Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Clarity Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 822
Joined: Apr 2017
Reputation: 3
I Root For: CSUB
Location: Bakersfield
Post: #101
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
No it absolutely doesn't because you ignored the points I made. The AAC is not the WAC. There is no Chicago State or UTRGV in the AAC. The AAC isn't even considered a mid-major. GCU expressed a ton of interest in the Horizon but that apparently means nothing. You really are thick dude. Shame Stugray isn't here to put you in your place like usual.
08-21-2017 12:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Clarity Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 822
Joined: Apr 2017
Reputation: 3
I Root For: CSUB
Location: Bakersfield
Post: #102
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
(08-21-2017 12:18 AM)ProfScott Wrote:  
(08-20-2017 10:25 PM)Clarity Wrote:  4 or fewer losses? You do realize the odds of that happening right? I think all of this will be null and void anyway because the WAC will either look drastically different or gone completely within 5 years. I still think NMSU and GCU joint bid to the Horizon is going to happen.
In terms of GCU, I'd bet my life savings that it would not happen. The WAC is a marketing paradise for GCU. Major cities in Seattle, Chicago, and Kansas City plus schools in California, Texas, Utah and New Mexico. Not counting Arizona, these four states (plus Nevada) are our highest recruiting states for students (online and ground). In terms of marketing, the only possible conferences that GCU might consider would be the WCC or the MWC. Since the MWC has football that really leaves the WCC. The WCC is attractive from a competitive standpoint since right now it is a better conference than the WAC. However, the WAC beats it out in terms of marketing by a landslide. Joining the WCC means we lose Texas, New Mexico, Chicago, and Kansas City. It also means we exchange Seattle for Spokane in Washington. The only benefits are a greater presence in California, the addition of Oregon and a larger city in Utah. I am fairly confident that the administration would rather roll the dice with the WAC and work to strengthen it rather than go anywhere else.

Your administration thinks differently. They were properly vetted by the Horizon. They obviously have interest or that wouldn't have happened. You aren't getting in the WCC either because the big dogs have made it clear your for-profit status is a problem. The Horizon doesn't seem to think it is a problem. The GCU administration desperately wants out of the WAC for anywhere else due to the instability. They are actively shopping and it couldn't be more obvious. Also bleh conference realignment. Leaving it at that.
(This post was last modified: 08-21-2017 01:05 AM by Clarity.)
08-21-2017 12:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RoosHouse Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 396
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 0
I Root For: UMKC
Location:
Post: #103
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
(08-21-2017 12:32 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(08-20-2017 10:25 PM)Clarity Wrote:  4 or fewer losses? You do realize the odds of that happening right? I think all of this will be null and void anyway because the WAC will either look drastically different or gone completely within 5 years. I still think NMSU and GCU joint bid to the Horizon is going to happen.

That is ridiculous. You do realize that the WAC as a conference had a higher RPI and better attendance than the Horizon? Plus, the Horizon just lost their best team in Valpo. That league is just another one bid league. GCU and NMSU would gain nothing by joining the Horizon. They would add to their travel expenses. The Horizon is a Midwest bus league. No western school is going there. Ridiculous prediction.

The 2016 Temple basketball team blows up your theory of a mid-major school needing no more than four losses. Temple is a mid-major that got selected with 11 losses and a higher RPI than CSUB had last season. It is the quality of the schedule you play.

This is why I have been so disappointed in the teams of WAC scheduling so soft.

I do like the other scenario of a team from WAC making a tournament run. I think that would be more beneficial.

Of course its hard to beat top teams if you have not played any top teams during regular season.
(This post was last modified: 08-21-2017 01:01 AM by RoosHouse.)
08-21-2017 12:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoCalBobcat78 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,859
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 302
I Root For: TXST, UCLA, CBU
Location:
Post: #104
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
(08-21-2017 12:49 AM)Clarity Wrote:  No it absolutely doesn't because you ignored the points I made. The AAC is not the WAC. There is no Chicago State or UTRGV in the AAC. The AAC isn't even considered a mid-major. GCU expressed a ton of interest in the Horizon but that apparently means nothing. You really are thick dude. Shame Stugray isn't here to put you in your place like usual.

Prove that "GCU expressed a ton of interest in the Horizon." Name an official at GCU that expressed interest in the Horizon? Stu had an inside source that told him GCU was being added to the Horizon. How well did that work out?

Temple is a mid-major school. In college basketball, the power conferences are the Big East, ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, PAC-12 and SEC. Not every mid-major is the same, but they are all mid-majors. This should be a simple concept to understand. The WCC is a mid-major that gets multiple bids every year. Yes, there are mid-majors that get multiple bids.
08-21-2017 01:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,334
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 135
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #105
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
Excluding the ACC, B1G, BIG XII, PAC-12, SEC, Big East, AAC, and A-10 (which are perennial multi-bid conferences), these are the non-power conferences that have had multiple bids over the Last 11 years; the time NMSU has been in the WAC. Teams in bold have joined one of the multi-bid conferences listed above. Teams in italic have moved from one mid-major conference to another mid-major conferences.

2017 - WCC (Gonzaga, St. Mary's)
2016 - Missouri Valley Conference (Wichita State, Northern Iowa)
2015 - Mountain West Conference (Wyoming, Boise State, San Diego State)
2015 - Missouri Valley (Northern Iowa, Wichita State)
2015 - WCC (Gonzaga, BYU)
2014 - Mountain West (New Mexico, San Diego State)
2014 - WCC (Gonzaga, BYU)
2013 - Missouri Valley (Creighton, Wichita State)
2013 - Sun Belt (Western Kentucky, Middle Tennessee)
2013 - WCC (Gonzaga, St Mary's)
2012 - Mountain West (Colorado State, New Mexico, San Diego State, UNLV)
2012 - WCC (St. Mary's, Gonzaga, BYU)
2012 - C-USA (Memphis, Southern Mississppi)
2012 - MAAC (Iona, Loyola (MD))
2012 - Missouri Valley (Creighton, Wichita State)
2011 - Mountain West (San Diego State, UNLV, BYU)
2011 - Colonial (George Mason, VCU, Old Dominion)
2011 - C-USA (Alabama Birmingham, Memphis)
2010 - Mountain West (BYU, New Mexico, San Diego State, UNLV)
2010 - C-USA (Houston, UTEP)
2010 - WAC (New Mexico State, Utah State)
2010 - WCC (Gonzaga, St. Mary's)
2009 - Mountain West (BYU, Utah)
2009 - Horizon (Butler, Cleveland State)
2008 - WCC (Gonzaga, St. Mary's, San Diego)
2008 - Mountain West (BYU, UNLV)
2008 - Sun Belt (South Alabama, Western Kentucky)
2007 - Colonial (VCU, Old Dominion)
2007 - Horizon (Butler, Wright State)
2007 - Missouri Valley (Southern Illinois, Creighton)
2007 - Mountain West (UNLV, BYU)
2007 - WAC (Nevada, New Mexico State)

It is obvious there are less mid-majors receiving at-large bids. But some of the reduction can be attributed to the shift of program to upper level conferences. We will see if this trend continues or if there will be other mid-majors to fill the void of teams like Creighton, VCU, Butler, Wichita State, etc. moving up.
(This post was last modified: 08-21-2017 09:02 AM by NMSUPistolPete.)
08-21-2017 08:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PojoaquePosse Offline
Blowhard
*

Posts: 2,414
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 147
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #106
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
(08-20-2017 04:33 PM)Clarity Wrote:  Comparing Temple and a very decent AAC to the WAC is laughable and ridiculous. I will bet you my life savings that a WAC team doesn't even get close to an at-large bid in 5 years. It's completely unrealistic especially since the committee hates mid-majors. They let in a near .500 Vanderbilt team and you think they will look at a WAC team that does well? Please.

I'm not taking anyone's side, but just wanted to point out that just last year the Aggies made a very realistic run at an automatic bid. We were on the bubble watch and had a realistic chance to go something like 30-3. There was a lot of talk that if we ran the table and lost the in the WAC title game, we would probably get in. That just happened last year! Yet no one thinks it's achievable? Did we all just forget about last season?
08-21-2017 12:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Clarity Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 822
Joined: Apr 2017
Reputation: 3
I Root For: CSUB
Location: Bakersfield
Post: #107
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
I mean after NMSU lost to CSUB they were off the bubble entirely. Even if they won out they wouldn't have gotten in because of their SOS.
08-21-2017 02:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,334
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 135
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #108
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
(08-21-2017 12:47 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  
(08-20-2017 04:33 PM)Clarity Wrote:  Comparing Temple and a very decent AAC to the WAC is laughable and ridiculous. I will bet you my life savings that a WAC team doesn't even get close to an at-large bid in 5 years. It's completely unrealistic especially since the committee hates mid-majors. They let in a near .500 Vanderbilt team and you think they will look at a WAC team that does well? Please.

I'm not taking anyone's side, but just wanted to point out that just last year the Aggies made a very realistic run at an automatic bid. We were on the bubble watch and had a realistic chance to go something like 30-3. There was a lot of talk that if we ran the table and lost the in the WAC title game, we would probably get in. That just happened last year! Yet no one thinks it's achievable? Did we all just forget about last season?

Even if NMSU had run the table in the WAC last season, it would have been difficult to get an at-large bid without a truly quality marquee win. Arizona State wasn't very good last season. Of NMSU 6 losses, three of them were very winnable... Colorado State, Grand Canyon, and Utah Valley.
08-21-2017 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PojoaquePosse Offline
Blowhard
*

Posts: 2,414
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 147
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #109
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
My point is we were in the discussion and it was a very real possibility. Granted, it was a unique and special season. But that is what it would take and we almost saw it happen just last year.
08-21-2017 02:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,334
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 135
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #110
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
(08-21-2017 02:39 PM)PojoaquePosse Wrote:  My point is we were in the discussion and it was a very real possibility. Granted, it was a unique and special season. But that is what it would take and we almost saw it happen just last year.

To be honest GCU's schedule is setup where they could have a season similar to NMSU's last season. They have games against Louisville and Illinois on the road but the other games are winnable if they play well. A win over St. John's would enhance their chances.

If NMSU could somehow beat Illinois and have a very good showing at the Diamondhead Classic, an at-large is attainable.
08-21-2017 03:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Clarity Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 822
Joined: Apr 2017
Reputation: 3
I Root For: CSUB
Location: Bakersfield
Post: #111
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
You really think any team is going to go undefeated in conference this year? I don't think so and that's what it would take to even get a look in. Still don't think they would even if they did.
08-21-2017 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PojoaquePosse Offline
Blowhard
*

Posts: 2,414
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 147
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #112
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
I don't think any team will go undefeated in the WAC this year. The league is very top heavy and I think those teams will duke it out beating each other at home (my guess). I was merely pointing out that this "far-fetched" idea almost came to fruition last year. Again, that was an anomaly.
08-21-2017 05:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,334
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 135
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #113
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
At this point, we really don't know what to expect. GCU returns a lot of their roster. If Casey Benson (or one of the other guards) can fill the void Russell left, they could be very good. Although I think Barnes has Bakersfield moving in the right direction, I'm not sure if they lost too much from a year ago. I think CSUB has three good players (Wrapp, Durham, & Briggs) to build around. But others will need to step up quickly if Barnes wants a solid rotation. Of all the teams in the WAC, I think UVU has the best combination of size and skill. I believe they are in for a big season. BUT, is Pope a good enough coach to out coach, Barnes, Majerle, Hayford, and Jans? NMSU might have more talent on this squad than last season. However, the coaching change and turnover of players will test NMSU's maturity and team chemistry. And finally, I'm not sure Seattle has more talent than a season ago, but Hayford's coaching could produce better results. Until UMKC, UTRGV, and Chicago State can turn the corner and show marked improvement, they serve as nothing more than spoilers.
(This post was last modified: 08-21-2017 07:44 PM by NMSUPistolPete.)
08-21-2017 06:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
joshadam84 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 552
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 11
I Root For: Chicago State
Location: Indiana
Post: #114
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
I do think the WAC could become a two bid conference.. in time. It'll require the selection committee to change the metrics they use in their selection determinations. A value on a closely played road game EVEN if it is a loss (ie.. Bakersfield at UCLA) should be considered better than a hypothetical 17-13 Illinois team beating #20 Indiana in Champaign.


This is a start at least: http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...uality-win
(This post was last modified: 08-21-2017 07:43 PM by joshadam84.)
08-21-2017 07:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lopes87 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,569
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 38
I Root For: GCU
Location:
Post: #115
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
To piggy back with what Josh is saying I think another qualification should be all at large bids should have 20 wins to be considered for the NCAAT.
08-21-2017 11:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ProfScott Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 592
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 1
I Root For: GCU
Location:
Post: #116
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
(08-21-2017 11:43 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  To piggy back with what Josh is saying I think another qualification should be all at large bids should have 20 wins to be considered for the NCAAT.
Both a 20+ win rule and more value placed on road victories should help mid-major schools. Hope both are adopted. Is the NCAA actually discussing a 20+ win requirement?
08-22-2017 07:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lopes87 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,569
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 38
I Root For: GCU
Location:
Post: #117
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
They are not but they should.
08-22-2017 09:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoCalBobcat78 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,859
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 302
I Root For: TXST, UCLA, CBU
Location:
Post: #118
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
(08-22-2017 07:59 AM)ProfScott Wrote:  
(08-21-2017 11:43 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  To piggy back with what Josh is saying I think another qualification should be all at large bids should have 20 wins to be considered for the NCAAT.
Both a 20+ win rule and more value placed on road victories should help mid-major schools. Hope both are adopted. Is the NCAA actually discussing a 20+ win requirement?

The Power schools won't let that happen. Marquette got in at 19-13 last season with an RPI of 67. They went 7-8 against the RPI top 50, including a win over Villanova. Their worst loss was against St. John's, with an RPI of 148. So the committee sees no bad losses and some quality wins and let's them in.

GCU could make it in as an at-large with their powder puff home schedule if they beat Illinois and don't have any "bad losses." GCU is better than St. John's and should be favored to win that game. If NMSU and CSUB are in the RPI top 100, then a couple of losses to them don't hurt, as long as GCU is ranked in the RPI top 50 and wins the regular season title.
08-22-2017 10:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RoosHouse Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 396
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 0
I Root For: UMKC
Location:
Post: #119
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
(08-22-2017 07:59 AM)ProfScott Wrote:  
(08-21-2017 11:43 PM)Lopes87 Wrote:  To piggy back with what Josh is saying I think another qualification should be all at large bids should have 20 wins to be considered for the NCAAT.
Both a 20+ win rule and more value placed on road victories should help mid-major schools. Hope both are adopted. Is the NCAA actually discussing a 20+ win requirement?

This would just lead to less marquee games early in the season.

If Utah Valley can get a win against Kentucky or Duke that would be interesting.
08-22-2017 11:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NMSUPistolPete Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,334
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 135
I Root For: NMSU
Location: AZ
Post: #120
RE: 2016-17 WAC Men's Basketball Attendance Numbers
In the future, the NCAA Selection Committee is going to put greater values quality "road" and "neutral site" wins. Simply racking up a lot of cupcake homes wins will not impress the Committee. Also, beating good teams at home will be devalued; as good teams are expected to win those type of games at home. So, looking at GCU's schedule, the games that will really help the Lopes gain an at-large bid are the 4-5 games they are expected to lose (@ Illinois, @ Louisville, @ Cal State Bekersfield, @ New Mexico State, @ Utah Valley); not the 20-plus games they are expected to win.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...uality-win
08-22-2017 11:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.