+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: CUSAbbs (/forum-514.html)
+---- Forum: CUSA Conference Talk (/forum-439.html)
+---- Thread: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. (/thread-872853.html)
An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - Hilltop75 - 03-17-2019 03:42 PM
During the Tenn Auburn game one of the Commentators said even if
Tenn loses the game (which the did) they still should be a number one seed in the big dance.
So the SEC runner up is in contention for a #1 seed
The Cusa runner up does not get an at large to the ncaa or nit.
That's the reality of college sports today
I am not saying that WKU deserves a bid, Just how one-sided things have become.
Mid Majors used to get 6 to 8 at large invites now they are rare.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - topper1296 - 03-17-2019 04:06 PM
If I were king for a day, I would make a rule that you are NOT eligible for an at-large bid if you did NOT finish at .500 or above in your conference. Nashville based Belmont, out of the OVC, with a 26-5 record will be probably be left out so some mediocre P5 team that finished a couple games below .500 in their conference can get in.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - KNIGHTTIME - 03-17-2019 04:36 PM
Not a great argument this season. If Western KY had a net ranking inside the top 50 they would be a bubble team. Anyone sitting over 110 would never get consideration.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - topper1296 - 03-17-2019 05:08 PM
(03-17-2019 04:06 PM)topper1296 Wrote: If I were king for a day, I would make a rule that you are NOT eligible for an at-large bid if you did NOT finish at .500 or above in your conference. Nashville based Belmont, out of the OVC, with a 26-5 record will be probably be left out so some mediocre P5 team that finished a couple games below .500 in their conference can get in.
Shocked that Belmont received an at-large bid. 20th ranked OVC is a 2 bid league while 13th ranked CUSA will have 1 bid.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - dhart020 - 03-17-2019 05:28 PM
(03-17-2019 05:08 PM)topper1296 Wrote:(03-17-2019 04:06 PM)topper1296 Wrote: If I were king for a day, I would make a rule that you are NOT eligible for an at-large bid if you did NOT finish at .500 or above in your conference. Nashville based Belmont, out of the OVC, with a 26-5 record will be probably be left out so some mediocre P5 team that finished a couple games below .500 in their conference can get in.
Shocked that Belmont received an at-large bid. 20th ranked OVC is a 2 bid league while 13th ranked CUSA will have 1 bid.
For some reason, there is absolutely no respect for CUSA ever.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - ARandomHerdFan - 03-17-2019 05:30 PM
Oklahoma being in the tourney is laughable.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - ThreeifbyLightning - 03-17-2019 05:42 PM
Interesting minor reversal of a very bad trend for non-power conferences with seven getting at large bids last year. Had been going down every year for the past five years.
And especially after the chair said last year of a team like MT when he said it didn't matter if they win 30 games and have a top 10 non conf SOS we don't want teams like that. Belmont gets in this year with worse metrics than MT did last year.
So, is this an anomaly or should we expect it to go right back to four or five (or even less) going forward?
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - ThreeifbyLightning - 03-17-2019 05:43 PM
(03-17-2019 05:30 PM)ARandomHerdFan Wrote: Oklahoma being in the tourney is laughable.
Oklahoma almost always is in this position losing double digit games and still getting in.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - topper1296 - 03-17-2019 05:46 PM
and why I'm thinking of it. I guess being in pod 1 didn't help ODU improve their seed. 14 seed isn't great.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - ThreeifbyLightning - 03-17-2019 05:52 PM
(03-17-2019 05:46 PM)topper1296 Wrote: and why I'm thinking of it. I guess being in pod 1 didn't help ODU improve their seed. 14 seed isn't great.
This year it probably wasn't warranted to be any higher since we don't have a single team in the top 50.
But I look at a team like Wofford that gets a seven seed. Buffalo gets a six seed.
MT has a very similar season two years ago going 29-4 with a top 20 non conference SOS and gets a 12 seed. Marshall was what - a 13 last year?
This is a function of this conference's leadership. It's a by-product of not being on TV, but again that goes to the failure of the leadership.
We need a legit Division I commissioner and we need some presidents and AD's that can buy a freaking clue about what needs to change with this league. It's so ridiculous how piss poor this league has been run since most of us moved into the league five years ago (i.e. 3.0). Even Karl Benson has run the Belt better than this league has been run.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - cb4029 - 03-17-2019 05:57 PM
The NCAA tourney is proof that we will always complain no matter how many teams are in and an example of clear bias. Tell me. Has a 7, 8, or 9th ranked team in a conference ever won the tourney? Can it happen? Will it ever happen? Why are they there? Give me more mid majors. Make the NIT the NIT again. All regular season champs should get in even if they lose in the conference tourney. Screw over rated big name conferences. Three number one seeds from one conference is a joke. If you're not top 5 in your conference, get out.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - MUther - 03-17-2019 06:10 PM
(03-17-2019 05:52 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:Do you think that it's your ADs and Presidents that have caused the problem? I mean you say it's been run like crap since you guys came aboard...I don't disagree, I'm just wondering where the weak link happened. Truthfully CUSA has been going down hill since Slive sold it out. It was just slower till realignment forced it down to 5 teams and we had to fully rebuild it. Not much anyone could have done to change the TV or whatever when no one is interested. No one's buying what we're trying to sell, collectively. That why I've advocated for turning TV rights over to the schools to make what they can from them. Create our own brands instead of being tied to the lame ass conference deals.(03-17-2019 05:46 PM)topper1296 Wrote: and why I'm thinking of it. I guess being in pod 1 didn't help ODU improve their seed. 14 seed isn't great.
This year it probably wasn't warranted to be any higher since we don't have a single team in the top 50.
But I look at a team like Wofford that gets a seven seed. Buffalo gets a six seed.
MT has a very similar season two years ago going 29-4 with a top 20 non conference SOS and gets a 12 seed. Marshall was what - a 13 last year?
This is a function of this conference's leadership. It's a by-product of not being on TV, but again that goes to the failure of the leadership.
We need a legit Division I commissioner and we need some presidents and AD's that can buy a freaking clue about what needs to change with this league. It's so ridiculous how piss poor this league has been run since most of us moved into the league five years ago (i.e. 3.0). Even Karl Benson has run the Belt better than this league has been run.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - EverRespect - 03-17-2019 07:50 PM
(03-17-2019 05:42 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote: Interesting minor reversal of a very bad trend for non-power conferences with seven getting at large bids last year. Had been going down every year for the past five years.They also mentioned on ESPN that UNC-G was in until Oregon won last night. They are the first team out.
And especially after the chair said last year of a team like MT when he said it didn't matter if they win 30 games and have a top 10 non conf SOS we don't want teams like that. Belmont gets in this year with worse metrics than MT did last year.
So, is this an anomaly or should we expect it to go right back to four or five (or even less) going forward?
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - paintedblue2 - 03-18-2019 06:41 AM
On my way to work yesterday there was a discussion about Zion Williamson on ESPN (imagine that). One of the talking heads said that Zion wouldn’t be the player he is if he had gone to a mid-major like Mississippi St. or Cal. Berkeley.
ESPN trying to re-frame lower-rung P5 schools as mid-majors is a corollary of them having spent years sucking Duke.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - rileylives - 03-18-2019 07:00 AM
Listened to ESPN radio this morning (I know, but wanted their take).
Mike Golic JR blasted Cinderella. They all agreed small schools hurt the tournament. They want “blue blood power 5 schools” (their words
).Said Loyola’s run and MTSU’s upset were bad for the tournament because “these schools always flame out” and are “horrible for the ratings.”
I’m ready to fight!
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - odu09 - 03-18-2019 07:03 AM
(03-17-2019 05:46 PM)topper1296 Wrote: and why I'm thinking of it. I guess being in pod 1 didn't help ODU improve their seed. 14 seed isn't great.
It would have if we had taken care of business against USM and UAB in the regular season. Something clicked off with this team after the 1 seed was clinched. Oh well. I still like pods moving forward. Made the regular season a lot more interesting for me personally. Getting into that top pod is huge... just ask Marshall.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - ThreeifbyLightning - 03-18-2019 07:40 AM
(03-17-2019 06:10 PM)MUther Wrote:(03-17-2019 05:52 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:Do you think that it's your ADs and Presidents that have caused the problem? I mean you say it's been run like crap since you guys came aboard...I don't disagree, I'm just wondering where the weak link happened. Truthfully CUSA has been going down hill since Slive sold it out. It was just slower till realignment forced it down to 5 teams and we had to fully rebuild it. Not much anyone could have done to change the TV or whatever when no one is interested. No one's buying what we're trying to sell, collectively. That why I've advocated for turning TV rights over to the schools to make what they can from them. Create our own brands instead of being tied to the lame ass conference deals.(03-17-2019 05:46 PM)topper1296 Wrote: and why I'm thinking of it. I guess being in pod 1 didn't help ODU improve their seed. 14 seed isn't great.
This year it probably wasn't warranted to be any higher since we don't have a single team in the top 50.
But I look at a team like Wofford that gets a seven seed. Buffalo gets a six seed.
MT has a very similar season two years ago going 29-4 with a top 20 non conference SOS and gets a 12 seed. Marshall was what - a 13 last year?
This is a function of this conference's leadership. It's a by-product of not being on TV, but again that goes to the failure of the leadership.
We need a legit Division I commissioner and we need some presidents and AD's that can buy a freaking clue about what needs to change with this league. It's so ridiculous how piss poor this league has been run since most of us moved into the league five years ago (i.e. 3.0). Even Karl Benson has run the Belt better than this league has been run.
Can we point to any significant steps any Prez or AD in this conference has taken that enhances the profile and stability of the league? The Pod thing was really one of the most meaningful measures we've seen the league adopt, but the jury is still out on whether it will make a difference and reeks of desperation more than strategic vision.
I have no problem with a woman in charge of the league, but elevating Judy to the position seems like it was nothing more than taking the path of least resistance. Did the league actually conduct a nationwide search and seek a visionary leader that could help C-USA emerge from the dust of one of the most significant collegiate athletic realignments in American history? When your conference's leadership is having circles run around them by Karl Benson I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone who could offer a yes to that question with a straight face.
As someone suggested previously, this isn't a new phenomenon for this league. As much as I hate ESPN and hate to admit it the league really did begin to stall when it elected to create division with the network and instead sided with CBSSN and Fox. It was simply a bad strategic move for a non-power conference. The evidence is by looking at how much more valuable the properties (that mostly now reside in the AAC) are with ESPN as their partner than they were with the other two networks. Even adjusted for inflation it's not close.
The current leadership of C-USA has done nothing but double down on that failed multi-media rights deal. We are becoming more and more irrelevant each passing year.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - 49RFootballNow - 03-18-2019 08:00 AM
TV only wants big boys in the tourney. Same for venues. Sad to say but more people want to watch an 18-12 P5 than a 29-3 G5.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - nastybunch - 03-18-2019 08:11 AM
Well, what they will end up doing is eliminating Cinderella stories like UMBC and Loyola of Chicago in the picture. They are their own worst enemies and it will get them in the end.
RE: An Example of how different the invites to the NCAA are. - ThreeifbyLightning - 03-18-2019 08:14 AM
(03-18-2019 08:00 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote: TV only wants big boys in the tourney. Same for venues. Sad to say but more people want to watch an 18-12 P5 than a 29-3 G5.
Disagree. I believe people enjoy watching upsets in the tournament so long as it is not their school.
CBS Sports’ exclusive coverage of the 2010 NCAA Men’s Basketball National Championship Game on Monday, April 5 (9:15-11:45 PM, ET) earned an average overnight household rating/share of 16.0/25, up 34% compared to last year’s 11.9/19 (North Carolina-Michigan State) in the metered markets.
The 16.0/25 rating/share tied with a 16.0/23 in 2005 (North Carolina-Illinois) as the highest rating in the metered markets for the NCAA National Championship game since a 16.9/25 in 1999 (Connecticut-Duke).
Given the opportunity the masses appreciate less resourced programs competing with blue bloods. In fact, the NCAA Tournament with the so called Cinderella is as indicative of the American story as anything. Like in life everyone has a chance to be great - no matter how much the odds are stacked against one versus another.