(03-12-2024 05:11 PM)NIU75 Wrote:  Why do we keep talking about Burno and the Chicago connections? He only has two players on the team from the Chicago area. Ironically, we have five players that are not US citizens. Maybe we should talk about his foreign connections?
https://niuhuskies.com/sports/mens-basketball/roster

Agreed, it doesn't appear Burno has Chicago connections. We have a bunch of players from northeastern corridor of the US and foreign players. Maybe everyone assumed he did because he played at DePaul even though Burno himself is from NJ??

(03-12-2024 04:57 PM)uiniu57 Wrote:  

(03-11-2024 04:36 AM)epasnoopy Wrote:  [quote='HuskiePride12' pid='19509508' dateline='1710129344']
UIC just canned their coach. Maybe burno revisits this guy again and has a good chance with him.
Their head coach had a better winning % than our's. Hopefully Burno's leash is short if he has another bad season next year.

IF Burno could go 14-10 to start next season, even then he would only be on par (47-70) with UIC's Yaklich. And let's be honest, the MAC ain't on par with MVC basketball.
Speaking of which, Mullins at SIU gets them into two NCAA tourneys and an NIT but gets canned with an 86-68 (five year) career ledger. The Salukis finished 19-13 losing a first-round MVC tourney game in double overtime to UIC. Still sounds better than not even making your conference tourney. Perhaps the SIU grad originally from Downers Grove would be willing to take another job close to his original home and the opportunity to use his Chicago connections for recruiting?

To be fair, Yaklich's first season was in the Horizon League where he racked up 9 conference wins. In the MVC, he's been there 2 years and gotten 4 wins each year.

With that said, I kinda thought UIC was going to be kind of decent this year with their non-conf schedule. In non-conf, they went 7-5 with wins over Little Rock (who we beat but also who almost won the OVC this year), Loyola (yes...they beat Loyola 72-67), Middle Tennessee, George Washington (the worst A10 team), Jacksonville State (basically any CUSA team not named Sam Houston or LA Tech were kind of the same), and Western Michigan.

Then they got into MVC play and sucked balls.

Honestly, they had a very similar season to NIU in a lot of ways sans the big win over a really good team (Loyola). And no...sorry Rocket Fans...I don't consider our win over Toledo all that wonderful.

(03-12-2024 05:00 PM)HuskiePride12 Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 04:57 PM)uiniu57 Wrote:  

(03-11-2024 04:36 AM)epasnoopy Wrote:  [quote='HuskiePride12' pid='19509508' dateline='1710129344']
UIC just canned their coach. Maybe burno revisits this guy again and has a good chance with him.
Their head coach had a better winning % than our's. Hopefully Burno's leash is short if he has another bad season next year.

IF Burno could go 14-10 to start next season, even then he would only be on par (47-70) with UIC's Yaklich. And let's be honest, the MAC ain't on par with MVC basketball.
Speaking of which, Mullins at SIU gets them into two NCAA tourneys and an NIT but gets canned with an 86-68 (five year) career ledger. The Salukis finished 19-13 losing a first-round MVC tourney game in double overtime to UIC. Still sounds better than not even making your conference tourney. Perhaps the SIU grad originally from Downers Grove would be willing to take another job close to his original home and the opportunity to use his Chicago connections for recruiting?

That might be one guy to reach out to. Rare to see a coach get canned with basically being in the hunt for the top of the MVC.

Mullins is a good coach and it's a bit of a head scratcher why he got canned.

Personally, I felt they should have been better than they were in the MVC this year but still. He's had a pretty good run.

I'd definitely look at him as an upgrade on Burno.

Now, he's an SIU guy and has connections there but he's from Hinsdale and went to Downers Grove South. Not that we have an opening for him and he sure as hell wouldn't take an assistant spot under Burno. But if we did, we could do a hell of a lot worse than Bryan Mullins.

(03-12-2024 05:57 PM)Big Red Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 05:00 PM)HuskiePride12 Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 04:57 PM)uiniu57 Wrote:  

(03-11-2024 04:36 AM)epasnoopy Wrote:  [quote='HuskiePride12' pid='19509508' dateline='1710129344']
UIC just canned their coach. Maybe burno revisits this guy again and has a good chance with him.
Their head coach had a better winning % than our's. Hopefully Burno's leash is short if he has another bad season next year.

IF Burno could go 14-10 to start next season, even then he would only be on par (47-70) with UIC's Yaklich. And let's be honest, the MAC ain't on par with MVC basketball.
Speaking of which, Mullins at SIU gets them into two NCAA tourneys and an NIT but gets canned with an 86-68 (five year) career ledger. The Salukis finished 19-13 losing a first-round MVC tourney game in double overtime to UIC. Still sounds better than not even making your conference tourney. Perhaps the SIU grad originally from Downers Grove would be willing to take another job close to his original home and the opportunity to use his Chicago connections for recruiting?

That might be one guy to reach out to. Rare to see a coach get canned with basically being in the hunt for the top of the MVC.

Mullins is a good coach and it's a bit of a head scratcher why he got canned.

Personally, I felt they should have been better than they were in the MVC this year but still. He's had a pretty good run.

I'd definitely look at him as an upgrade on Burno.

Now, he's an SIU guy and has connections there but he's from Hinsdale and went to Downers Grove South. Not that we have an opening for him and he sure as hell wouldn't take an assistant spot under Burno. But if we did, we could do a hell of a lot worse than Bryan Mullins.

Unless there is something under the surface, I would take Mullins in a heartbeat. Forty two wins in the last two seasons. Over five years 86-68. That be quite an improvement for us.

(03-12-2024 06:41 PM)HuskieDave Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 05:57 PM)Big Red Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 05:00 PM)HuskiePride12 Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 04:57 PM)uiniu57 Wrote:  

(03-11-2024 04:36 AM)epasnoopy Wrote:  [quote='HuskiePride12' pid='19509508' dateline='1710129344']
UIC just canned their coach. Maybe burno revisits this guy again and has a good chance with him.
Their head coach had a better winning % than our's. Hopefully Burno's leash is short if he has another bad season next year.

IF Burno could go 14-10 to start next season, even then he would only be on par (47-70) with UIC's Yaklich. And let's be honest, the MAC ain't on par with MVC basketball.
Speaking of which, Mullins at SIU gets them into two NCAA tourneys and an NIT but gets canned with an 86-68 (five year) career ledger. The Salukis finished 19-13 losing a first-round MVC tourney game in double overtime to UIC. Still sounds better than not even making your conference tourney. Perhaps the SIU grad originally from Downers Grove would be willing to take another job close to his original home and the opportunity to use his Chicago connections for recruiting?

That might be one guy to reach out to. Rare to see a coach get canned with basically being in the hunt for the top of the MVC.

Mullins is a good coach and it's a bit of a head scratcher why he got canned.

Personally, I felt they should have been better than they were in the MVC this year but still. He's had a pretty good run.

I'd definitely look at him as an upgrade on Burno.

Now, he's an SIU guy and has connections there but he's from Hinsdale and went to Downers Grove South. Not that we have an opening for him and he sure as hell wouldn't take an assistant spot under Burno. But if we did, we could do a hell of a lot worse than Bryan Mullins.

Unless there is something under the surface, I would take Mullins in a heartbeat. Forty two wins in the last two seasons. Over five years 86-68. That be quite an improvement for us.

Mullins was 5-27 against the top teams in the Valley the past 3 years.

(03-12-2024 08:18 PM)niu16 Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 06:41 PM)HuskieDave Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 05:57 PM)Big Red Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 05:00 PM)HuskiePride12 Wrote:  

(03-12-2024 04:57 PM)uiniu57 Wrote:  IF Burno could go 14-10 to start next season, even then he would only be on par (47-70) with UIC's Yaklich. And let's be honest, the MAC ain't on par with MVC basketball.
Speaking of which, Mullins at SIU gets them into two NCAA tourneys and an NIT but gets canned with an 86-68 (five year) career ledger. The Salukis finished 19-13 losing a first-round MVC tourney game in double overtime to UIC. Still sounds better than not even making your conference tourney. Perhaps the SIU grad originally from Downers Grove would be willing to take another job close to his original home and the opportunity to use his Chicago connections for recruiting?

That might be one guy to reach out to. Rare to see a coach get canned with basically being in the hunt for the top of the MVC.

Mullins is a good coach and it's a bit of a head scratcher why he got canned.

Personally, I felt they should have been better than they were in the MVC this year but still. He's had a pretty good run.

I'd definitely look at him as an upgrade on Burno.

Now, he's an SIU guy and has connections there but he's from Hinsdale and went to Downers Grove South. Not that we have an opening for him and he sure as hell wouldn't take an assistant spot under Burno. But if we did, we could do a hell of a lot worse than Bryan Mullins.

Unless there is something under the surface, I would take Mullins in a heartbeat. Forty two wins in the last two seasons. Over five years 86-68. That be quite an improvement for us.

Mullins was 5-27 against the top teams in the Valley the past 3 years.

There’s a difference though SIU expects to be the top team in the MVC yearly. I think most would be happy if NIU was considered among the top 3 year and year out with an occasional year where they’re in the discussion for the MAC top team.

He would be an upgrade instantly and has connections that would help greatly in recruiting this area.

Mullins was in the NCAA tourney as a SIU player, not as a coach. He has never made the NCAA tourney as a head coach, but was trending up, and had attendance at SIU games increasing. SIU is just trying to get back to their golden era of Sweet 16 runs and are searching for a coach who has head coaching experience, at any level, according to the relatively new AD.

He would be a great hire, and NIU would be a respectable program in due time with him. We can only dream.......

(03-12-2024 11:15 PM)jjj Wrote:  Mullins was in the NCAA tourney as a SIU player, not as a coach. He has never made the NCAA tourney as a head coach, but was trending up, and had attendance at SIU games increasing. SIU is just trying to get back to their golden era of Sweet 16 runs and are searching for a coach who has head coaching experience, at any level, according to the relatively new AD.

He would be a great hire, and NIU would be a respectable program in due time with him. We can only dream.......

He also lost his top players to the portal at the start of this year, so SIU Admin seems pretty unrealistic thinking they should win the MVC. With the players that left- yes without - no shot. Once again I know others disagree, but I hate the Portal era we are in.
I watched a good bit of MVC basketball the last week to say they are much better than the MAC is a stretch. Maybe with with the teams that left over the past few years, but not much now. As much as I cheer on the little guys, ISU does not deserve an at large bid. They have 0 signature wins and a schedule strength ranked in the 300's even in the vaunted MVC.

Indiana State has a NET of 30. No time with a NET of 30 or lower has not made the tourney. The NET does factor in strength of schedule. I believe they are getting an at large, assuming there are no upsets in Atlantic 10 (Dayton) and American (FAU).....Right now they are the last team or two in.....

I don't think an at large has ever had 1 quad 1 either since they started the metric. And that win was Bradley, which is a weak quad 1. MVC had a few decent teams that really skews the Net ranking. Hope they get left out. MVC is not a two bid league without all their recent deflections.

With selection Sunday approaching, most brackets have Virginia and Seton Hall in over Indiana State. Indiana State is 30 NET right now, Virginia and Seton Hall are 55+. Oklahoma is at 46. NET does incorporate strength of schedule in its computatations.

NET supposedly is the "sophisticated" tool used by the committee.... I can see New Mexico and Colorado getting in, with a higher NET. That makes sense.

Why will Indiana State get left out???? This is total BS.

(03-16-2024 11:47 AM)jjj Wrote:  With selection Sunday approaching, most brackets have Virginia and Seton Hall in over Indiana State. Indiana State is 30 NET right now, Virginia and Seton Hall are 55+. Oklahoma is at 46. NET does incorporate strength of schedule in its computatations.

NET supposedly is the "sophisticated" tool used by the committee.... I can see New Mexico and Colorado getting in, with a higher NET. That makes sense.

Why will Indiana State get left out???? This is total BS.

IMO, New Mexico has really underperformed expectations this year while Colorado has been a mixed bag in a weaker than usual conference.

As for Indiana State, I'd definitely put them in ahead of New Mexico but probably not Colorado.

As for both Virginia and Seton Hall, NET rankings aside, I think both of those teams are better than Indiana State. Seton Hall is sneaky good and Virginia is pretty solid. I'd be pretty surprised if Indiana State could beat either of those teams if they played.

IMO, Virginia has one bad loss (Notre Dame). Seton Hall has a bad loss to Rutgers. Seton Hall has, what I would say is a bad loss to USC but it was back in November when USC was ranked #23.

But there's a lot of parity in NCAA hoops so teams lose nowadays, even the best teams.

As for Indiana State, the losses to Illinois State and SIU stand out. I'm also not in love with the loss to Michigan State though that team did go on a bit of a run in the B1G which is another conference that was particularly down and weak this year. But they just don't have any wins over non-MVC teams that impress me all that much but I'd still slot them in ahead of New Mexico.

With all of that said, I really don't like conference tournaments determining automatic bids. For example, you have a team like a Merrimack or Central Connecticut who kick azz in their conference and then get upset in one game and now the conference representative is Wagner who went 16-15 (7-9 in the NEC) or you have the Big South where High Point, UNC Asheville and even Gardner-Webb had really good seasons but the representative is Longwood who went 6-10 in conference. Actually...maybe Longwood is not yet eligible for the postseason (which is dumb) and it defaults to UNC Asheville (who lost in the Conf Final). But it happens elsewhere as well.

In the Big Sky, the rep is Montana State (17-17, 9-9) when Eastern Washington is by far the best team in that conference and both Northern Colorado and Montana are also well deserving.

The rep of the A-10 will not be one of the 4 best teams in the conference.

Temple is one of 4 teams that could potentially represent the AAC.

UTEP could represent CUSA.

Kent State could represent the MAC.

The rep of the MEAC will be either Howard (17-16) or Delaware State (15-17) when the best team was Norfolk State who went 22-11.

I know I complain about this every year but I just want to see conferences get represented by their best teams and to disregard the regular season and leave it up to a single elimination tournament where literally anything can happen sure makes for great entertainment but it really robs the NCAA Tournament of the best teams.

I know they'd never do it and I'm sure it would be loaded with tomfoolery, but ideally I'd award an auto-bid to all regular season conference champs and then a 2nd bid to any team that wins it's conf tournament. But that would mean some mediocre Major conference teams wouldn't get in like Wake Forest or Colorado or Oregon and we all know the powers that be need those teams in and really couldn't give a rat's azz about Norfolk State, Central Connecticut or Indiana State.

Anway...tl;dr....I don't like the selection process.

(03-16-2024 01:48 PM)Big Red Wrote:  

(03-16-2024 11:47 AM)jjj Wrote:  With selection Sunday approaching, most brackets have Virginia and Seton Hall in over Indiana State. Indiana State is 30 NET right now, Virginia and Seton Hall are 55+. Oklahoma is at 46. NET does incorporate strength of schedule in its computatations.

NET supposedly is the "sophisticated" tool used by the committee.... I can see New Mexico and Colorado getting in, with a higher NET. That makes sense.

Why will Indiana State get left out???? This is total BS.

IMO, New Mexico has really underperformed expectations this year while Colorado has been a mixed bag in a weaker than usual conference.

As for Indiana State, I'd definitely put them in ahead of New Mexico but probably not Colorado.

As for both Virginia and Seton Hall, NET rankings aside, I think both of those teams are better than Indiana State. Seton Hall is sneaky good and Virginia is pretty solid. I'd be pretty surprised if Indiana State could beat either of those teams if they played.

IMO, Virginia has one bad loss (Notre Dame). Seton Hall has a bad loss to Rutgers. Seton Hall has, what I would say is a bad loss to USC but it was back in November when USC was ranked #23.

But there's a lot of parity in NCAA hoops so teams lose nowadays, even the best teams.

As for Indiana State, the losses to Illinois State and SIU stand out. I'm also not in love with the loss to Michigan State though that team did go on a bit of a run in the B1G which is another conference that was particularly down and weak this year. But they just don't have any wins over non-MVC teams that impress me all that much but I'd still slot them in ahead of New Mexico.

With all of that said, I really don't like conference tournaments determining automatic bids. For example, you have a team like a Merrimack or Central Connecticut who kick azz in their conference and then get upset in one game and now the conference representative is Wagner who went 16-15 (7-9 in the NEC) or you have the Big South where High Point, UNC Asheville and even Gardner-Webb had really good seasons but the representative is Longwood who went 6-10 in conference. Actually...maybe Longwood is not yet eligible for the postseason (which is dumb) and it defaults to UNC Asheville (who lost in the Conf Final). But it happens elsewhere as well.

In the Big Sky, the rep is Montana State (17-17, 9-9) when Eastern Washington is by far the best team in that conference and both Northern Colorado and Montana are also well deserving.

The rep of the A-10 will not be one of the 4 best teams in the conference.

Temple is one of 4 teams that could potentially represent the AAC.

UTEP could represent CUSA.

Kent State could represent the MAC.

The rep of the MEAC will be either Howard (17-16) or Delaware State (15-17) when the best team was Norfolk State who went 22-11.

I know I complain about this every year but I just want to see conferences get represented by their best teams and to disregard the regular season and leave it up to a single elimination tournament where literally anything can happen sure makes for great entertainment but it really robs the NCAA Tournament of the best teams.

I know they'd never do it and I'm sure it would be loaded with tomfoolery, but ideally I'd award an auto-bid to all regular season conference champs and then a 2nd bid to any team that wins it's conf tournament. But that would mean some mediocre Major conference teams wouldn't get in like Wake Forest or Colorado or Oregon and we all know the powers that be need those teams in and really couldn't give a rat's azz about Norfolk State, Central Connecticut or Indiana State.

Anway...tl;dr....I don't like the selection process.

Update: Just to add to it.

In the Ivy League, Brown (13-17, 8-6) beat Princeton (24-4, 12-2) in the conf semi.

Because the NCAA needs a Brown potentially in the tournament...

(03-16-2024 01:55 PM)Big Red Wrote:  Because the NCAA needs a Brown potentially in the tournament...

Brown will not get past Yale.

(03-16-2024 04:29 PM)uiniu57 Wrote:  

(03-16-2024 01:55 PM)Big Red Wrote:  Because the NCAA needs a Brown potentially in the tournament...

Brown will not get past Yale.

I'd have said the same about Princeton.

(03-16-2024 04:29 PM)uiniu57 Wrote:  

(03-16-2024 01:55 PM)Big Red Wrote:  Because the NCAA needs a Brown potentially in the tournament...

Brown will not get past Yale.

We were 1 second from a Brown NCAA appearance.

Indiana State is highest to not make tourney. Chairman said they had to find something and the something on them was non conference schedule..... playing NIU did not help...lol

Virginia at NET of 55 made it. NET means nothing I have learned. Waste of time. Also is quad 1 wins, Virginia is 2-7.

Michigan State being in over Indiana State is also an abomination. Big Ten was historically weak this year. As I stated at the start of this debate about Indiana State. Much like the CFP, the Tournament committee sent a strong message that the (G5 in Football) MVC is now a 1 Bid league just like the rest of the bottom feeders like the MAC.

(03-18-2024 07:02 AM)HuskieJ Wrote:  Michigan State being in over Indiana State is also an abomination. Big Ten was historically weak this year. As I stated at the start of this debate about Indiana State. Much like the CFP, the Tournament committee sent a strong message that the (G5 in Football) MVC is now a 1 Bid league just like the rest of the bottom feeders like the MAC.

The MVC is not G5. The Valley is FCS.

(03-18-2024 07:02 AM)HuskieJ Wrote:  Michigan State being in over Indiana State is also an abomination. Big Ten was historically weak this year. As I stated at the start of this debate about Indiana State. Much like the CFP, the Tournament committee sent a strong message that the (G5 in Football) MVC is now a 1 Bid league just like the rest of the bottom feeders like the MAC.

All the air Michigan State gets is because of Tom Izzo. All season, they'd win 2 games and all of a sudden, they'd shoot up the rankings even though there were equal or better teams in the B1G getting 0 votes.

The media/committee/etc. just want to do everything for this guy even when his team is clearly mediocre and there are better options.

I b!tch a lot about it but until they start awarding auto-bids to regular season conference champs, then it's best to just realize they absolutely do not want the best possible tournament and are more worried about manufactured excitement and legacy.

I bet they tried everything they could to get St. John's in the field but just couldn't justify it even with their clearly lowered and biased leanings toward anything that will generate media hype.