Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
Author Message
Chappy Online
Resident Goonie
*

Posts: 16,004
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 598
I Root For: ECU
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post: #181
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
(03-11-2018 11:55 PM)Aztec Since 88 Wrote:  I would like the committee to take the stance you must be least .500 in league play to be considered for an at large position. If you are less than .500 in conference you must win the autobid.

I'd be in favor of it. It wouldn't help you get the all of the best teams in the tournament, but it would add to the diversity of schools in the field.
03-12-2018 08:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bostonspider Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 291
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 4
I Root For: Richmond
Location:
Post: #182
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
(03-12-2018 07:45 AM)MKPitt Wrote:  
(03-11-2018 09:32 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  A-10 manages 3 bids, again.

Yeah, I think I read that’s 11 years in a row now.

11 years in a row of a MINIMUM of 3 bids, I think the max the A10 has gotten was 6 a few years ago. I did call the possibility of three bids, with Davidson being the conference winner a last week. SBU aeems liked they were dinged by the committee a lot for the loss though, all the way down to the PIG

"Well the A10 has two teams pretty well locks for the tourney. In Lunardi's latest Bracket, SBU is up to a 10 seed is not one of the last 8 in. Coupled with URI as an 8 seed. If someone else comes out of the A10 tourney, looks like the conference would likely get 3 teams in."
03-12-2018 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,398
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 83
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #183
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
(03-12-2018 08:58 AM)bostonspider Wrote:  
(03-12-2018 07:45 AM)MKPitt Wrote:  
(03-11-2018 09:32 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  A-10 manages 3 bids, again.

Yeah, I think I read that’s 11 years in a row now.

11 years in a row of a MINIMUM of 3 bids, I think the max the A10 has gotten was 6 a few years ago. I did call the possibility of three bids, with Davidson being the conference winner a last week. SBU aeems liked they were dinged by the committee a lot for the loss though, all the way down to the PIG

"Well the A10 has two teams pretty well locks for the tourney. In Lunardi's latest Bracket, SBU is up to a 10 seed is not one of the last 8 in. Coupled with URI as an 8 seed. If someone else comes out of the A10 tourney, looks like the conference would likely get 3 teams in."

We've seen the committee "make amends" for prior snubs, though. Some thought the AAC got robbed a bid here and there back when they first started, and then got two "gift bids" with teams who would have been considered out by many. Bonaventure goes back to that '15-16 season where maybe St. Joe's stole the bid? They had a good RPI, and better than some others...didn't get the bid. Now, with a much higher RPI, here they are again, but they won't "get screwed" a second time.
03-12-2018 10:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,320
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 366
I Root For: Houston
Location: Zamunda
Post: #184
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
(03-12-2018 08:41 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  
(03-12-2018 12:30 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  That's not fair to teams with really tough conferences or injuries in really tough conferences. I would like for them to be slightly more subjective and weigh recent performance as much as total body of work. OU and Arizona State got in due things they did 3-4 months ago. The Pac wasn't even good this year.

Then why bother with OOC. It's called a basketball season not a basketball last 10 games it would be idiotic to judges season by only part of it

And here's the thing if you get hot at the end of the season then that use you a chance to win the conference tournament But then you complain about things getting hot at the end of the year and winning the conference tournament and getting in when they had a lousy first part of the season so make up your mind what do you want ?

You want one standard in one scenario in another standard for another scenario

I didn't say throw out the results, I said factor in recent performance as much as anything else. You're supposed to be finding the best teams, not the ones that look best on paper. Often times, teams and players haven't been fine tuned in November and because they have to incorporate newcomers into the mix, they usually take 5-15 games to get a sharp on court chemistry.

So what Arizona State posted some big wins months ago, they proved themselves to be mediocre as the season wore on. Saint Mary's didn't have their schedule but proved to be good consistently throughout the year. I'm fine with things turned out because it was a coin flip ultimately and ASU happened to win.
03-12-2018 01:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 30,788
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 287
I Root For: College Sports
Location:
Post: #185
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
(03-12-2018 01:59 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  
(03-12-2018 08:41 AM)dbackjon Wrote:  
(03-12-2018 12:30 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  That's not fair to teams with really tough conferences or injuries in really tough conferences. I would like for them to be slightly more subjective and weigh recent performance as much as total body of work. OU and Arizona State got in due things they did 3-4 months ago. The Pac wasn't even good this year.

Then why bother with OOC. It's called a basketball season not a basketball last 10 games it would be idiotic to judges season by only part of it

And here's the thing if you get hot at the end of the season then that use you a chance to win the conference tournament But then you complain about things getting hot at the end of the year and winning the conference tournament and getting in when they had a lousy first part of the season so make up your mind what do you want ?

You want one standard in one scenario in another standard for another scenario

I didn't say throw out the results, I said factor in recent performance as much as anything else. You're supposed to be finding the best teams, not the ones that look best on paper. Often times, teams and players haven't been fine tuned in November and because they have to incorporate newcomers into the mix, they usually take 5-15 games to get a sharp on court chemistry.

So what Arizona State posted some big wins months ago, they proved themselves to be mediocre as the season wore on. Saint Mary's didn't have their schedule but proved to be good consistently throughout the year. I'm fine with things turned out because it was a coin flip ultimately and ASU happened to win.

St Mary's had a pathetic schedule though. not just in conference- but had only 2 Q2 games OOC all year long as well. But they found a way to squeeze in 11 Q3 an Q4 OOC games. Reported last night I saw that they had turned down games with Rhode Island and Creighton. So I'm not just OK with them missing, but I'm glad they missed. Maybe Bennett will learn from this and actually schedule something OOC.
03-12-2018 02:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,398
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 83
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #186
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
(03-12-2018 02:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  St Mary's had a pathetic schedule though. not just in conference- but had only 2 Q2 games OOC all year long as well. But they found a way to squeeze in 11 Q3 an Q4 OOC games. Reported last night I saw that they had turned down games with Rhode Island and Creighton. So I'm not just OK with them missing, but I'm glad they missed. Maybe Bennett will learn from this and actually schedule something OOC.

I agree. I honestly expected Bennett to have learned from prior snubs; he should know better. Apparently, no he doesn't. And his team suffers for it. Again, it seems.

To be fair, though, if they aren't winning those two games, and now you have a record of 26-7, where are they in the field? They gambled wrong on Cal and Dayton, and were punished for that. Swapping out two other games and coming up short doesn't sound like much of a reward, either. If the charge is "you're not as good as your record indicates," I'm not sure how that's really assessed. We know how it is for the big guys...not the mid-majors.

Or, trade the losses to UGA and WSU, win those and lose to URI and Creighton (trading out Sac St. and SFPA), and back to 28-5...you still don't have "great wins," but your SOS and NC-SOS improve. For this, they're rewarded...with one of the last spots or lower lines?
(This post was last modified: 03-12-2018 03:02 PM by The Cutter of Bish.)
03-12-2018 03:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,320
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 366
I Root For: Houston
Location: Zamunda
Post: #187
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
@dbackjon

As for the last half of your post, again it's not that the last half of the season should matter, it's that you have to account for the totality of everything. You need to know who the best teams are going into the Tournament.
03-12-2018 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,320
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 366
I Root For: Houston
Location: Zamunda
Post: #188
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
I think the San Francisco loss combined with some of the other bubble activity just barely squeezed them out, not to mention a tough commitee.

The committee is hypocritical anyways if the criteria is having a really tough schedule, or else how do you leave out Oklahoma State? Why, because their RPI is too high? They deserved a bid more than Syracuse, OU and Arizona State.
03-12-2018 03:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dbackjon Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,669
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 196
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #189
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
(03-12-2018 03:12 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  @dbackjon

As for the last half of your post, again it's not that the last half of the season should matter, it's that you have to account for the totality of everything. You need to know who the best teams are going into the Tournament.

First half of the season, ASU was playing better than any team in the country. But that is still THIS season.
03-12-2018 03:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,320
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 366
I Root For: Houston
Location: Zamunda
Post: #190
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
It is but so is the second half. In the end, I think justice prevailed as they just barely slipped in the Dance, although I'd say USC and St. Mary's have legit greviences over not getting in.
03-12-2018 04:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,320
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 366
I Root For: Houston
Location: Zamunda
Post: #191
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
Looks like Middle Tennessee is angry about not going Dancing. They're taking their frustrations out on some perfectly innocent kittens.
03-13-2018 08:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
_C2_ Offline
The King of Overanalysis
*

Posts: 19,320
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 366
I Root For: Houston
Location: Zamunda
Post: #192
RE: Realistic Mid-Major At-Large Bid Candidates
Saint Mary's too.
03-13-2018 10:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2018 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, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.