The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(05-07-2018 06:09 PM)ODUDJ96 Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 10:51 AM)ODUBB35 Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 10:36 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:19 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  This past season CUSA was better at the top than any season we ever played in the CAA.

Not a chance. MTSU would have competed and WKU had enough to play spoiler (they were too inconsistent to win it), but no way this year's ODU, Marshall, or UAB finished in the top half of those CAAs.

Maybe for the last couple of years in the CAA.

For the majority of it's existence, the CAA sucked.

That is my recollection as well. Other than a four year stretch, the CAA was cannon fodder in the dance - and NIT invites were rare.

The four year stretch you refer to must have been in the mid 90's (see Villanova).

(05-07-2018 10:23 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 10:16 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:19 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  This past season CUSA was better at the top than any season we ever played in the CAA.

I don't know about that. ODU finished 2nd in C-USA this year and they certainly weren't as good as some of the teams Blaine had.

Middle Tennessee was a 1 seed in the NIT
Western Kentucky made the NIT semifinals
ODU was one of the final teams out of the NIT
Marshall, the fourth-best team and a team that ODU swept, won a game in the NCAA, the fourth year that a CUSA team won in the tournament — which the CAA *has* never done.

I think you can make a pretty decent case that the top four of CUSA this past season was better than the CAA's top four at any point in its history.

The four seed in the Caa went to the final 4.

This is the dumbest argument that’s ever been made in odu basketball history and you AGREED WITH IT.

Jesus dude.

In the CAA we went to 7 NCAAs and 4 NITS in the CAA over 22 seasons. Thats 50% of the time. However, we only won 2 first round NCAA games.

(05-07-2018 12:13 PM)Big Bluezilla Wrote:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_A..._by_school

Pretty clear who the cream was of this conference and UNCW is the only remaining team who sniffed and sustained success anytime in the last twenty five years. With VCU and GMU gone, I see no evidence that we wouldn't be the conference's "daddy"!

Except for where we keep losing to William and Mary lol.

(05-07-2018 12:41 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 12:13 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 11:49 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 10:23 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 10:16 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  I don't know about that. ODU finished 2nd in C-USA this year and they certainly weren't as good as some of the teams Blaine had.

Middle Tennessee was a 1 seed in the NIT
Western Kentucky made the NIT semifinals
ODU was one of the final teams out of the NIT
Marshall, the fourth-best team and a team that ODU swept, won a game in the NCAA, the fourth year that a CUSA team won in the tournament — which the CAA *has* never done.

I think you can make a pretty decent case that the top four of CUSA this past season was better than the CAA's top four at any point in its history.

The CAA had three teams in the NCAA tournament one year (ODU, VCU & GMU) and another year had two in the NCAA and two in the NIT. Most seasons you would be correct, but the CAA had as good or better teams some years.

But, that assumes mid majors are held to the same standards as they were previously.

2010/2011:

Ken Pom
GMU 24 (8 seed)
ODU 48 (9 seed)
VCU 53 (11 seed)

RPI
GMU 28
ODU 29
VCU 53

2017/2018

Ken Pom
MTSU 45 (no bid)
WKY 47 (no bid)
ODU 64 (no bid)

RPI
MTSU 33
WKY 45
ODU 77


ODU was a 9 seed in 2011 with the same credentials as MTSU just had. (I realize we won the tourney, but a 9 seed in 2011 equals no bid in 2018).

ODU had wins OOC against Clemson (5 seed), Xavier (6 Seed) and Richmond (12 Seed) as well as Dayton and Cleveland State (NIT). They also had 3 conference wins against VCU and GMU and were a total of 11-5 against the top 100.

MTSU played 3 NCAA teams OOC (Auburn, USC, and Miami) and lost all 3. Further, they were 0-2 in conference against Marshall, the only team to make the NCAAs. They went 4-6 against the top 100.

MTSU had a good team last season, but their resume simply doesn't compare to ODU's in 2011.

It’s absolutely unbelievable he keeps claiming to be a “stat” guy and yet he had absolutely no idea what they mean or how to interpret them.

Rpi and kenpom are one slice of a giant pie of a season.

That odu team and this year’s wku weren’t even close in terms of talent or performance despite having a similar rpi. Context is important as any number and giles routinely shows zero understanding of the context of any of the numbers he spouts off as “facts”.

Sos, quality wins and conference tourneys MATTER.

Wku had little in the way of that this year and Jeff jones has none of the above in 5 years.

Ridiculous.

(05-07-2018 02:46 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 02:40 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 02:29 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 12:41 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 12:13 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  But, that assumes mid majors are held to the same standards as they were previously.

2010/2011:

Ken Pom
GMU 24 (8 seed)
ODU 48 (9 seed)
VCU 53 (11 seed)

RPI
GMU 28
ODU 29
VCU 53

2017/2018

Ken Pom
MTSU 45 (no bid)
WKY 47 (no bid)
ODU 64 (no bid)

RPI
MTSU 33
WKY 45
ODU 77


ODU was a 9 seed in 2011 with the same credentials as MTSU just had. (I realize we won the tourney, but a 9 seed in 2011 equals no bid in 2018).

ODU had wins OOC against Clemson (5 seed), Xavier (6 Seed) and Richmond (12 Seed) as well as Dayton and Cleveland State (NIT). They also had 3 conference wins against VCU and GMU and were a total of 11-5 against the top 100.

MTSU played 3 NCAA teams OOC (Auburn, USC, and Miami) and lost all 3. Further, they were 0-2 in conference against Marshall, the only team to make the NCAAs. They went 4-6 against the top 100.

MTSU had a good team last season, but their resume simply doesn't compare to ODU's in 2011.

But but KenPom...

Blaine's teams rarely ran up the score and he often toyed around with lineups in the middle of the season ending with some narrower than expected wins against teams like Towson and usually a bad loss or two. But, his teams almost always showed up and played well against strong competition outside of the Patriot Center. He was never really a KenPom kind of coach.

LOL off this logic. Good teams beat teams by a lot of points. You are just making stuff up to try and support this faulty logic.

Jesus dude how are you not getting the very simple logic he is using to destroy your insanely poorly formed argument??

(05-07-2018 09:46 PM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 06:09 PM)ODUDJ96 Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 10:51 AM)ODUBB35 Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 10:36 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:19 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  This past season CUSA was better at the top than any season we ever played in the CAA.

Not a chance. MTSU would have competed and WKU had enough to play spoiler (they were too inconsistent to win it), but no way this year's ODU, Marshall, or UAB finished in the top half of those CAAs.

Maybe for the last couple of years in the CAA.

For the majority of it's existence, the CAA sucked.

That is my recollection as well. Other than a four year stretch, the CAA was cannon fodder in the dance - and NIT invites were rare.

The four year stretch you refer to must have been in the mid 90's (see Villanova).

Or Richmond, or navy, or uncw, or odu, or gmu, or vcu or Georgia state .......yeah no one from the caa ever did anything in the tourney lol.

If you're dumb enough to include Navy and Richmond's runs, you must now include Memphis, Louisville, Marquette, Cincinnati, and the likes for CUSA. This debate ended once you were silly enough to chime in.

Fact is, the CAA was never as good as you misremember it being. It had 1-2 great regular seasons and 3-4 great postseasons in the 30 seasons we were a member. In that same span, CUSA has been better 95% of the seasons.


Sent from my Pixel XL using CSNbbs mobile app

(05-08-2018 05:45 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  If you're dumb enough to include Navy and Richmond's runs, you must now include Memphis, Louisville, Marquette, Cincinnati, and the likes for CUSA. This debate ended once you were silly enough to chime in.

Fact is, the CAA was never as good as you misremember it being. It had 1-2 great regular seasons and 3-4 great postseasons in the 30 seasons we were a member. In that same span, CUSA has been better 95% of the seasons.


Sent from my Pixel XL using CSNbbs mobile app

It would be more fair to compare the old CAA to the Sun Belt (now CUSA) over that time since a lot of the teams now in CUSA were in the SB at the time we were in the CAA. In that case the CAA was better most of the time. Comparing old records should have the CAA vs the AAC (or old CUSA) in which case you are correct that 95% of the time they were better.

I was told, by a former player during the WKU game, that Blaine's teams would've run both of those teams out of the gym. He was speaking about WKU and ODU obviously.

(05-08-2018 06:13 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 05:45 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  If you're dumb enough to include Navy and Richmond's runs, you must now include Memphis, Louisville, Marquette, Cincinnati, and the likes for CUSA. This debate ended once you were silly enough to chime in.

Fact is, the CAA was never as good as you misremember it being. It had 1-2 great regular seasons and 3-4 great postseasons in the 30 seasons we were a member. In that same span, CUSA has been better 95% of the seasons.


Sent from my Pixel XL using CSNbbs mobile app

It would be more fair to compare the old CAA to the Sun Belt (now CUSA) over that time since a lot of the teams now in CUSA were in the SB at the time we were in the CAA. In that case the CAA was better most of the time. Comparing old records should have the CAA vs the AAC (or old CUSA) in which case you are correct that 95% of the time they were better.

We are comparing the CAA when we were in it to CUSA today. Aside from maybe MTSU in '16-'17, nobody has come close to reaching the level of play that the top 4 of the CAA reached in almost every year between 2004 and 2011. Go to YouTube and watch the highlights for an eye test. Even some of the Hofstra, Drexel, and Northeastern teams that never made the dance played at a higher level. That is why GMU and VCU made their big runs. They were accustomed to stepping up their level of play and were able to sustain it. All of us were winning big games OOC as well, which is a rarity in CUSA.

(05-08-2018 07:39 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 06:13 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 05:45 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  If you're dumb enough to include Navy and Richmond's runs, you must now include Memphis, Louisville, Marquette, Cincinnati, and the likes for CUSA. This debate ended once you were silly enough to chime in.

Fact is, the CAA was never as good as you misremember it being. It had 1-2 great regular seasons and 3-4 great postseasons in the 30 seasons we were a member. In that same span, CUSA has been better 95% of the seasons.


Sent from my Pixel XL using CSNbbs mobile app

It would be more fair to compare the old CAA to the Sun Belt (now CUSA) over that time since a lot of the teams now in CUSA were in the SB at the time we were in the CAA. In that case the CAA was better most of the time. Comparing old records should have the CAA vs the AAC (or old CUSA) in which case you are correct that 95% of the time they were better.

We are comparing the CAA when we were in it to CUSA today. Aside from maybe MTSU in '16-'17, nobody has come close to reaching the level of play that the top 4 of the CAA reached in almost every year between 2004 and 2011. Go to YouTube and watch the highlights for an eye test. Even some of the Hofstra, Drexel, and Northeastern teams that never made the dance played at a higher level. That is why GMU and VCU made their big runs. They were accustomed to stepping up their level of play and were able to sustain it. All of us were winning big games OOC as well, which is a rarity in CUSA.

And that CAA is dead.

(05-08-2018 07:49 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 07:39 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 06:13 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 05:45 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  If you're dumb enough to include Navy and Richmond's runs, you must now include Memphis, Louisville, Marquette, Cincinnati, and the likes for CUSA. This debate ended once you were silly enough to chime in.

Fact is, the CAA was never as good as you misremember it being. It had 1-2 great regular seasons and 3-4 great postseasons in the 30 seasons we were a member. In that same span, CUSA has been better 95% of the seasons.


Sent from my Pixel XL using CSNbbs mobile app

It would be more fair to compare the old CAA to the Sun Belt (now CUSA) over that time since a lot of the teams now in CUSA were in the SB at the time we were in the CAA. In that case the CAA was better most of the time. Comparing old records should have the CAA vs the AAC (or old CUSA) in which case you are correct that 95% of the time they were better.

We are comparing the CAA when we were in it to CUSA today. Aside from maybe MTSU in '16-'17, nobody has come close to reaching the level of play that the top 4 of the CAA reached in almost every year between 2004 and 2011. Go to YouTube and watch the highlights for an eye test. Even some of the Hofstra, Drexel, and Northeastern teams that never made the dance played at a higher level. That is why GMU and VCU made their big runs. They were accustomed to stepping up their level of play and were able to sustain it. All of us were winning big games OOC as well, which is a rarity in CUSA.

And that CAA is dead.

Correct and nobody is arguing to move back to the CAA, but regardless, this could not go unanswered...

(05-07-2018 09:19 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  This past season CUSA was better at the top than any season we ever played in the CAA.

(05-08-2018 07:39 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 06:13 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 05:45 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  If you're dumb enough to include Navy and Richmond's runs, you must now include Memphis, Louisville, Marquette, Cincinnati, and the likes for CUSA. This debate ended once you were silly enough to chime in.

Fact is, the CAA was never as good as you misremember it being. It had 1-2 great regular seasons and 3-4 great postseasons in the 30 seasons we were a member. In that same span, CUSA has been better 95% of the seasons.


Sent from my Pixel XL using CSNbbs mobile app

It would be more fair to compare the old CAA to the Sun Belt (now CUSA) over that time since a lot of the teams now in CUSA were in the SB at the time we were in the CAA. In that case the CAA was better most of the time. Comparing old records should have the CAA vs the AAC (or old CUSA) in which case you are correct that 95% of the time they were better.

We are comparing the CAA when we were in it to CUSA today. Aside from maybe MTSU in '16-'17, nobody has come close to reaching the level of play that the top 4 of the CAA reached in almost every year between 2004 and 2011. Go to YouTube and watch the highlights for an eye test. Even some of the Hofstra, Drexel, and Northeastern teams that never made the dance played at a higher level. That is why GMU and VCU made their big runs. They were accustomed to stepping up their level of play and were able to sustain it. All of us were winning big games OOC as well, which is a rarity in CUSA.

You have to schedule them first.

This year's CUSA would have been compatible with most of the good CAA years. The last few CAA years were exceptional, but CUSA has the potential to be even better (if they can keep their good players from transferring).

The best CAA years were usually ODU, VCU, GMU, and one other (Drexel, Hofstra, UNCW, etc.) Other than that, even I the best years, the conference wasn't that good.

CUSA has the potential to get 7 or 8 teams to that level, it just hasn't happened yet. Of course, we'll also have 7 or 8 sucky teams, but that's what you get in a 14 team football-first conference.

The CUSA champ, for the past 4 season, accomplished most or more than what the CAA champ did most years. It's not likely that we will match the fluke Final Four runs of VCU and GMU, but who knows? (That's why they were flukes).

(05-08-2018 07:52 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 07:49 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 07:39 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 06:13 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 05:45 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  If you're dumb enough to include Navy and Richmond's runs, you must now include Memphis, Louisville, Marquette, Cincinnati, and the likes for CUSA. This debate ended once you were silly enough to chime in.

Fact is, the CAA was never as good as you misremember it being. It had 1-2 great regular seasons and 3-4 great postseasons in the 30 seasons we were a member. In that same span, CUSA has been better 95% of the seasons.


Sent from my Pixel XL using CSNbbs mobile app

It would be more fair to compare the old CAA to the Sun Belt (now CUSA) over that time since a lot of the teams now in CUSA were in the SB at the time we were in the CAA. In that case the CAA was better most of the time. Comparing old records should have the CAA vs the AAC (or old CUSA) in which case you are correct that 95% of the time they were better.

We are comparing the CAA when we were in it to CUSA today. Aside from maybe MTSU in '16-'17, nobody has come close to reaching the level of play that the top 4 of the CAA reached in almost every year between 2004 and 2011. Go to YouTube and watch the highlights for an eye test. Even some of the Hofstra, Drexel, and Northeastern teams that never made the dance played at a higher level. That is why GMU and VCU made their big runs. They were accustomed to stepping up their level of play and were able to sustain it. All of us were winning big games OOC as well, which is a rarity in CUSA.

And that CAA is dead.

Correct and nobody is arguing to move back to the CAA, but regardless, this could not go unanswered...

(05-07-2018 09:19 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  This past season CUSA was better at the top than any season we ever played in the CAA.

Sorry, just a reminder as this discussion gets further and further away from whether JJ is in a make or break year or not.

I have to side on the CAA side, in the 00s it was special. The rivalry aspect is something we won't reach here. But perhaps if the NCAA hadn't slammed the door on mids getting at-large bids, we could probably see a lot more tourney success in CUSA. There are some talented teams in this league. But they did and we're all left to argue this annually with assumptions based on different guidelines for 2 different leagues in 2 different eras.

(05-08-2018 07:56 AM)ODUBB35 Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 07:39 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 06:13 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 05:45 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  If you're dumb enough to include Navy and Richmond's runs, you must now include Memphis, Louisville, Marquette, Cincinnati, and the likes for CUSA. This debate ended once you were silly enough to chime in.

Fact is, the CAA was never as good as you misremember it being. It had 1-2 great regular seasons and 3-4 great postseasons in the 30 seasons we were a member. In that same span, CUSA has been better 95% of the seasons.


Sent from my Pixel XL using CSNbbs mobile app

It would be more fair to compare the old CAA to the Sun Belt (now CUSA) over that time since a lot of the teams now in CUSA were in the SB at the time we were in the CAA. In that case the CAA was better most of the time. Comparing old records should have the CAA vs the AAC (or old CUSA) in which case you are correct that 95% of the time they were better.

We are comparing the CAA when we were in it to CUSA today. Aside from maybe MTSU in '16-'17, nobody has come close to reaching the level of play that the top 4 of the CAA reached in almost every year between 2004 and 2011. Go to YouTube and watch the highlights for an eye test. Even some of the Hofstra, Drexel, and Northeastern teams that never made the dance played at a higher level. That is why GMU and VCU made their big runs. They were accustomed to stepping up their level of play and were able to sustain it. All of us were winning big games OOC as well, which is a rarity in CUSA.

You have to schedule them first.

This year's CUSA would have been compatible with most of the good CAA years. The last few CAA years were exceptional, but CUSA has the potential to be even better (if they can keep their good players from transferring).

The best CAA years were usually ODU, VCU, GMU, and one other (Drexel, Hofstra, UNCW, etc.) Other than that, even I the best years, the conference wasn't that good.

CUSA has the potential to get 7 or 8 teams to that level, it just hasn't happened yet. Of course, we'll also have 7 or 8 sucky teams, but that's what you get in a 14 team football-first conference.

The CUSA champ, for the past 4 season, accomplished most or more than what the CAA champ did most years. It's not likely that we will match the fluke Final Four runs of VCU and GMU, but who knows? (That's why they were flukes).

MTSU played 3 at large teams (Miami, Auburn, USC) and went 0-3.

Winning a game in the NCAA tournament can be a fluke. Winning 4 or 5 games is not a fluke. Every win in the last 4 years was followed by a blowout loss. I'm more apt to see those wins as flukes than wins followed by more wins over the likes of UNC, UConn (in their prime), Purdue, FSU, and Kansas. It is not like either GMU or VCU's bracket fell apart with upsets and they got to cakewalk through double digit seeds.

FWIW, I do think the '16-'17 MTSU team was legit, could have been an at-large team in the old CAA, and also could have done more damage in the NCAA tournament if they didn't get Butler'd.

(05-08-2018 08:05 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 07:52 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 07:49 AM)ODUDrunkard13 Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 07:39 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(05-08-2018 06:13 AM)monarx Wrote:  It would be more fair to compare the old CAA to the Sun Belt (now CUSA) over that time since a lot of the teams now in CUSA were in the SB at the time we were in the CAA. In that case the CAA was better most of the time. Comparing old records should have the CAA vs the AAC (or old CUSA) in which case you are correct that 95% of the time they were better.

We are comparing the CAA when we were in it to CUSA today. Aside from maybe MTSU in '16-'17, nobody has come close to reaching the level of play that the top 4 of the CAA reached in almost every year between 2004 and 2011. Go to YouTube and watch the highlights for an eye test. Even some of the Hofstra, Drexel, and Northeastern teams that never made the dance played at a higher level. That is why GMU and VCU made their big runs. They were accustomed to stepping up their level of play and were able to sustain it. All of us were winning big games OOC as well, which is a rarity in CUSA.

And that CAA is dead.

Correct and nobody is arguing to move back to the CAA, but regardless, this could not go unanswered...

(05-07-2018 09:19 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  This past season CUSA was better at the top than any season we ever played in the CAA.

Sorry, just a reminder as this discussion gets further and further away from whether JJ is in a make or break year or not.

I have to side on the CAA side, in the 00s it was special. The rivalry aspect is something we won't reach here. But perhaps if the NCAA hadn't slammed the door on mids getting at-large bids, we could probably see a lot more tourney success in CUSA. There are some talented teams in this league. But they did and we're all left to argue this annually with assumptions based on different guidelines for 2 different leagues in 2 different eras.

I agree, but I don't necessarily believe the NCAA slammed the door on mids getting at-large bids. We were one bad loss from getting one just a few years ago. Instead, the mids that were largely getting the bids are now still getting them, but are in the AAC, Big East, and A10. Even in the 00s, there were scores of snubs against teams like Utah State, Missouri State, Harvard, and even Hofstra, Drexel, and Richmond). What they lacked is what the MTSUs of this year lacked... quality wins. What has changed is that aside from preseason tournaments, it has become much more difficult to get quality opponents on the schedule. MTSU had 4 top 100 wins, 3 of which were in conference. They actually had a good enough schedule, they just whiffed on all 3 chances at a quality win. I am not sure anyone has ever gotten an at-large with only 4 top 100 wins (I could be wrong). For comparison, ODU had 11 in 2010-2011.

We hear so much complaining about how hard it is for good mids to schedule games that will boost their resume, but none of them seem willing to play each other. Why is there not something like Bracket Busters to get some quality competition as the season comes down the stretch.

(05-08-2018 08:52 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  We hear so much complaining about how hard it is for good mids to schedule games that will boost their resume, but none of them seem willing to play each other. Why is there not something like Bracket Busters to get some quality competition as the season comes down the stretch.

If I remember correctly, ESPN cancelled that program. I certainly could be wrong, but I could of swore that happened a handful of years ago. The Cleveland State win at the TED in 2011 may have been the last one for us. I remember Norris Cole shooting bombs!

(05-08-2018 08:52 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  We hear so much complaining about how hard it is for good mids to schedule games that will boost their resume, but none of them seem willing to play each other. Why is there not something like Bracket Busters to get some quality competition as the season comes down the stretch.

That consultant suggested basically having an in-conference bracket busters where the top half of the conference are sure to play each other later in the season. I think thats a good idea since sometimes teams peak later and finish strong. If we want our toughest teams to have a shot they need to win big games early and late in the season. This would help in that regard.