D-West & PO-Z
-
Posts
52 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by D-West & PO-Z
-
-
I don't think Bay Area is coming off as obsessive over Butler. Merely listing facts.
Just seems odd out of all the teams to complain about Butler being the first. Unless he complained about others first and I missed it.
-
In a previous world, Butler, with its RPI of 57, would be NIT bound.
Not to mention I am seeing Butler at 56 in RPI and 4 teams below them in the RPI who got in:
Michigan, Tulsa, Temple, Vandy.
Not sure what your obsession with Butler is?
-
In a previous world, Butler, with its RPI of 57, would be NIT bound.
You are focusing way to much on the RPI. That might be true in a previous world but the committee has stated they are looking at other measures as well, the RPI is a piece but not the end all be all. Especially just looking solely at a teams overall RPI.
-
Butler deserved it more than about 5 or 6 teams in the field. They are not a team anyone should have a problem with compared to some of the teams let in
Yeah I dont get the Butler hating on being in? They has 3 top 25 RPI wins, 4 in the top 50. They also had zero "bad" losses.
Bona definitely got screwed but it wasnt bc Butler got in. Having 2 sub 150 losses to Duquesne and Lasalle I;m sure hurt pretty bad too.
-
Butler played all of 1 road game in the non-conference season- one (1).
Butler played Purdue on a "neutral" court in Indianapolis. Butler is located in Indianapolis.
Butler had an RPI of 57 and has no business being in the NCAA Tournament ahead of St. Bonaventure (RPI 30 and Co-A10 Regular Season Champion), St. Mary's (RPI 38 and the WCC Regular Season Champion, who played Cal on the road in Berkeley. Haas Pavilion on the Cal Campus in Berkeley is not a "neutral" site), and Monmouth (RPI 52 and the MAAC Regular Season Champion, who won on the road at UCLA and Georgetown and defeated Notre Dame on a neutral floor).
As much as Butler should not be in the NCAA field, 58 Tulsa, 60 Temple, and 63 Vanderbilt should not be in the NCAA either, especially Tulsa (Haith).
Syracuse's RPI of 72 made its inclusion in this NCAA field an utter abomination, a travesty.
I guarantee there were more Purdue fans than Butler fans in Indy. Do you realize how small Butler is?
-
I'm fine with Butler. 6 top 100 wins, 8 of their losses to top 40 teams (5 to top 10).
Tulsa, Syracuse, Michigan, Vandy, those are a joke.
And here's something to chew on: Every eligible Power 5 school with a top-54 RPI made the NCAA Tournament. But eight non-Power 5 schools with top-54 RPIs did not.
Yeah Butler is way down the list when talking about questionable teams, if on it at all.
-
Butler making this field is a joke. Bona, as well as others should be in over them. Rewarding a team who schedules weak OOC and then finished only 10-8 in a top heavy conference is absurd. Tulsa is another one. Absolutely ridiculous how this field and seeding was done.
Butler won @UC and beat Purdue on neutral court. That is 2 better wins away from home than probably half the field. What are you talking about?
-
Travis Ford is a terrible coach. Lands recruits and flops every year in the Tournament.
This.
-
To answer Gordo's question of is SLU all in, I'd say very much so. The speed at which Crews was released w/some buyout shows me they want to fill the Fetz and keep it filled. Plus that NCAA money ain't a bad carrot either. In the past, Before Majerus, we would have let the Crews era run it's course.
I hope we don't go the recycle route as there is no Majerus out there. Underwood' s intriguing. Drew, Valpo for SLU? Hmmm, not feeling it.
Agree about the recycle route. I think Underwood would be a very god hire.
-
My top candidates for Head Coach would be as follows
1. Rick Byrd
2. Bryce Drew
3. Anthony Grant
4. Chris Beard
5. Rick Stansbury
Byrd seems to be a Belmont lifer. He has pined for the Tennessee job before though. Is he tired of having to win his league tournament to get to the NCAAs? Him losing may be a good thing for us. You have to make a call to him and offer him big bucks. He is the closest coach to Majerus out there. His hiring would be a homerun, energize the program like when we hired Spoon. Little chance of it happening.
Drew is next. There aren't many top jobs available. Unless somebody retires there are no really good BCS jobs opening up. Offer him enough money and he could come here. Still he most likely turns us down.
As mentioned before Hiring Grant before OKC is done with their season will be difficult. That may take him out of the running. We need a coach now not in June. He'd be a solid hire though.
Dark horse is Chris Beard. as far as up and coming low major HCs he would be my choice. He will get some play at some lower level BCS schools this offseason but SLU is a better option than that.
Stansbury will get some offers probably from Ok St, maybe Memphis or another Texas school. He doesn't seem like the type to coach at SLU but you never know.
There are some Assts out there. Crutchfield has been mentioned. Other Assts of note in the Midwest region Steele from Xavier, Boals at TOSU, Lavall Jordan is constantly mentioned as a HC coaching candidate. For my money I would prefer Bacari Alexander also from Michigan or Dwayne Stephens at Mich St. I'd much rather have a HC though.
FWIW I think Chaifetz comes out of nowhere with a candidate with an NBA background.
Travis Steele would be a really good hire if they went assistant route. Great recruiter. No head coaching experience may be a downside. If Mack ever leaves XU Steele would get a long look but might not be quite ready for that level yet, especially with no HC experience.
-
Crews has been so bad and fans are so desperate for anyon else that it is blinding them into thinking retreads like Weber and Lavin would be good hires.
-
Lavin's teams get W's, his teams make the postseason, he can recruit, he has a name in the sport..... "Lavin would be an awful hire" is completely wrong.
If mediocrity is your goal Lavin would be great. He has a name because he is on TV. He is a good recruiter but he did nothing with some really good talent at St. Johns.
-
He's going to Duke, i suspect because the SLU program is a disaster and disgrace currently.
Bringing Justin Tatum in after his son has committed to Duke would be the dumbest idea since hiring Crews.
Let's not even discuss that path. SLU is at minimum a top 100 program. We are not a Valley school, we should not be playing second fiddle half baked garbage. Grant is the kind of guy we need to be going after. Lavin. Drew. Real names. Stay focused on guys who can get us to the Dance.
Lavin would be an awful hire. He can't coach his way out of a paper bag. I like him as a studio guy and he is a decent recruiter but he is a bad coach.
-
The SEC is a mediocre P5 basketball league outside of Kentucky - Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, Tenn... when is the last time any of those programs had sustained success? A lot of coaches go fail in that league. One of the few guys who was able to build success at one of these football factory schools was Billy D - Grant was an assistant for him for 10 years and Donovan thought enough of him to bring him to the NBA. Adding the NBA (even for just a year) to his resume would be a plus. He was a good player at Dayton, so should have a sense of how to do well at a program like SLU. Also, he won conference titles all three years he was at VCU = "mid major" success. And looking back at his record at Bama, it wasn't that bad. He was over .500 in the SEC, really only one bad year. He made the Big Dance once, and the NIT three times, including the Finals once. Even in his final season, he made the NIT.
Yeah he was very successful at VCU, but he did have 2 guys on his roster who were 1st round NBA picks. Wonder if he recruited them?
Maybe he would do well again at a school with no football where basketball takes precedence.
-
Grant did very little at Alabama with an incredible athletic budget.
Yeah he would be a decent candidate (way better than Bruce Weber) but I'm not sure I understand all the love he is getting on here. Especially not if you have to break the bank to get him.
Whoever it is it needs to be someone with a proven recruiting record and hopefully with strong recruiting ties to the general area, whether a current assistant or a head coach.
-
-if we have to wait two coaches or 10 years to be in the tourney the wrong coach was hired
Yeah no kidding.
There is no reason SLU should not be able to be a top tier A10 team. Good school, good location, good facilities. It wont happen instantly but the right coach will have SLU in a good position after a couple of recruiting classes.
-
I'd take a Weber grill over Jim Crews.
HA! Obviously, but lets not make that our bar.
-
I dont know... I think our last older coach worked out just fine.
Majerus was different than Weber, he was always a good succssful coach everywhere at all levels and left the game for personal reasons not because he was a fired retread at 2 different schools like Weber would be. Why anyone would want an old fired multiple times Bruce Weber is beyond me.
-
I havent read all of the thread but imo SLU needs to hire a young up and coming coach who has been successful in the mid-major to low major ranks. Hiring another retread older coach like Bruce Weber would be a disaster imo. Grab a young go-getter with something to prove who is working his but off to make a name for himself. When does hiring a guy like Bruce Weber ever work out? That has the makings of Crews part 2.
To make a (maybe not so great) compariosn to UC football They had great success hiring no name guys from mid major programs (Brian Kelly, Butch Jones) that were young hungry coaches wanting to make a name for themselves and UC football thrived. Then after Jones though go and hire a retread who had had some success at bigger schools and been around for quite a while in Tommy Tubberville and it has been a disaster.
-
I'm pretty certain it was an ankle. Hopefully it's just a minor sprain and he'll be okay.
Ya I was afraid he was holding his knee for a moment. Hopefully it is nothin too serious.
-
The first half was brutal! Very frustrating to watch. Georgia is not a good basketball team but we looked worse in the first half. We play half way decent in the first half we win that game and I think we win fairly easily.
-
And once again, just about nothing is settled and anything can happen. Richmond's win at Charlotte last night sets up an interesting game Saturday in Richmond when the Spiders host Xavier. Xavier has to first play Dayton Thursday night at home and I have to believe Xavier, in a revenge mode and looking to clinch another A10 regular season title, waltzes over Dayton in that one. That would make them 12 and 3 and even if they lose at Richmond and Rhode Island beats UMass to both finish at 12 and 4, Xavier gets the top spot based on its head-to-head win over the Rams on Janusary 15 (67-65 X in Cincy). But does a win against Dayton make Saturday immaterial for the Muskies? A less-than-stellar effort would allow Richmond to win and finish at 9 and 7. If the Bills lose tonight but hold serve against La Salle, what does a tie between us and Richmond mean?
Assuming (which always does the inevitable and makes an ass out of me) the Bills do as I expect, lose tonight and win at home against La Salle, that means 9 and 7. Duquesne finishes 9 and 7 by beating us and losing at Dayton. St. Joes can finish 9 and 7 by losing tonight against Temple and then beating Fordham on the road. Maybe now even Richmond can do the same. In that four-way tie, SLU goes 3 and 2 against the other tied members. Duquesne goes 1 and 3. St. Joes is 2 and 1. And Richmond is 2 and 2. Which means St. Joe's is five, we are six, Richmond is seven and Duquesne is eight? Is that what happens here? Anyone know?
If the tiebreaker is who beat the higher finishing team, Duqesne and Richmond would have beaten Xavier in this scenario and knock us and the Hawks down. Richmond also beat Rhode Island which means they are the five and the Dukes are the six. We win seven in our head-to-head with St. Joes then, yes? Owwwwww! All this hurts once again. I really just want to avoid the 8 or 9 finish, have to play Wednesday March 11 at noon in Atlantic City and then, if winning, play Xavier at noon on Thursday again. Of course, if we drop to the 8 or 9 seed, it will mean losing all three of our last games (SB, DU, LS) which means in all likelihood, one and done on the Boards is highly probable.
What I think will happen: 03/05 winners --- GeeDub over Umass; Duquesne over SLU; and La Salle over Fordham. 03/06 winenrs: Xavier over Dayton and Temple over St. Joes. 03/07 winners: Richmond over Xavier; St. Joe's over Fordham; Rhode Island over Umass; the Bonnies over Charlotte; Temple over GeeDub; Dayton over Duquesne and SLU over La Salle.
Which means: #1 Xavier, #2 Rhode Island, #3 Dayton (head-to-head over Temple), #4 Temple, #5 St. Joe's (if my logic above is correct), #6 Saint Louis, #7 Richmond, #8 Duquesne, #9 La Salle, #10 St. Bonaventure; #11 George Washington (given the same kind of logic as above with a 2 adn 1 record against the others tied), and #12 Charlotte. Which leaves UMass at home and is all predicated on George Washington beating them tonight in Amherst. That doesn't happen and Umass wins, GeeDub stays home and Umass gets the 11 seed and a match with us.
I am 110% certain that all this will change with even the first final score tonight. Watch. But again, here comes the last week and we don't really know much of anything and the match-ups are so uncertain, prognostication is futile at best.
I don't think I want to play Umass. I'd rather see Charlotte and/or the Bonnies. While Umass is on a negative tear, having lost 8 out of its last 11 games, I watched Charlotte last night for a while and, having seen them like five times this year, they just don't impress me as being that deep. Short of Mack and Coley, and sometimes Wilderness, they really don't have much in terms of depth and talent.
No, because although they would get the top seed it would still be a split A10 Championship which Xavier wouldnt want to have plus Xavier is playing for seeding the NCAA tournament. If the beat UD and Richmond and win the A10 tourney they have a chance for a 3 seed.
-
Its a shame RI couldn't pull out 1 or 2 of its close non-conference losses; if they had they'd likely be an at-large NCAA tourney team. They have a current RPI of 56 but could get up to 48ish if beat UMass to finish the season and end 23-8.
They lost a game at Duke that they led for about 38 minutes. They lost by 7 @ Villanova and had a last second loss @ Providence. Lost by 4 vs. OK-State. No embarassing losses but no key wins. They'll finish 12-4 in conference, inlcuding a 3OT loss to St. Joes.
Temple blew their at-large chances with the loss to LaSalle. Best this conference can hope for is Dayton to finish at least 1-1 in the regular season and have a non X or Dayton team win the tourney. Temple and RI will probably fall a couple games short. Too bad.
I think Temple may sneak in if they win their last game and make it to the conference tourney finals. But it is a shame they lost so many close OOC games.
Here is an excerpt from this article Doug Gottlieb wrote on espn. Visit My Website
"But if we are really looking for the 34 best at-large teams, why are we not looking for the best teams? For instance, Maryland is in? Does a great team get beaten by 41 by their archrival? Does a great team lose to Georgetown by 27? Clemson by 29? Yes, the Terps beat UNC after trailing by 16 in the second half, but they turned around and lost again at home to Duke. Does a great or even really good team have that kind of inconsistent play? Or does a great team give everyone a great game, like Rhode Island? Seven of the Rams' eight losses this season have been by a total of 24 points. And they have won nine of 10. Rhode Island lost by three at Cameron early in the season and is playing its best basketball right now. Do I know that they are better than Maryland? No. I am confident, but far from arrogant enough to say I know. But the Rams have never lost to Morgan State and have never been "hosed" this year. Why not reward such a solid team?"
-
Do you think we have the ability to compete in the Big East even now with our coach and facilities in place? We lost to DePaul on a neutral court, who is currently 0-15 in conference play. Yes, where we are is not where we are going to be in a few years, but I still don't know about that. The Big East in the premier conference in the nation right now, but how much does it help recruiting wise when you usually finish 13th-16th in the conference? So, not trying to belittle our team or hurt anyone's feelings, just asking an honest question: How would you envision SLU if we had been given the 17th spot in the BE?
I don't think one time 5 pt loss to DePaul means all that much when you look at your program long term. When we both played in GMW and CUSA, we played them pretty much even. Some years better and some years worse. Same with Marquette. Marquette advantage was, they had some very good years which we did not come close to.
I think even if we finished in the bottom part of the BE but still demonstrated commitment, I believe you would have seen much easier recruiting (possibly Harrelson and Roth and ones we probably don't know about, even Majerus has eluded to that on several occasions). We would probably been on national TV. Also look at attendance, wouldn't we have had sell-outs with Marquette, ND, Georgetown, etc.. coming into town. I think playing some of these schools at home we would have pulled them out as we did with BC & UD. Some our best attended games in our history were the Marquette games when we played in the old GMW/CUSA.
A good example is Seton Hall prior to the BE, you could not get any lower, a equivalent to St Peters today. Today they are not a world beater but in the BE they had a final 4 and several players in the NBA. They made a major commitment to basketball but even with what they done, we have done more with a 85mil $ arena/practice areas on campus and the hiring of Majerus.
What I am just saying is the A10 needs to have some schools make the commitment we made or we spin our wheels.
While I agree that the schools who are making the commitment should indeed be able to criticize those who dont, I think you are wrong when you say some schools need to make the same commitment because more than some have there are only a few at the very bottom I am concerned about. Also spin our wheels and go where? If there were some place better to go at this point dont you think a team like Xavier would already be gone? Barring another BE breakup there isnt really any good options. Maybe MVC for SLU but that is only because of geographical reasons, it isnt a better conference than the A10. The A10 is still usually one of the top 8 conferences every year and usually never worse than 9th. They are usually the first or second best conference outside the big 6. So lets not pretend like SLU is going to pack up and leave if things dont get changed, because there really isnt anywhere better to go.
NCAA Field
in Billikens.com Main Board
Posted
They said that in previous years. I wasnt talking about after the fact. I know Kenpom is one thing they also consider, among others I am sure, and Bona was #79 in KenPom. Butler was 40. Temple was the worst KenPom ranked team to get an at large at #86.
I dont pretend to completely understand KenPom rankings and how that all works, I know it takes a lot of different factors into account, and by most opinions is a way better measure than the RPI.