STLfan Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 This site now says that there is no way we make the NIT. At the beginning of the season I was expecting the Billikens to be in the NCAA's. If we don't even get into the NIT this season could be called nothing but a complete failure. I've been sitting on the fence in regards to Brad but I am starting to lean closer to the crowd that thinks he isn't going to get it done here at SLU. I wonder if next season is going to be make or break for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FromGreeceWithLove Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Could you post a link to that site? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STLfan Posted March 10, 2007 Author Share Posted March 10, 2007 http://tcaa.puretecmo.com/nit06.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Out of pure desperation, this poster was reduced to watching the Albany at Vermont battle in a small gym in Burlington, VT with walls at both ends in the America East. We needed a Vermont win. Vermont had the ball with 31 seconds left, down 60-59, and called timeout. The point guard stood 50 feet away from the basket without a running 5 count for about half the remaining time. He made his move, got stripped, and Vermont didn't even get off a shot. #2 seed Albany wins. But the bad news for SLU: Vermont gets another of those patently absurd "automatic" NIT bids to regular season conference winners that don't win their post-season conference tournament. I knew this rule would be trouble when it was announced late last season. As for that website, I can't fathom the NIT picking sub-.500 Cal (16-17) over SLU, even if the old NIT rule of having to be .500 or above is no longer in effect. And Mizzou (RPI 90 per kenpom.com and 93 per realtimerpi.com) should not be picked ahead of SLU (RPI 73 per kenpom.com and 79 per realtime.com, both after last night's games) either. At least Memphis won C-USA, which should eliminate Houston and save an NIT spot. We can afford no more lesser conference tournament upsets of regular season conference champs. Big West- We need Long Beach State to win tonight against Cal Poly. Southland- We need Texas A&M CC to beat Northwestern State. SWAC- We need Mississippi Valley State to beat Jackson State (unlikely IMO). MEAC- We need Delaware State to beat Florida A&M. And in the ACC, SLU needs midnight to come for Cinderella NC State. By my count, no less than six (6) NIT bids have already been lost to this "automatic bid" NIT rule, the effect of which rewards these lesser conferences, most of which have lower RPI's. I don't like having SLU in the desperate position of having to watch for the Big West, Southland, SWAC, and MEAC results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAG Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 After getting smoked like we did last night, there is no way we're going to the NIT. Rhode Island or GW (whoever loses) is getting in along with UMASS. That's it from the kick ass A10 CAG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inthelou Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 It just doesn't make sense. Supposedly they are using the EXACT same kind of criteria as the NCAA ie RPI, conference records, etc. Mizzou just doesn't cut it it if you line them up with the Billikens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 I've got no problem with giving the winners of low major conferences NIT bids if they don't win their tournament. Vermont deserves some type of postseason after going 25-7 and winning at Boston College this year. What I object to is giving LSU a bid when they've been getting their brains beat in by less talented teams all year long or even considering BCS teams with RPIs in the 90s. You're literally skipping over 20 teams just to propagate the myth of BCS superiority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VTIME Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 They are in the Big 12. Its more respected than the A10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 The powers in the new NIT can't make the distinction, in some cases for PC reasons, but IMHO, teams with RPI's well over 100 have no business being in any post-season tournament. That being said, looking at that website list, by no objective basis should NC State, LSU, Cal, Mizzou, and Iowa be allowed in the NIT ahead of SLU. Cal is 16-17 for Ben Braun's sake! Otherwise, SLU is literally getting shafted from both sides, the lesser conference regular season winners on the one hand, and the BCS also-rans on the other side. For those who rip SLU for laying an egg last night against GW so as to disqualify SLU from any NIT bid, shouldn't that same logic then apply to Mizzou, which got routed by lowly Baylor? GW is a far superior team than Baylor IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Agreed re Mizzou. And ditto for LSU, Cal (16-17), Iowa, and NC State. Someone can always come up with some reason or explanation. In NC State's case, I heard today that the point guard was injured this year. But Kevin Lisch was injured this season too. Someone will say that Iowa was over .500 in the Big Ten. Well, SLU was 10-9, counting the conference tournament in the A-10. SLU's RPI is better than NC State, LSU, Mizzou, and Iowa. Cal is one RPI spot ahead of SLU per realtimerpi.com, 7 spots behind per kenpom.com. But Cal finished 16-17. How can that record be rewarded even if Cal lost its 6'11" Center very early to a season ending injury? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FromGreeceWithLove Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 I think the thing you have to realize is that finishing in the middle of the A-10 is not the same as finishing in the middle of the SEC, Pac-10, Big Ten, or Big 12. You just have to wonder how many teams the NIT is going to take from the A-10 and if we can get one of those. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inthelou Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 if we don't get into the NIT. What will that say about this conference as far as the future and post season play? If SLU cannot get into the NIT on the merits of its achievements this year you wonder what will happen in other years. I say we get in over teams like Mizzou and LSU. There's just no logic NOT to take us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 I agree. But IMO finishing in the middle of the A-10 is better than winning say the Southland, Ohio Valley, MEAC, or SWAC, losing your conference tournament, and getting an automatic NIT bid. That's what I mean by SLU getting the shaft from both sides. As Tony Bruno would say, "It's an outrage!" Well, maybe not in this case, after all it is only the NIT, but you know what I mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidlee Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Although I would love to see SLU get into the NIT, you have to be honest about the situation. When in your last game you lose and only score 40 points (thank you Wendell for making that short jumper to get us there), you are going to have a hard time getting people interested in you, even if you say that should not be part of the equation. PS. Remember last year in SLU"S last game they only scored 37 points against St. Joe's. A bad habit to be forming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STLfan Posted March 10, 2007 Author Share Posted March 10, 2007 SLU and Mizzou are both bubble NIT teams in my opinion. RPI SLU - 73 Mizzou - 90 SOS Mizzou - 63 SLU - 84 Conference RPI Big 12 - 7th A10 - 10th Top 50 wins Mizzou - 3 SLU - 2 Top 100 wins SLU - 9 Mizzou - 5 Losses to teams 101-200 SLU - 3 Mizzou - 4 Losses to teams 200+ Mizzou - 0 SLU - 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 That last one scares me. Really, that is the whole season in a nutshell right there, isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 No kidding. These conference tourney egg laying finales have to stop. I was sitting there on a Friday night with my wife and 17 year old son, watching the debacle on TV, and rooting for SLU to score at least 40 points, and at least exceed the 37 from last year's finale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 The other thing re last night. For a long time during that game, the Billikens just looked helpless on offense, as if they had no idea how to score and no hope to score. The only way they could score during that time was at the free throw line, and the 2 bigs were 0 for 4 at the charity line late in the first half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VTIME Posted March 11, 2007 Share Posted March 11, 2007 I agree. College basketball is a business and there could be a tendency to go with a team with a similar resume but that plays a more fan friendly type of basketball. 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.