Clock_Tower Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 Butler? VCU? (yawn) Most mid major programs are as good as their coach, contingent upon the good coach being there 6 yrs or more, give or take. So VCU & Butler, fine, everybody is excited, but will they be good when their coaches get their dream job and leave? Most teams like that come and go (Hobbs). Look at SIUC, Drake, in the A-10, RI, GW, etc. They had good runs, now look at them. There are exceptions, like Xavier and some others. But realistically mid majors that have a good streak with a top notch coach slip when he moves on. BCS can have a bad hire coach and recover because of their tradition, alumni network, and big $$$$. So, for example, UCLA had some lean years but still could get Jabbar on the phone calling recruits. Before I spend time responding to your post, do you want to clarify that not all BCS schools are like UCLA in your example. In fact, for every top BCS school there is a bottom-dwelling BCS program enjoying the benefit created by their conference members. Also, many BCS programs rise and fall (with high highs and low lows) depending upon their coach. I point this out b/c your post implies, at least to me, that all the BCS program are/remain at high levels but that the mid-majors are head coaching dependent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 Before I spend time responding to your post, do you want to clarify that not all BCS schools are like UCLA in your example. In fact, for every top BCS school there is a bottom-dwelling BCS program enjoying the benefit created by their conference members. Also, many BCS programs rise and fall (with high highs and low lows) depending upon their coach. I point this out b/c your post implies, at least to me, that all the BCS program are/remain at high levels but that the mid-majors are head coaching dependent.Agree, not all BCS schools... but the higher tier BCS programs can recover quickly after they have a bad coaching regime. Little guys cannot. I am saying that mid majors... and The Horizon & Colonial Conferences are actually well BELOW mid majors... have great runs then usually flop after a great coach leaves. Like us after Spoon, until RM. SIUC actually had a long run with a couple of coaches, but inevitably, flopped to hell. Drake. RI had a great run 15+ yrs ago. GW was a power for awhile there. And so on. I am primarily citing that the small conference teams that have a good run with a great coach generally do not continue that level of success when he leaves. And again, with Butler and VCU in 14th and 15th best conference, you cannot go by NCAA appearances compared to higher ranked conferences. Statistically irrelevant in this discussion. They are currently glamorous because they both went very deep into the NCAA tourney. Good for them. Just wait and see... years down the road... they will be invisible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 Wow, what a bunch of twisted nonsense. The usual suspects throw a group hissy fit. Sure, Butler and VCU got into the NCAA's. They were in inferior conferences, 14th and 15th RPI this year. So I do not go by NCAA appearances with those type of teams. Nice, but not impressive. Sure, they both have had decent programs. I am merely pointing out that the their recent impressive successes with Butler's two time Championship Game appearances and VCU's run in 2011 are highly unlikely to continue, and that when they join the A-10 and when their current coaches leave, they will likely slip to mediocrity. Mark my words, when those two glamor coaches leave, 2 yrs later or so they will struggle, maybe even GW, RI type collapses. Again, try to use facts, not just attack. So many mid majors... and these teams are not mid majors, they are in minor conferences... flop after coaching changes. Bizzleboy, make a list while you do your 24/7 research. VAST LEFTIST CONSPIRACY AGAINST MB73 HAS BEEN UNCOVERED. TERMINATE IMMEDIATELY. Also, Bizzle so helpfully pointed out that every single predecessor to Stevens had Tournament success, as well- and every single predecessor jumped to a bigger school for a bigger paycheck. If Stevens does the same, why would Butler suddenly fall off a cliff when it never has before? Same for Smart and VCU, to a lesser extent. Bizzle, I'm sorry- this is what happens when you use reason and evidence to argue with a person who rejects both concepts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 -why i am trying i am not sure, but i'll give it go.... -mb- see these FACTS about the ncaa tourney... Butler has appeared 11 times (10 in the last 16 seasons under 4 different coaches) and has a record of 18-11. VCU, which has only been a D-1 program since 1973, has 11 NCAA appearances (5 in the last 9 seasons under 3 different coaches) and a record of 11-11 -these are not programs that have had success with one coach or with one or two recruiting classes, this may not qualify as sustained but it is pretty darn good -i thought the goal for every school included getting to the ncaa tourney but you don't go by ncaa appearances, you seem to have a standard different than anyone else's, which is not necessarily bad but i can't find what your standard is -i don't think ucla or duke are looking to move to the a10, yet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 My mom told me SLU was going to win it all in 2013 so I tried to put $20 on them this weekend at the Venetian El Cortez sports book. They didn't have the Tournament winners available for betting yet, though. There. Fixed it for ya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLIKNS Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 Remember everyone thought Gonzaga would fall after Monson left for Minnesota. Yet Few has been tremendous, plus Butler and VCU went deeper in the tournament than the rest of the Gonzaga`s of the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 -why i am trying i am not sure, but i'll give it go.... -mb- see these FACTS about the ncaa tourney... Butler has appeared 11 times (10 in the last 16 seasons under 4 different coaches) and has a record of 18-11. VCU, which has only been a D-1 program since 1973, has 11 NCAA appearances (5 in the last 9 seasons under 3 different coaches) and a record of 11-11 -these are not programs that have had success with one coach or with one or two recruiting classes, this may not qualify as sustained but it is pretty darn good -i thought the goal for every school included getting to the ncaa tourney but you don't go by ncaa appearances, you seem to have a standard different than anyone else's, which is not necessarily bad but i can't find what your standard is -i don't think ucla or duke are looking to move to the a10, yet Yes. I am certainly not agreeing with MB; however, it does appear that he is stating that b/c someone must represent the bad conferences (14th and 15th RPI conference), being the best of the bad is not much of an accomplishment. Therefore, no credit is really given for making the Tourney from the CAA and Horizon. And since Butler and VCU only made it to the Final Four under Stevens and Smart and since Stevens and Smart will soon be gone if history repeats itself, then it will be back to being an ordinary team soon. MB, IMO, does have a point about the teams, like Butler in the Horizon and X in the old MCC, which can dominate the conferences and make the Tourneys each year. No doubt both Butler and X made it to the Tourney a year or two in the past when they probably would not have made it as an "at large" team in a conference such as the A10. In short, if you add Butler and VCU to the A10, the A10 certainly gets stronger but it does not necessarily increase the number of teams it sends to the Tourney - 2 more bids b/c we all know that VCU and Butler are "Tourney" teams. Instead, Butler's leaving the Horizon means that someone else will get the chance to make the Tourney 11 years in a row. IMO, getting more than 3 or 4 teams each year will be very tough for the A10. To make my point even more obvious, for instance, assuming Creighton, GMU and Belmont (each a recent "Tourney team") all were to the join the A10 as well, the A10 would not get 3 more bids on the basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 BLIKNS, sure, I agree, some mid majors like Gonzaga and Xavier have a deep committment at the top of the house and continue with their success after they lose a golden boy coach. But most wither and die. And to those of you who keep keep redundantly citing Butler and VCU's tournament appearances, (yes, the GOT IN) they represent much lower tier conferences. Different situation. BCS = Stakes horses A-10 = Allowance Horizon & Colonial = claimers Yes, I said that Butler and VCU excelled recently, tremendous accomplishments, Butler especially was magical, VCU went deep. But when their coaches leave, they will almost certainly slide. If they stayed in their old conferences, they would probably keep making the tournament here and there with the next guy. But not go deep into the tourney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
For-DaLove Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 BLIKNS, sure, I agree, some mid majors like Gonzaga and Xavier have a deep committment at the top of the house and continue with their success after they lose a golden boy coach. But most wither and die. And to those of you who keep keep redundantly citing Butler and VCU's tournament appearances, (yes, the GOT IN) they represent much lower tier conferences. Different situation. BCS = Stakes horses A-10 = Allowance Horizon & Colonial = claimers Yes, I said that Butler and VCU excelled recently, tremendous accomplishments, Butler especially was magical, VCU went deep. But when their coaches leave, they will almost certainly slide. If they stayed in their old conferences, they would probably keep making the tournament here and there with the next guy. But not go deep into the tourney. Are you really ignorant enough to believe that Smart and Stevens are the first successful coaches these teams have had? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 Are you really ignorant enough to believe that Smart and Stevens are the first successful coaches these teams have had? Successful, yes, they had some decent squads, but don't tell me making it to the NCAA's in the Colonial and Horizon are the same statistically as making it in the mid majors. Many times, people on this board have cited that Butler enjoys the advantage of being in the Horizon and making the NCAA's easily. NOW, many of the same are taking the opposite position. Because I am right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 what other programs that are not already old school BCS national programs would make you happier? please tell us, if you had your wish with no limitations other than the obvious it wont be a current BCS school, on replacing charlotte and temple in our conference, who would you select? maybe if we know your expectations of what a real replacement would be, we can empathize with your reasoning? I'd be interested in hearing this answer as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 Successful, yes, they had some decent squads, but don't tell me making it to the NCAA's in the Colonial and Horizon are the same statistically as making it in the mid majors. Many times, people on this board have cited that Butler enjoys the advantage of being in the Horizon and making the NCAA's easily. NOW, many of the same are taking the opposite position. Because I am right. I could argue that its HARDER to make the tourney from a small conference than it is from a big conference. As a small conference school you either have to 1) be nearly perfect in the regular season conference games, including 8+ road games or 2) be perfect in the conference tourney. Neither are easy and it might be easier to ask a team to go .500 in the Big East than it is to consistently be the only team from your conference to make the dance. That being said, its misleading to say the CAA or Horizon are that bad is ridiculous. Here are the Conference RPI ranks going back a few years. Clearly, the A-10 is better but we aren't talking about the SWAC here. 2011: A-10: 10 CAA: 9 Horizon: 12 2010: A-10: 6 CAA: 13 Horizon: 12 2009: A-10: 8 CAA: 11 Horizon: 13 2008: A-10: 7 CAA: 11 Horizon: 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 MB just called Xavier and Gonzaga "mid majors". It's shocking how a guy with 1700 posts on this board can know so little about college basketball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 Yes, I read his post. Let's start with this, roy: do you equate the Horizon (# 14) and Colonial (#15) to the A-10? And, SLU had a miserable run, no talent, under Sodie. Nice guy, good game coach, terrible recruiter. Yes, Butler and VCU are good pick ups after losing Temple and Charlotte, but are not an upgrade. Temple by far has a deeper tradition and success. Don't just compare NCAA appearances. And Charlotte ain't that bad. So when the dust settles and the two golden boy coaches leave, down the road, they will be middle of the pack. mb, while i agree soderberg wasnt and isnt the on court success of rickma, to label it as "miserable" is flat out wrong. his overall record while at slu was over 500 and a better win loss percentage then rich grawer even though cusa and the A-10 were far better conferences to play against than grawer had. you might want to label his time here as mediocre, i wouldnt argue that, but miserable is inaccurate. as to going back to the subject at hand, as much as you continue to want to link butler and vcu's success to smart and stevens, as bizzle's post detailed, the previous coaches were very very successful. so it amazes me you expect butler an vcu to fall back. the programs have consistently found very good head coaches to continue their success and i would expect that to continue. secondly, even if you were right and there was an eminent regression coming when the coaches leave, what makes you think that will happen. both coaches have turned down the top available jobs two years in a row to stay at butler and vcu. why will that change now that they are in an even better conference? as to temple and charlotte, while i agree temple is/was the show piece of the A-10, charlotte is not. and has not been since leaving cusa. there is no way the cumlative of temple and charlotte are the equal of butler and vcu. you need to do a better job of preparing your case if you want any of us to bite off on your feelings that butler and vcu are not good for the conference compared to the cumlative effect of losing temple and charlotte. personally, i have long been a "stay in the A-10 to get to the next stage" guy since we joined the A-10. right now i am leaning more to the A-10 is the place to be for eternity. soon it wouldnt surprise me if schools getting shafted by the bcs conferences for no football or sub par football are looking to join us. i say the A-10 appears to be fixing weaknesses and problems and seem to be out front more than any of the non bcs schools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 Roy, face it- MB is just pissed that the A10 is too strong now for any of the mouth breathers to make a case for SLU to move to the Valley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 MB just called Xavier and Gonzaga "mid majors". It's shocking how a guy with 1700 posts on this board can know so little about college basketball. I'm as guilty as anyone, but we've got to stop feeding the trolls, and MB73 is clearly a troll. If we ignore them, they'll go away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 and MB you still havent told us what schools would have been better alternatives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 I'm as guilty as anyone, but we've got to stop feeding the trolls, and MB73 is clearly a troll. If we ignore them, they'll go away. I know, I know. That "View It Anyway" button always gets me in trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted May 17, 2012 Author Share Posted May 17, 2012 personally, i have long been a "stay in the A-10 to get to the next stage" guy since we joined the A-10. right now i am leaning more to the A-10 is the place to be for eternity. soon it wouldnt surprise me if schools getting shafted by the bcs conferences for no football or sub par football are looking to join us. i say the A-10 appears to be fixing weaknesses and problems and seem to be out front more than any of the non bcs schools. Ding Ding Ding. Commissioner McGlade nailed realignment and now she just needs to fix the TV contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 I think MB's advocating SLU jump to the Horizon and make the dance for 11 years in a row. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 (edited) Successful, yes, they had some decent squads, but don't tell me making it to the NCAA's in the Colonial and Horizon are the same statistically as making it in the mid majors. Many times, people on this board have cited that Butler enjoys the advantage of being in the Horizon and making the NCAA's easily. NOW, many of the same are taking the opposite position. Because I am right. Uhhh, the CAA and Horizon are the very definition of what 'mid major' is. In fact, per Wikipedia, the list of conferences generally considered 'mid-major' include the Horizon and Colonial. It also points out that generally, the MWC , A-10 and CUSA do not consider themselves 'mid-majors'. Perhaps you meant 'high-major' or 'BCS'? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-major Edited to show 'MWC' instead of 'MVC' when listing conferences that consider themselves above mid-major. The MVC is CLEARLY a mid-major. Edited May 17, 2012 by jbizzle09 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 Bizzle, which year did we lose 2 games in the Tournament? Check your FACTS, you commie. REALITY. I'm with MB73, yawning my ass off. Why is the A10 settling for MID MAJORS when we should be going after Dook and Seeracuse, places where they have long-term proven winners, not just flashes in the pan. REALITY. 1957. There was a third place game in the Regionals that year and SLU lost that game as well as the Regional semi-final. So that is where the two losses came from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 1957. There was a third place game in the Regionals that year and SLU lost that game as well as the Regional semi-final. So that is where the two losses came from. You, sir, are good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 I think MB's advocating SLU jump to the Horizon and make the dance for 11 years in a row. You spelled Missouri Valley wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 Even if one wants to discount Butler's and VCU's NCAA tourney appearances (though kshoe makes a very legit and good point about the difficulty in making multiple trips from a smaller conference), wouldn't each school's relative success in the tourney mean something? Take away Shaka and Stevens, and you still have schools that have won more tourney games than SLU has. VCU won 5 NCAA tourney games before Shaka's run. Butler won 7 games before Stevens took over. Once again, SLU has all of 4 NCAA tourney wins in its entire history. Also, Butler has 4 at-large bids in its history and VCU has 3, so they didn't ALWAYS have to win the conference toruney of a smaller conference to get into the tourney. Yes, most of the time they got in via conference tournament wins. But one could also argue that they have gotten screwed over a couple of times when they've failed to win their conference tourneys and not receiving at-large bids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.