Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2018 4:50:35 GMT -6
. I say no and it really isn't OOC scheduling that will ever make enough of a difference as long as we are in the MAC. So on your bizarre planet Ball State didn't schedule a difficult enough OOC for an at large bid this season. Dude if we had taken care of business against Dayton and Bucknell, and given both Oklahoma and Oregon good games we very much would have been in the NCAA discussion at the start of the conference season. You are just clueless. We probably would have had a power index in the 30's, prior to our typical conference swoon.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 13, 2018 10:37:26 GMT -6
. I say no and it really isn't OOC scheduling that will ever make enough of a difference as long as we are in the MAC. So on your bizarre planet Ball State didn't schedule a difficult enough OOC for an at large bid this season. Dude if we had taken care of business against Dayton and Bucknell, and gave both Oklahoma and Oregon good games we very much would have been in the NCAA discussion at the start of the conference season. You are just clueless. We probably would have had a power index in the 30's, prior to our typical conference swoon. There is no way we were headed for RPI 30. Getting within 10 points against those two power schools would not be any plus at all in the RPI/Quadrant system. It just gives us more losses in that quadrant. Would count the same as the big losses did. Besides, losing close games to OU and Ore on the road don't seem to me very likely results, anyway. Our schedule this year was hardly one we want every year. It did not pay very well, did not prepare us particularly well, did not help home fans. Beating ND on a buzzer beater was the key positive. I liked the Dayton and Bucknell games. But not both on the road. As it was had we been at full strength we might have beaten Dayton, Bucknell. But give me one of those games on my season ticket! We did what we did this year to get into the Phil Knight and hopefully to get a better deal in the future. We did not need 3 more road games. Give us Bucknell or Dayton at home, at least. While we had to do it for Phil Knight, better in many ways if we avoid two power teams along with ND, we would have a good schedule. Your plan to beat Dayton, Bucknell on the road and then have good showings on the other two road trips is the hand we were dealt. But if we could do all that, AND beat ND, let me suggest we have a good alternative. The St Mary's strategy for example would have worked like a charm. We could have more likely gone almost unbeaten in the MAC...until the tourney anyway. If you want the most likely plan to the NIT it is probably to be ready and beat Buffalo at home and win the MAC regular season. A lot more likely than beating ND and coming out of that early season with two wins and good showings on the road against power teams. I am all for the Phil Knight, but not because it increases our RPI/Quadrant score, and not if it means the schedule we had this year every year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2018 10:51:48 GMT -6
"There is no way we were headed for RPI 30. Getting within 10 points against those two power schools would not be any plus at all in the RPI/Quadrant system." I didn't say RPI, I said power index and I said "in the 30's" not 30. Once again I quit reading your response at that point.................
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Mar 13, 2018 11:50:56 GMT -6
"There is no way we were headed for RPI 30. Getting within 10 points against those two power schools would not be any plus at all in the RPI/Quadrant system." I didn't say RPI, I said power index and I said "in the 30's" not 30. Once again I quit reading your response at that point................. I generally stop reading at "0". Works out pretty well for me.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 13, 2018 11:53:14 GMT -6
"There is no way we were headed for RPI 30. Getting within 10 points against those two power schools would not be any plus at all in the RPI/Quadrant system." I didn't say RPI, I said power index and I said "in the 30's" not 30. Once again I quit reading your response at that point................. It's always easier to make sense of your posts by assuming you haven't read or paid attention to what anybody else said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2018 12:57:46 GMT -6
"There is no way we were headed for RPI 30. Getting within 10 points against those two power schools would not be any plus at all in the RPI/Quadrant system." I didn't say RPI, I said power index and I said "in the 30's" not 30. Once again I quit reading your response at that point................. I generally stop reading at "0". Works out pretty well for me. Your are right, it works perfectly.
|
|
|
Post by DanT on Mar 13, 2018 20:25:10 GMT -6
"There are six mid-majors in today's Top 25," Please name these six mid majors for me. [/quote] Or considering you are at a computer you could look for yourself. Anyway.............. Cincinnati Gonzaga Wichita State Houston Nevada St. Mary's [/quote]Cincinatti, Houston, Wichita State, and Nevada are all in the American Conference along with notables of Temple, Memphis and UConn. I do not think of any of these as mid majors as they all have had strong presence in the NCAA Tourney in recent and past year's. These would be identified as high majors if not majors. Gonzaga is a major program in a mid major conference. St. Mary's is a mid major who has been moving upward and is pressing Gonzaga. You may also refer to Wikipedia as it pretty much follows my thoughts. I do not see any mid majors, besides St. Mary's, in the field of 68 without winning their conference right to be there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2018 8:01:17 GMT -6
"There are six mid-majors in today's Top 25," Please name these six mid majors for me. Or considering you are at a computer you could look for yourself. Anyway.............. Cincinnati Gonzaga Wichita State Houston Nevada St. Mary's [/quote]Cincinatti, Houston, Wichita State, and Nevada are all in the American Conference along with notables of Temple, Memphis and UConn. I do not think of any of these as mid majors as they all have had strong presence in the NCAA Tourney in recent and past year's. These would be identified as high majors if not majors. Gonzaga is a major program in a mid major conference. St. Mary's is a mid major who has been moving upward and is pressing Gonzaga. You may also refer to Wikipedia as it pretty much follows my thoughts. I do not see any mid majors, besides St. Mary's, in the field of 68 without winning their conference right to be there. [/quote] Well you are certainly free to dismiss what you like. Especially if it makes you feel better.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 14, 2018 9:25:29 GMT -6
"There are six mid-majors in today's Top 25," Please name these six mid majors for me. Halftime names: Cincinnati Gonzaga Wichita State Houston Nevada St. Mary's Cincinatti, Houston, Wichita State, and Nevada are all in the American Conference along with notables of Temple, Memphis and UConn. I do not think of any of these as mid majors as they all have had strong presence in the NCAA Tourney in recent and past year's. These would be identified as high majors if not majors. Gonzaga is a major program in a mid major conference. St. Mary's is a mid major who has been moving upward and is pressing Gonzaga. I don't see Houston as a mid major. Cinncinati and Houston have history in national championship level achievement. They certainly aren't comparable to many mid majors. Gonzaga is the mid major that has become major in BB. Wichita State is the best example I see of a little engine that could. Nevada is a flagship state university but they don't fit very well with high majors either. Notice that 4 are in the category of mid majors who don't football. I think the point here is that these schools one and all have resources to compete with high majors. The American Conference is obviously a step up from the MAC (or MVC) in basketball. I might agree with halftime that we might categorize those schools reasonably as mid major, but have to add the caveat, that some schools are in some sense mid major. But, for example, membership in the Big East is substantially different, and when you say "look at what they do" you cannot compare that to what we can do. This success for all 6 schools is not due to scheduling genius or great hires that can turn around a program. They did all hire good coaches at the time we hired Buckley, and after, but the issue is not choice of coach. They got there with plan and resources, allowing that, and including in almost all cases, better demographic giving ability to draw fans and charge high ticket prices which helped build success. When we were MAYBE in that position to break out, 20+ years ago, we said that we would hire an assistant on a low budget...will probably not be there again. We had our chance and did not take it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2018 10:39:47 GMT -6
Please name these six mid majors for me. Halftime names: Cincinnati Gonzaga Wichita State Houston Nevada St. Mary's Cincinatti, Houston, Wichita State, and Nevada are all in the American Conference along with notables of Temple, Memphis and UConn. I do not think of any of these as mid majors as they all have had strong presence in the NCAA Tourney in recent and past year's. These would be identified as high majors if not majors. Gonzaga is a major program in a mid major conference. St. Mary's is a mid major who has been moving upward and is pressing Gonzaga. I don't see Houston as a mid major. Cinncinati and Houston have history in national championship level achievement. They certainly aren't comparable to many mid majors. Gonzaga is the mid major that has become major in BB. Wichita State is the best example I see of a little engine that could. Nevada is a flagship state university but they don't fit very well with high majors either. Notice that 4 are in the category of mid majors who don't football. I think the point here is that these schools one and all have resources to compete with high majors. The American Conference is obviously a step up from the MAC (or MVC) in basketball. I might agree with halftime that we might categorize those schools reasonably as mid major, but have to add the caveat, that some schools are in some sense mid major. But, for example, membership in the Big East is substantially different, and when you say "look at what they do" you cannot compare that to what we can do. This success for all 6 schools is not due to scheduling genius or great hires that can turn around a program. They did all hire good coaches at the time we hired Buckley, and after, but the issue is not choice of coach. They got there with plan and resources, allowing that, and including in almost all cases, better demographic giving ability to draw fans and charge high ticket prices which helped build success. When we were MAYBE in that position to break out, 20+ years ago, we said that we would hire an assistant on a low budget...will probably not be there again. We had our chance and did not take it. "I don't see Houston as a mid major. Cinncinati and Houston have history in national championship level achievement." Yeah so do Loyola of Chicago and the University of San Francisco, I am not going to bother reading the rest of your post.
|
|
|
Post by DanT on Mar 14, 2018 10:41:18 GMT -6
Please name these six mid majors for me. Or considering you are at a computer you could look for yourself. Anyway.............. Cincinnati Gonzaga Wichita State Houston Nevada St. Mary's Cincinatti, Houston, Wichita State, and Nevada are all in the American Conference along with notables of Temple, Memphis and UConn. I do not think of any of these as mid majors as they all have had strong presence in the NCAA Tourney in recent and past year's. These would be identified as high majors if not majors. Gonzaga is a major program in a mid major conference. St. Mary's is a mid major who has been moving upward and is pressing Gonzaga. You may also refer to Wikipedia as it pretty much follows my thoughts. I do not see any mid majors, besides St. Mary's, in the field of 68 without winning their conference right to be there. [/quote] Well you are certainly free to dismiss what you like. Especially if it makes you feel better. [/quote]Thanks for giving me permission to have my own thoughts. 🤔 How I feel has nothing to do with the discussion. 🙄 It would be nice to have a discussion with you, but your snide remarks makes it impossible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2018 10:53:20 GMT -6
Oh I see, so quality Mid-Major Conferences don't count, and quality programs within single bid conferences don't count. Thanks for you thoughts.
Oh and as-an-aside Nevada is in the Mountain West not the AAC.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 14, 2018 11:28:08 GMT -6
"I don't see Houston as a mid major. Cinncinati and Houston have history in national championship level achievement." Yeah so do Loyola of Chicago and the University of San Francisco, I am not going to bother reading the rest of your post. Pretty hard to compare those schools with most mid majors. Especially Houston. UH is the third-largest university in Texas with nearly 43,000 students. 19 NCAA appearances, 5 Final 4's... Yep, typical mid major.... The other schools are urban in great markets, no football. If mid major now, they are also not typical. Much more like the Big East schools. Their history was made before today's age of mid major sports.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 14, 2018 11:30:57 GMT -6
Oh I see, so quality Mid-Major Conferences don't count, and quality programs within single bid conferences don't count. Thanks for you thoughts. Oh and as-an-aside Nevada is in the Mountain West not the AAC. If we are talking what a mid major can do in scheduling or what they can accomplish, not all mid majors are equal, and not all have the "choice" to do what the best schools do. Maybe if you read all the posts you would see what argument is being made by DanT and in my posts above.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2018 16:29:01 GMT -6
As was discussed earlier in this thread (I believe it was this thread), the MAC was statistically considered to be the 10th best basketball conference. To get 1 team in the NCAA and NIT is horse crap.
As far as I'm concerned, and the talking heads always point out, there is the power 5 conferences and everyone else. Those conferences are the Big 10, Big 12, Sec, Acc, and Pac 12. Basically the money conferences. Everyone else is an afterthought, which is 100% bullshit.
As I travel the west, people reference the east coast bias. Even the Pac 12 is getting dissed, as USC, second in the regular season and their conference, didn't make the NCAA tourney. Yes I realize UCLA got beat, once again proving the Bonnies of St Bonaventure, who would not have made the tourney if they did not win their conference tourney, was a mid major capable of playing good basketball. It was only a few years ago that VCU, George Mason, Butler (Horizon at that time) and Duke made the final four. At that point I thought it proved more mid majors would get to participate in the NCAA dance. Instead, it has went the opposite way.
It is time for the other division 1 conferences to break out from the NCAA and start their own tourney. The luster of having David beat Goliath, which is why the NCAA tourney is so popular in the first place, is gone.
I know....$$$$$$$$
|
|