(03-01-2009 12:02 AM)SF Husky Wrote:  

(02-28-2009 11:56 PM)TonyTiger Wrote:  

(02-27-2009 03:29 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Yea..i did not hear anything close to that about Memphis last year. Everyone knew they were legit because they had a bunch of big time wins out of conference to their credit. This year they do not. Their best wins are UAB twice, Tennessee and Gonzaga,...not exactly murderers row. The point is they have been inflated playing an easier schedule. Still a very good team that does not finish top 5 in the Big East this year.

LOL ... This is laughable. We're not in the Big East, so it's irrelevant. If you guys wanna help change that, "feel free."

By the way, "in addition to the three NCAA Tourney runs the Tigers have placed about five/six players in the NBA over the course of the last three years."

I wonder how that compares with the average Big East conference team? No braggin or anything, just sayin ... "we can only play the conference schedule that's set before us."

The point is not how good you should be or whatever, it is what have you done to earn that #1 seed. If #1 seed was given to teams with best records, then mid-major teams should get #1 seed because their 31-2 record or whatever.

What you done to earn that #1 seed? Memphis have not earned it this year. At best Memphis should be a #2 or #3 but not a #1.

Cal needs to schedule tough games outside of CUSA to earn respect no matter how good his team is. It is easy to win 16 games in the CUSA vs. the BE. In the BE, you have a off day you lose. Even the weak teams can beat you. In the CUSA, you can have an off day and still win. Many BE teams could have gone undefeated this season in the CUSA if they are in Memphis' place.

No one is dissing Memphis' talent or Cal's coaching. It is as simple as what have you done to earn that #1 seed.

SF Husky, I don't think that very many of the Tigers Fans will lose any sleep over whether we get a #1 Seed or #2 Seed. In the final analysis, that's up to the 2009 NCAA Tournament Selection Committee.

I'm just a little offended about all of this discussion about what our record would be if we were in the Big East and the Out-of-Conference Schedule Strength. Year after year, we've had one of the strongest OCS rating in the country. As a matter of fact, we're working on agreements with North Carolina, Duke and Kansas that would add them to our current mixture of Out-of-Conference Games.

My argument is simple, "We are just as talented as any of the Big East Conference Men's Basketball Teams." We've been a little shorthanded at times this season, but IMO ... WE ARE JUST AS TALENTED."

(03-01-2009 10:52 AM)3601 Wrote:  I love it how everybody says that winning 56 straight conference games is no big deal and that everyone could do it. Pitt just lost at Providence, right? Providence is 72 in the RPI. Memphis is like the New York Yankees of C-USA. Everyone hates us and our game is their Super Bowl when we come to town. We hold the attendance record at virtually every arena in C-USA. We are always the biggest crowd of the season. While the competition certainly isn't the greatest, there are no off nights on the road.

There's a reason that there are only two teams left in the country who are undefeated in conference play.

One last thing to consider...while Memhis doesn't have any great wins we also have ZERO bad losses. Almost every team in the top 10 has a loss against a team rated outside of the top 50. We don't.

I think people are saying winning 56 games in CUSA is not big deal. And they are correct. Would you be proud to say, "undefeated in CUSA play"?

RPI is misleading because it is based on wins and losses of the team you beat. You mention Providence has an RPI in the 70's well UAB has an RPI around 35. UAB lost all their big OOC games but they did beat USF 78-77 in overtime. One point over USF in OT with no other significant wins and they are 30 points over Providence. RPI is overrated and flawed.
That being said. It is unfair to say Memphis has no bad losses. Whom coud they lose to. IF they played Pitt one game and UCONN the next, them I bet Seton Hall would have a chance to catch them sleeping on game three.
Look, CUSA schedule is like an OOC schedule for the BE or the ACC. CUSA is a warm-up schedule. St Johns would be a top 3 three team in CUSA. Memphis is in a "system" where they play a few good teams a year and ride the cupcakes to a good seeding in the NCAAs. Last years team did not any breaks. This years team is taking a free /easy ride.

I was watching ESPN and they did this mock bubble selection and Crighton was selected over Cincy because Crighton finished the season better- over their last 12 games. Well, whom did they play and whom did Cincy play. It is terrible not to look at level of competition. MOving ahead it makes no sense for the BE to play anyone from the ACC or anyone good as part of our OOC schedule. We should stop scheduleing good teams OOC because the benefit only goes one way.

(03-01-2009 01:26 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  current Memphis Resume:

record: 26-3
RPI: #7
KenPom: #1
SOS: 41 (not bad considering all the crap you guys talk)
bad losses: ZERO
Top-25 wins: 1 (@Gonzaga)

key wins:
@Gonzaga (#18)
@Tennessee
Cincy
@UAB
Seton Hall

Key wins. Outside of maybe Gonzaga there are no key wins. Cincy and SH are bubble teams and not yet tournament teams. Well at least Cincy is on the bubble. How is SH a good win for a potential one seed. UCONN won't put a win over SH on their resume as someting to brag about. I guess theirs is a higher standard. UAB won't see the tournament this century. USF took them to overtime and lost by one. The entire SEC stinks this year so Tenn. is not a good win. When you have to use Seton Hall and UAB to spice up your resume you know you are in cupcake heaven.

Reality check on Gonzaga. Name one top 25 team Gongaza has beat this year. Zags best win this year was maryland. Sort of like Memphis is saying "We are the fake guys who beat the other fake guys and that's our key win."

Bad losses should include Bubble team Georgetown and unranked Syracuse.

Bottom line, not an impressive list of accomplishments for a one or two seed. The system need fixin.

(03-01-2009 01:04 PM)frogman Wrote:  

(03-01-2009 01:26 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  current Memphis Resume:

record: 26-3
RPI: #7
KenPom: #1
SOS: 41 (not bad considering all the crap you guys talk)
bad losses: ZERO
Top-25 wins: 1 (@Gonzaga)

key wins:
@Gonzaga (#18)
@Tennessee
Cincy
@UAB
Seton Hall

Key wins. Outside of maybe Gonzaga there are no key wins. Cincy and SH are bubble teams and not yet tournament teams. Well at least Cincy is on the bubble. How is SH a good win for a potential one seed. UCONN won't put a win over SH on their resume as someting to brag about. I guess theirs is a higher standard. UAB won't see the tournament this century. USF took them to overtime and lost by one. The entire SEC stinks this year so Tenn. is not a good win. When you have to use Seton Hall and UAB to spice up your resume you know you are in cupcake heaven.

Reality check on Gonzaga. Name one top 25 team Gongaza has beat this year. Zags best win this year was maryland. Sort of like Memphis is saying "We are the fake guys who beat the other fake guys and that's our key win."

Bad losses should include Bubble team Georgetown and unranked Syracuse.

Bottom line, not an impressive list of accomplishments for a one or two seed. The system need fixin.

Bottom line: Memphis does not lose to bad teams. Nearly everyone else does. Excluding UConn and Pitt, who has a record that much more impressive than Memphis? Lets compare...

Memphis - 4-3 against the Top 50 in the RPI, no losses to teams outside of the Top 50, SOS of 49.

Louisville - 5-3 against the Top 50 in the RPI, with 3 losses to teams outside of the Top 50, SOS of 21.

Villanova - 4-6 against the Top 50, no losses to teams outside of the Top 50, SOS of 34.

WVU - 3-5 against the Top 50, 3 losses outside the Top 50, SOS of 9.

Syracuse: 5-6 against the Top 50, 2 losses outside the Top 50, SOS 15.

Marquette: 5-4 against the Top 50, 1 loss outside of the Top 50, SOS 77.


Who in that group should clearly be ranked/seeded ahead of Memphis? No one has clearly done better against the Top 50 than Memphis, many of those teams have bad losses, Memphis doesn't, Memphis has a SOS that isn't far below the average in that group.

I wish we could play in the Big East, but we don't, and it isn't our choice. All we do is beat everyone the conference puts in front of us, year after year, and we challenge ourselves as much as possible OOC. Every year we run up a gaudy record, and every year people doubt Memphis. Every year, Memphis has made a run deep into the tournament to prove everyone wrong. I don't know what else we can do to prove ourselves to people.

(03-01-2009 02:47 PM)TigerEsquire Wrote:  Bottom line: Memphis does not lose to bad teams. Nearly everyone else does. Excluding UConn and Pitt, who has a record that much more impressive than Memphis? Lets compare...

Memphis - 4-3 against the Top 50 in the RPI, no losses to teams outside of the Top 50, SOS of 49.

Louisville - 5-3 against the Top 50 in the RPI, with 3 losses to teams outside of the Top 50, SOS of 21.

Villanova - 4-6 against the Top 50, no losses to teams outside of the Top 50, SOS of 34.

WVU - 3-5 against the Top 50, 3 losses outside the Top 50, SOS of 9.

Syracuse: 5-6 against the Top 50, 2 losses outside the Top 50, SOS 15.

Marquette: 5-4 against the Top 50, 1 loss outside of the Top 50, SOS 77.


Who in that group should clearly be ranked/seeded ahead of Memphis? No one has clearly done better against the Top 50 than Memphis, many of those teams have bad losses, Memphis doesn't, Memphis has a SOS that isn't far below the average in that group.

I wish we could play in the Big East, but we don't, and it isn't our choice. All we do is beat everyone the conference puts in front of us, year after year, and we challenge ourselves as much as possible OOC. Every year we run up a gaudy record, and every year people doubt Memphis. Every year, Memphis has made a run deep into the tournament to prove everyone wrong. I don't know what else we can do to prove ourselves to people.

You must be a lawyer because you frame the question to suit your argument. Memphis doesn't lose to bad teams. Why no try it this way, Does Memphis beat any good teams?

I'd argue that the BE only has four bad teams and nobody good lost to them. Providence, etc are midrange teams, they are hardly bad. UAB is bad. BOston College beat UNC. BC is a lower midrange team but they are not bad. Nobody in the top 10 has lost to a bad team.

Last year's Memphis team won the big games. This year's Memphis team lost their big games. Just like georgetown can be up and down, memphis can be up and down. Why keep bringing up past success when those guys are no longer on the team. I'm not anti-memphis but you guys keep flipping the facts to make this year's team as good as last years and I think most people don't believe it is.

And your top 50 list looks a lot different if it were the top 15. Top 50 could mean Boston College and Providence.

(03-01-2009 03:11 PM)frogman Wrote:  

(03-01-2009 02:47 PM)TigerEsquire Wrote:  Bottom line: Memphis does not lose to bad teams. Nearly everyone else does. Excluding UConn and Pitt, who has a record that much more impressive than Memphis? Lets compare...

Memphis - 4-3 against the Top 50 in the RPI, no losses to teams outside of the Top 50, SOS of 49.

Louisville - 5-3 against the Top 50 in the RPI, with 3 losses to teams outside of the Top 50, SOS of 21.

Villanova - 4-6 against the Top 50, no losses to teams outside of the Top 50, SOS of 34.

WVU - 3-5 against the Top 50, 3 losses outside the Top 50, SOS of 9.

Syracuse: 5-6 against the Top 50, 2 losses outside the Top 50, SOS 15.

Marquette: 5-4 against the Top 50, 1 loss outside of the Top 50, SOS 77.


Who in that group should clearly be ranked/seeded ahead of Memphis? No one has clearly done better against the Top 50 than Memphis, many of those teams have bad losses, Memphis doesn't, Memphis has a SOS that isn't far below the average in that group.

I wish we could play in the Big East, but we don't, and it isn't our choice. All we do is beat everyone the conference puts in front of us, year after year, and we challenge ourselves as much as possible OOC. Every year we run up a gaudy record, and every year people doubt Memphis. Every year, Memphis has made a run deep into the tournament to prove everyone wrong. I don't know what else we can do to prove ourselves to people.

You must be a lawyer because you frame the question to suit your argument. Memphis doesn't lose to bad teams. Why no try it this way, Does Memphis beat any good teams?

I'd argue that the BE only has four bad teams and nobody good lost to them. Providence, etc are midrange teams, they are hardly bad. UAB is bad. BOston College beat UNC. BC is a lower midrange team but they are not bad. Nobody in the top 10 has lost to a bad team.

Last year's Memphis team won the big games. This year's Memphis team lost their big games. Just like georgetown can be up and down, memphis can be up and down. Why keep bringing up past success when those guys are no longer on the team. I'm not anti-memphis but you guys keep flipping the facts to make this year's team as good as last years and I think most people don't believe it is.

And your top 50 list looks a lot different if it were the top 15. Top 50 could mean Boston College and Providence.

First, let me clarify, I don't think this team is as good as last years, and any Memphis fan who thinks that is delusional. That being said, I think the best 5 or 6 teams from last year are all better than any team this year. In comparison to other teams playing this year, I think Memphis is a Top 10 team, and capable of beating anyone.

I think you do underestimate UAB. If you think UAB isn't better than or at least in the same category as Cleveland State, Kentucky, Davidson, Western Kentucky, and UNLV, than you are crazy.

Memphis did lose their big games this year, but that doesn't justify your Georgetown comparison. Memphis started slow, just like Louisville. The difference is Louisville has the benefit of playing strong teams in the second half of the season. They got the chance to prove they are a Top 10 team that just had a few problems early in the year. We don't get that chance. We try and schedule non-conference games in the middle of the conference season and very few will agree to it.

Memphis might have won 20 in a row only because we have played very few good teams over the past 3 months, and we will get bounced in the 2nd round. Memphis might have won 20 in a row because they figured things out over the Christmas break and will win it all this year. Just like the previous 3 seasons, because of our weak conference schedule, we won't find out which is the truth until later this month.

Fair enough.

But I do think that Cleveland State, Kentucky, Davidson, Western Kentucky, and UNLV, and UAB are all pretty terrible. Yea that means Syr lost to a bad team-- Cleveland State. What can I say. They had memphis on their mind.

Good Luck in the tournament. And I really hope someday we won't be wondering what memphis would do in the BE. We'd know for a fact.

Quote:MOving ahead it makes no sense for the BE to play anyone from the ACC or anyone good as part of our OOC schedule. We should stop scheduleing good teams OOC because the benefit only goes one way

this statement is ridiculous, especially since it's coming from a syracuse fan. syracuse was left out of the ncaa tournament the past two seasons, and it was due in no small part to their ooc schedule, or lack thereof. if you schedule nothing but cupcakes out of conference you're taking a pass on making any sort of case for yourself in those games. as a result, you put a ton of pressure on yourself to deliver in conference. in the big east that's not easy. beating florida, kansas and memphis didn't benefit syracuse in your mind??? without those wins the ground that syracuse is standing on wouldn't be nearly as solid.

i said something to this effect on the cincinnati board, but i believe it applies here....

memphis doesn't get the credit they deserve for dominating c-usa the way that they have. do they have a rougher time in c-usa than they would have in the big east?? certainly not. i'm not going to sit here for one second and say that they do. however, it's tougher on them than what they get credit for.

whenever they go on the road, it is the super bowl for the other team. the arena is sold out, the fans are jacked up, the players are jacked up, and in a lot of cases it's the high point of that team's season. overcoming that time and time agian is not easy. earlier this season connecticut went to buffalo and barely won. buffalo was jacked, the fans were jacked, the players gave it their all, and the bullseye on uconn's back couldn't have been bigger. they barely won. what if they had to play ten games like that every year?? it would not be more difficult than playing in the big east and i'm not saying that it is, but i am saying that it's not easy either.

what if louisville had to play at western kentucky in diddle arena ever year?? imagine what that game would mean to western kentucky and what the atmosphere would be like. on top of that, what if they had to play ten road games like that every year?? that's what it's like for memphis, xavier, butler, gonzaga, davidson and the like. playing at utep and at uab and at tulsa and at houston, etc every year isn't a cakewalk. if you've watched the ncaa tournament these past few seasons, it isn't as if memphis and the other teams i mentoined aren't battle tested. a few have advanced pretty far into it and taken down some major conference teams along the way. winning 56 games in a row in conference usa is no small feat when you consider every road game they play in is like what connecticut faced when they went into buffalo. no, it's not as hard as the big east, but to say that it's a cakewalk is very misinformed.

(02-26-2009 12:47 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The truth will come out in the tourney.

Just as it did last year. Ask Mich. St, Texas & UCLA how bad we were after playing in CUSA all year long.

(02-26-2009 01:16 PM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  

(02-26-2009 01:11 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(02-26-2009 12:47 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The truth will come out in the tourney.

Ask UCLA, Michigan State and Texas if it came out last year.

Different season, different team. By that logic Kansas would be the favorite to win the tournament this year.

The poiint is every year they get bashed for being in CUSA and just check the last 4 years. Nothing has changed this year.

(03-01-2009 05:47 PM)AtlantaTonyTiger Wrote:  

(02-26-2009 01:16 PM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  

(02-26-2009 01:11 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(02-26-2009 12:47 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The truth will come out in the tourney.

Ask UCLA, Michigan State and Texas if it came out last year.

Different season, different team. By that logic Kansas would be the favorite to win the tournament this year.

The poiint is every year they get bashed for being in CUSA and just check the last 4 years. Nothing has changed this year.

I hear you...Bottomline: bet against Memphis before the Elite 8 at your own risk. I'm thinking now they deserve a 2 seed...was torn between 2 or 3. Will be very interested in seeing how Memphis does against any BE teams they meet in March?

I think UConn, Pitt, UNC and OU will be the #1 seeds at this juncture. Also, Duke is vastly overrated.

(03-01-2009 04:59 PM)TigerEsquire Wrote:  First, let me clarify, I don't think this team is as good as last years, and any Memphis fan who thinks that is delusional. That being said, I think the best 5 or 6 teams from last year are all better than any team this year. In comparison to other teams playing this year, I think Memphis is a Top 10 team, and capable of beating anyone.

I don't think so. I would like to see this year's UCONN team vs. Memphis of last year. Pitt and UCONN would no doubt give both Kansas and Memphis of last year a run for their money. That statement is just not true.

A less experienced UCONN team from last year gave Memphis a run for its money and then some. That was before Thabeet discovered he could dominate. This year's UCONN team has better guards and a very dominating big man.

(03-01-2009 05:45 PM)AtlantaTonyTiger Wrote:  

(02-26-2009 12:47 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The truth will come out in the tourney.

Just as it did last year. Ask Mich. St, Texas & UCLA how bad we were after playing in CUSA all year long.

You would have a good point if this was the same Memphis team from last season, but they have already shown that they are not as good as last years Memphis team.

(03-01-2009 05:30 PM)3rd Wise Man Wrote:  i said something to this effect on the cincinnati board, but i believe it applies here....

memphis doesn't get the credit they deserve for dominating c-usa the way that they have. do they have a rougher time in c-usa than they would have in the big east?? certainly not. i'm not going to sit here for one second and say that they do. however, it's tougher on them than what they get credit for.

whenever they go on the road, it is the super bowl for the other team. the arena is sold out, the fans are jacked up, the players are jacked up, and in a lot of cases it's the high point of that team's season. overcoming that time and time agian is not easy. earlier this season connecticut went to buffalo and barely won. buffalo was jacked, the fans were jacked, the players gave it their all, and the bullseye on uconn's back couldn't have been bigger. they barely won. what if they had to play ten games like that every year?? it would not be more difficult than playing in the big east and i'm not saying that it is, but i am saying that it's not easy either.

what if louisville had to play at western kentucky in diddle arena ever year?? imagine what that game would mean to western kentucky and what the atmosphere would be like. on top of that, what if they had to play ten road games like that every year?? that's what it's like for memphis, xavier, butler, gonzaga, davidson and the like. playing at utep and at uab and at tulsa and at houston, etc every year isn't a cakewalk. if you've watched the ncaa tournament these past few seasons, it isn't as if memphis and the other teams i mentoined aren't battle tested. a few have advanced pretty far into it and taken down some major conference teams along the way. winning 56 games in a row in conference usa is no small feat when you consider every road game they play in is like what connecticut faced when they went into buffalo. no, it's not as hard as the big east, but to say that it's a cakewalk is very misinformed.

I understand exactly what you are saying. But dont think for a minute that Uconn or Pitt or Louisville doesnt get to play in the same jacked up atmosphere in BE arena. If you are a top team in any league, you face that kind of atmosphere on the road. The difference is that in addition to playing such atmospheres in the BE, the opposing teams are much better for the most part than they are in Cusa.

SU is not a top team in the BE this season nor the last couple of seasons, but because they are historically a top team in the league, you better believe that teams like Rutgers, Seton Hall, St Johns etc...are jacked up to play them and the arens are full. I have not even mentioned the big rivalry games on the road like Georgetown and Uconn and Nova. I dont have to mention that Atmosphere that Cuse played in at Memphis do I? BE teams deal with what Memphis deals with on a nightly bases, but only against better competition for the most part.

All of the posting in the world is not going to change anyones opinion. Memphis fans are not going to change BE fans opinions, and BE fans are not going to change Memphis fans opinions, at least not on a message board. But Memphis will have an opportunity to prove all of the naysayers wrong just like last year. That the great beauty of the NCAA Tourney. Everyone gets a shot to make a statement and prove the naysayers wrong.

(03-01-2009 06:59 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  All of the posting in the world is not going to change anyones opinion. Memphis fans are not going to change BE fans opinions, and BE fans are not going to change Memphis fans opinions, at least not on a message board. But Memphis will have an opportunity to prove all of the naysayers wrong just like last year. That the great beauty of the NCAA Tourney. Everyone gets a shot to make a statement and prove the naysayers wrong.

That's what makes college basketball so great.

cuseroc, if i did not properly emphasize the fact that i understand that the big east is more challenging and intense than what memphis faces in conference usa, then let me do so now. i understand it completely. i disagree with nothing that you said in your post.

my only point is that memphis has it harder than what most people give them credit for. it's not as hard as the big east. i'm not even going to attempt to argue that it is. only an idiot would argue that it is. i'm just saying that it's not a cakewalk, which is the exact term that people use when describing what memphis faces in conference usa. it's harder than what people think. i think you can agree with that, since you first mentioned that you saw my point.

The Memphis resume is very similar to the team two years ago that lost to the best teams on their schedule early (started 8-3), finished the season strong on a long winning streak (went into the NCAA tourney 27-3), and got a #2 seed.

That team made the Regional Finals before losing to #1 seed Ohio State. Along the way they beat A&M in Texas (in Sweet 16) after A&M beat Louisville in Lexington (in 2nd round).

(03-01-2009 08:22 PM)3rd Wise Man Wrote:  cuseroc, if i did not properly emphasize the fact that i understand that the big east is more challenging and intense than what memphis faces in conference usa, then let me do so now. i understand it completely. i disagree with nothing that you said in your post.

my only point is that memphis has it harder than what most people give them credit for. it's not as hard as the big east. i'm not even going to attempt to argue that it is. only an idiot would argue that it is. i'm just saying that it's not a cakewalk, which is the exact term that people use when describing what memphis faces in conference usa. it's harder than what people think. i think you can agree with that, since you first mentioned that you saw my point.

I can understand that Memphis going thru Cusa is a little tougher than BE fans are giving credit for. The only team in the whole league that BE fans respect is Memphis. I'm willing to admit that it could be a little tougher than we think.

But dont think that BE fans are trashing Memphis. I believe that this Memphis team is very good, just not as good as last year. Last years team was special, and they could really shoot the ball, and it may take Memphis another year or two to reach that level again. Cal has been recruiting as well as anyone in the country and he is a very good coach, so I know he will get back there soon enough, just not this year. If they do, then I will admit that I was wrong.

In C-USA's defense, it never got the credit it deserved when UC, UL, and Marquette were ruling the league along with Memphis. Not being a BCS conference really keeps any of those conferences from getting much respect.

How much respect do people have for the A10? They sent 2 teams to the Elite 8 a few years back. Xavier and St. Joe's have been very good in recent years, Dayton appears to be on the upswing again.