher than if they were 21-2 in the CAA. If JMU were in the SEC their record would be worse BUT they would actually be a better team, improving against better competition.

Did I overstate things with the "cleaning house" comment? Perhaps, but that's a red herring. Your point that except for the "top 5 or 6" P5 schools, top mid-majors are on par with the rest of top P5 is delusional. There may be one or two mid-majors a year than can get up there but very rare (Chattanooga might be this year). For the record, I don't consider American or Big East to be mid-major in basketball, they straddle the line.

(02-15-2015 12:57 PM)2Buck Wrote:  

(02-14-2015 04:52 PM)Longhorn Wrote:  I strongly disagree with both points. I neither agree that the P5 "mid-pack teams clean house in the NIT" against JMU or CAA competition, nor do I think a close mid-season loss on the road to a good SEC team means much of anything...other than it proves JMU WBB does challenge itself with a tough regular season schedule.

Right. You're telling me all I need to know about your "knowledge". Calling Vandy a "good" SEC team contradicts your entire argument. You call them a good team? By SEC standards they're not even middle of the pack at 4-7 in conference play! Compare them to an equivalent CAA team (UNC Wilmington or W&M) and you you think that's parity in terms of competition and prepping a team to play in the NCAAs?

I DO think Vandy is a good team. They just play MUCH tougher competition than CAA and their record reflects that. They beat the CAA's best regardless of how you try to marginalize it (tough, on road, mid-season, whatever).

So to prove my point, if JMU were in SEC with a 17-6 record due to 5 loses in the SEC they deserve to be ranked higher than if they were 21-2 in the CAA. If JMU were in the SEC their record would be worse BUT they would actually be a better team, improving against better competition.

Did I overstate things with the "cleaning house" comment? Perhaps, but that's a red herring. Your point that except for the "top 5 or 6" P5 schools, top mid-majors are on par with the rest of top P5 is delusional. There may be one or two mid-majors a year than can get up there but very rare (Chattanooga might be this year). For the record, I don't consider American or Big East to be mid-major in basketball, they straddle the line.

A smarter fan would stop digging the hole you've dug for yourself, and just admit you WAY overstated your initial premise.

Glad your posting, but you might want to take off your P5 blinders when it comes to WBB.