The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

http://hamptonroads.com/2015/10/judy-mac...mmissioner

Since realignment, C-USA has been a one-bid league in men's and women's basketball. MacLeod said one of her biggest challenges is to is try to rebuild the league's basketball image. C-USA men's basketball took a huge hit when Memphis, Tulane and Houston all joined the American Athletic Conference.

"We need to be a multi-bid league in both men’s and women’s basketball," she said. "Obviously, performance on the court is important. But I think our teams are maybe better than the perception.

"We need to get the word out better. We need to get our bottom teams better. We need to schedule more top 50 teams, although I realize scheduling is hard."

"We need more basketball credits because the little tv money we get is going away."

We don't need to focus on top 50 teams, we need to focus on beatable top 100 teams. Playing more games at top 50 schools doesn't do much for the conference. Winning many top 100 games does.

(10-26-2015 01:15 PM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  "We need more basketball credits because the little tv money we get is going away."

Yeah, not good. And I hope she has considered other options for more revenue than just additional basketball credits. Right now she's just stating the conference's command message.

(10-26-2015 01:28 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  We don't need to focus on top 50 teams, we need to focus on beatable top 100 teams. Playing more games at top 50 schools doesn't do much for the conference. Winning many top 100 games does.

Unfortunately for a non-power conference team, beating top 100 teams is not going to get you an at large bid, unless you beat a whole lot of them and don't have bad losses. Beating a top 50 team is what the committee pays attention too, and you can't beat them if you don't play them.

(10-26-2015 05:10 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 01:28 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  We don't need to focus on top 50 teams, we need to focus on beatable top 100 teams. Playing more games at top 50 schools doesn't do much for the conference. Winning many top 100 games does.

Unfortunately for a non-power conference team, beating top 100 teams is not going to get you an at large bid, unless you beat a whole lot of them and don't have bad losses. Beating a top 50 team is what the committee pays attention too, and you can't beat them if you don't play them.

We got our last at large with a boatload of wins 50-75. Obviously there is a big difference between scheduling ten teams 80-100 and ten teams 30-60. Top 100 games help the rpi, and rpi does matter to a certain extent.

(10-26-2015 08:00 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 05:10 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 01:28 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  We don't need to focus on top 50 teams, we need to focus on beatable top 100 teams. Playing more games at top 50 schools doesn't do much for the conference. Winning many top 100 games does.

Unfortunately for a non-power conference team, beating top 100 teams is not going to get you an at large bid, unless you beat a whole lot of them and don't have bad losses. Beating a top 50 team is what the committee pays attention too, and you can't beat them if you don't play them.

We got our last at large with a boatload of wins 50-75. Obviously there is a big difference between scheduling ten teams 80-100 and ten teams 30-60. Top 100 games help the rpi, and rpi does matter to a certain extent.

CUSA was better when we got our last at large. Plus, we just barely got an at large by the skin of our teeth. I think UAB winning the regular season had a bigger impact that year than what the RPI of our opponents were. If I recall correctly, the fact we had not beaten any top 50 RPI teams was the biggest strike against us.

I thought vcu wound up just inside the top of 100. The big knock was they beat no top 50s and we beat that one if I remember correctly. And I agree, winning the regular season was also a huge factor that year. My point was we beat a lot of too 50-75 teams, not where they fell in the schedule. we had an rpi of 31 that year, with just one bad loss and ten top 100 wins, with 8 of those being between 49 and 78.(and in an oddity, losing to ecu gave us two top 100 wins we wouldn't have had if we beat them). Our rpi and sos screamed mid major bubble team. We fell on the right side. Southern miss got in with almost identical numbers two years later. For all the bellyaching la tech fans have done, they've not been top 50 or had a top 150 sos, which is te real reason they've been kept out in recent years.