Jump to content

Conference Idea


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, courtside said:

Drake's 2nd best win in NET was 97.

I would have had SLU in over Drake, Wichita St., Michigan St., Utah State, Syracuse, etc...but SLU didn't help itself multiple times either.

SLU caught a tough break this year.

Can Travis Ford take SLU from near A-10 bottom to consistently at or near A-10 top? He has done a nice job getting SLU back to their 16 year A-10 average or top 5 ish. (SLU's avg A-10 finish is 6 in 16 years) League titles, NCAA Tourneys, Wins in NCAA's? That is the next step.

This program is worlds away from being on the Big East radar. That is part of the reason I was so anti-NIT. All of the Big East schools eligible turned it down. Averaging 6th in this conference is...meh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

1 minute ago, JettFlight5 said:

This program is worlds away from being on the Big East radar. That is part of the reason I was so anti-NIT. All of the Big East schools eligible turned it down. Averaging 6th in this conference is...meh. 

If and when the Big East expands I believe we a a logical candidate as long as we are a top team . We have a lot going for us as long as we can be competitive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

The difference is the MVC has better leadership and people who understand how the system works. Both Drake and Loyola played Mo State (97)and Ind State (120)on the road twice. The schedule was adjusted to accommodate this. It allowed them both 4 quad 2 wins rather than 2 quad 2 and 2 quad 3’s which a home and home would have given them. 

Agreed here that the MVC has better leadership and administrators who better understand the system.  This just concluded season shows that again, and the result was the MVC tied the A10 for the number of total bids (2) and the number of at large bids (1).  Let's hope that is just a one year, pandemic caused anomaly.  If it becomes a trend, then some analysis is in order, at minimum of a quality assurance type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, willie said:

If and when the Big East expands I believe we a a logical candidate as long as we are a top team . We have a lot going for us as long as we can be competitive. 

I agree if this program can get out of its own way. CBI team...meet Situation 1. Ford gets good recruits...meet Situation 2. This year...well, we know by now. I would love the Bills to be a top-level program and move out of the A10, but there's a lot of work to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, willie said:

If and when the Big East expands I believe we a a logical candidate as long as we are a top team . We have a lot going for us as long as we can be competitive. 

You need to change "competitive" to "dominant." Results need to be elevated, and, maintained year in and year out. And of course, better Admin.

SLU missed its chance for the Big East (on and off of the floor) when the Big East was adding multiple teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AnkielBreakers said:

Just to take this back to the MVC discussion without citing anyone, this is the first year, in the last 10+, where the MVC and A10 have the same number if bids. In the past, arguments that we should move to the A10 were pretty harshly rejected. That said, if the A10 and MVC have the same number of bids moving forward, then the A10 is just not a smart conference for basketball bids. The A10 is a better conference. More academically talented schools, and better basketball, more Jesuit schools also. But also more competition for 2 bids.

I grew up an MVC fan, so I am entirely biased.

good post

fire brenda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bay Area Billiken said:

The NCAA Tournament selected field proved that the NET was paramount, 95% dispositive. The NCAA followed the NET in 35 of the 37 at large bids, with only 2 variances among the 37 at larges, those 2 being already eliminated 70 Mich. State and 72 Wichita State. Regrettably one of the two excised from the NCAA Tourney field was 43 SLU.

So you agree the NET is not something the NCAA uses strictly - I understand what you are saying but if the NET was that important to the NCAA then those two teams would not have been in the tourney.  My point is that I do not think that Belmont's NET of 90 helps us as a conference.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cheeseman said:

So you agree the NET is not something the NCAA uses strictly - I understand what you are saying but if the NET was that important to the NCAA then those two teams would not have been in the tourney.  My point is that I do not think that Belmont's NET of 90 helps us as a conference.  

The NCAA used the NET strictly, 95%, not solely, with 2 variances, 5%.

Belmont had that 90 NET because it plays in a Low Con league, the OVC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cheeseman said:

So you agree the NET is not something the NCAA uses strictly - I understand what you are saying but if the NET was that important to the NCAA then those two teams would not have been in the tourney.  My point is that I do not think that Belmont's NET of 90 helps us as a conference.  

If Belmont was playing an A10 schedule rather than an OVC schedule, their NET would be closer to 60 a la Davidson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...