But what if we go undefeated in conference?

[CenHudDude]

9 hours ago, dlarry said:

No I think he is a bigger name than he was last year. He wasn’t getting national attention until the MVC tournament last year. He was getting the spotlight preseason this year. If the Bills were to go on an 18 game conference winning streak the hype around Avila would build even more.

No way they leave him out.  

I guess we will never know, since we are not going 18 and 0.

[slu72]

36 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

because unlike you, we are true fans.   beiong a true fan is more than cheering only for a winner.  it is sticking with them through thick and thin and suffering together.   it all seems kinda destructive, but it is what it is.   i am sorry you arent capable of being a true fan.   

anyone can root for the yankmes, or the dukes or kansas or the chiefs.   but it is a challenge to be a billiken fan.   it's hard.   but when in those few instances where we are on top of the world (even for just two games) it's spectacular.   you'll never experience that total feeling.  

While I agree with the idea of total support for our Billikens, B’roy, I also try and stay real about our prospects. Winning out in the A10 is highly unrealistic.

[dlarry]

19 minutes ago, CenHudDude said:

I guess we will never know, since we are not going 18 and 0.

Can’t argue with that.

But 17-1…..

[gobillsgo]

When’s the last time we won at Dayton?  I vaguely remember a very mediocre Crews team going in there and beating the brakes off them randomly… but could be misremembering. Then there was the game Kwamain banked in the three at the buzzer to tie. We won that right?

[Band Legend]

7 minutes ago, gobillsgo said:

When’s the last time we won at Dayton?  I vaguely remember a very mediocre Crews team going in there and beating the brakes off them randomly… but could be misremembering. Then there was the game Kwamain banked in the three at the buzzer to tie. We won that right?

That was in St. Louis. 

[Pistol]

12 minutes ago, gobillsgo said:

When’s the last time we won at Dayton?  I vaguely remember a very mediocre Crews team going in there and beating the brakes off them randomly… but could be misremembering. Then there was the game Kwamain banked in the three at the buzzer to tie. We won that right?

January 11, 2014 - 67-59

Had a 9-point lead at halftime and Dayton couldn't catch up. Starters were Evans, Jett, Barnett, Loe, and McCall. McBroom had 17 off the bench. Manning and Loe combined for 9 blocks. Dayton couldn't make a shot all night, aside from Jordan Sibert from 3. Devin Oliver went 0-12. Wasn't SLU's best game, either, with an uncharacteristic 18 turnovers.

[The Wiz]

1 hour ago, slu72 said:

While I agree with the idea of total support for our Billikens, B’roy, I also try and stay real about our prospects. Winning out in the A10 is highly unrealistic.

I quoted you because your post was about being real.  It might be fun to speculate whether we will go 18-0  just like it is fun to speculate on winning the mega jackpot lottery but in the interest of realism the strategy for The Bills is to finish in the top 4 this year and every year.  The reality is in most years the A10 will receive only 1 bid.  Again it is fun to talk about Cinderella teams or a 16th seed pulling off an upset or that the NCAA "owes" Schertz a bid but in the end the NCAA will do whatever is best for the NCAA.  When faced with the choice of a mid level SEC team with many quad 1 games and a 2nd bid for the A10 there is no choice for the NCAA but to go with the Power conference knowing there will be plenty of other Cinderella teams with auto bids from other conferences.

There is a chance  for a 2nd A10  bid,  but it is less than 50% and will always be that way until things change (ie expanding the tourney).  That less than 50% chance for a 2nd bid has been and will continue to decline as the Power conferences get bigger and stronger. Unless change happens , the strategy is to be a top 4 A10  team and win 3 games in the tourney.

As they say at the crap table, you can wish for the 12 to come up but you are better off betting on the 7.

[Fraz]

Going 18-0 in the 7th best conference and missing the dance would make me never watch another basketball game again

[TheA_Bomb]

3 hours ago, dlarry said:

Because message boards are for silly speculative discussions? 

This is not silly speculation it's serious analysis.

I've been reading Clausewitz lately and he used dialectic to analyze (he did it before the communists), anyway it's useful to examine something in it's extreme (past absurdity) in either direction to reach a synthesis.  The extreme is SLU going on undefeated or completely defeated, the reality is somewhere in the middle.  Although the way the team is playing right now undefeated isn't completely out of the realm of possibility.  I think undefeated would be necessary to make the dance.  More likely to be over .500 and win the A10 tournament, a top 4 finish increases that likelihood.

[Minerva N. Owl]

35 minutes ago, The Wiz said:

 Again it is fun to talk about Cinderella teams or a 16th seed pulling off an upset or that the NCAA "owes" Schertz a bid but in the end the NCAA will do whatever is best for the NCAA.  When faced with the choice of a mid level SEC team with many quad 1 games and a 2nd bid for the A10 there is no choice for the NCAA but to go with the Power conference knowing there will be plenty of other Cinderella teams with auto bids from other conferences.

There is a chance  for a 2nd A10  bid,  but it is less than 50% and will always be that way until things change (ie expanding the tourney).  That less than 50% chance for a 2nd bid has been and will continue to decline as the Power conferences get bigger and stronger. Unless change happens , the strategy is to be a top 4 A10  team and win 3 games in the tourney.

OK ... if we're talking reality, then I grant that all this speculation is silly, but it nonetheless seems worthwhile to point out that the committee's 2024 snub of Indiana State was historic, and the choice to put in Virginia rather than Indiana State was a completely avoidable embarrassment for the committee. The committee did NOT follow their own guidelines. At selection time (March 17, 2024) Virginia was 54 in the NET, while Indiana State was 28 (the lowest in the NET era to be snubbed).

It seems worthwhile to continue banging this drum, not because it is realistic that the Billikens will win out or get their NET as low as 28 (which I grant is blue koolaid Lala land dreaming on a snow day). Instead, if we grant that "the NCAA will do whatever is best for the NCAA", then it seems worthwhile to keep up the memory that the committee did NOT follow its own guidelines on March 17, 2024 when Virginia was invited (with a NET ranking of 54) while Indiana State was snubbed (with a NET ranking of 28).

https://www.si.com/college/2024/03/20/march-madness-virginias-first-four-embarrassment-was-completely-avoidable

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2024/team-net-sheet?team=Virginia

Virginia (NET 54) was gifted an invitation in March 2024. In their tournament (play-in) game, they were drubbed: 67-42.

Indiana State (NET 28) was snubbed. In the NIT, they made an impressive run to the NIT Championship game.

My point is simply that the committee did not follow their own guidelines in choosing Virginia in 2024. In the snow day dreamland world where the Billikens (or any other A10 team) manage to end the season with a NET under 30 without winning the A10 Championship game, I think there's a strong case to be made for the 2025 committee to come closer to following their own guidelines rather than gifting a big state school with a low NET ranking, a losing record down the stretch, just so the ACC can get five teams in the tournament, when a mid-major team with a much, much better NET ranking gets snubbed.

[gobillsgo]

3 hours ago, Band Legend said:

That was in St. Louis. 

The Kwamain banked three was?? I must be getting old because I would’ve sworn that was at Dayton 

 

edit: sure was at home.  Funny, I was remembering the play almost exactly- a lot of curls and handoffs at the top of the key as we got further away from the basket, only for him to bank it in from deep. Not sure why my brain was placing it at Dayton though. 

[Billikenbooster]

Gives me goosebumps to see that again

thanks for sharing

[Matty Light]

1 hour ago, gobillsgo said:

The Kwamain banked three was?? I must be getting old because I would’ve sworn that was at Dayton 

 

edit: sure was at home.  Funny, I was remembering the play almost exactly- a lot of curls and handoffs at the top of the key as we got further away from the basket, only for him to bank it in from deep. Not sure why my brain was placing it at Dayton though. 

I remember winning on a buzzer beater at Dayton during the Soderberg era. It might've been Lisch who took the shot. It was a deep one.

[White Pelican]

I remember it at home cuz I was there.

[Box and Won]

3 hours ago, gobillsgo said:

The Kwamain banked three was?? I must be getting old because I would’ve sworn that was at Dayton 

 

edit: sure was at home.  Funny, I was remembering the play almost exactly- a lot of curls and handoffs at the top of the key as we got further away from the basket, only for him to bank it in from deep. Not sure why my brain was placing it at Dayton though. 

Maybe it was the blue unis.

[Midtown Madness]

3 hours ago, gobillsgo said:

The Kwamain banked three was?? I must be getting old because I would’ve sworn that was at Dayton 

 

edit: sure was at home.  Funny, I was remembering the play almost exactly- a lot of curls and handoffs at the top of the key as we got further away from the basket, only for him to bank it in from deep. Not sure why my brain was placing it at Dayton though. 

Man I was ahead of the curve with highlights on Youtube. If only I had a little more foresight.

[Crewsorlose]

10 hours ago, TheA_Bomb said:

This is not silly speculation it's serious analysis.

I've been reading Clausewitz lately and he used dialectic to analyze (he did it before the communists), anyway it's useful to examine something in it's extreme (past absurdity) in either direction to reach a synthesis.  The extreme is SLU going on undefeated or completely defeated, the reality is somewhere in the middle.  Although the way the team is playing right now undefeated isn't completely out of the realm of possibility.  I think undefeated would be necessary to make the dance.  More likely to be over .500 and win the A10 tournament, a top 4 finish increases that likelihood.

You had me at Clausewitz. No joke. 

[Crewsorlose]

10 hours ago, TheA_Bomb said:

This is not silly speculation it's serious analysis.

I've been reading Clausewitz lately and he used dialectic to analyze (he did it before the communists), anyway it's useful to examine something in it's extreme (past absurdity) in either direction to reach a synthesis.  The extreme is SLU going on undefeated or completely defeated, the reality is somewhere in the middle.  Although the way the team is playing right now undefeated isn't completely out of the realm of possibility.  I think undefeated would be necessary to make the dance.  More likely to be over .500 and win the A10 tournament, a top 4 finish increases that likelihood.

I don't think anyone on the board is saying: "We can go 18-0." It's more, "if we did, just out of curiosity, would we get an at-large bid?"

Obviously it's easier to be perfect over a long weekend in March than it is to be near perfect for 2+ months of A-10 ball. But both are paths; one has a very small chance. The other has a scintilla of a chance.  If we hadn't gotten screwed by the refs against GCU 16-2 would have probably done it. But oh well. What else are we supposed to talk about during a frigid week with five days between games? 

[Old guy]

11 hours ago, TheA_Bomb said:

This is not silly speculation it's serious analysis.

I've been reading Clausewitz lately and he used dialectic to analyze (he did it before the communists), anyway it's useful to examine something in it's extreme (past absurdity) in either direction to reach a synthesis.  The extreme is SLU going on undefeated or completely defeated, the reality is somewhere in the middle.  Although the way the team is playing right now undefeated isn't completely out of the realm of possibility.  I think undefeated would be necessary to make the dance.  More likely to be over .500 and win the A10 tournament, a top 4 finish increases that likelihood.

Clausewitz was a great mind, but military battles depend on many factors (logistics, reinforcements, weapon superiority) that has nothing to do with sports. A lot of what Clausewitz talks about, like "attack is the best defense," is applicable to sports. We do have a chance to win the whole set of conference games, but it is not a good chance. However, it is there. You also cannot win the powerball or the megamillions unless you buy a ticket. And despite the fact that you are throwing the money away and the chance of winning is minuscule, the chance is there. I think the best way to look at SLU chances at this time is to take it in a game by game basis. To enjoy the wins and not get fixed upon the losses.

 

[TheA_Bomb]

3 hours ago, Crewsorlose said:

You had me at Clausewitz. No joke. 

Just wait until we get into Jomini and Sun Tzu. That's next.

[brianstl]

On 1/6/2025 at 6:29 PM, The Wiz said:

Again , I will play along.  So we win all 18 games in conference.  Hard to say what the NET would be  but some seem to think around 40...but let's juice that up a bit to give us a little margin to say ...28.  You said in your earlier post 7 or 8 losses might do the trick too...Let's not take any chances ...let's go with the 7 losses...We have 6 losses now and the 7th loss can be in the A10 tourney to continue the model that was setup in this thread.  Of course , if we lose in the tourney somebody else gets the auto bid but that shouldn't be a problem either.

So where are we?  We go 18-0  in the conference season and lose 1 in the tourney...we finish the season 28-6 ...we have a NET rank  of 28 ...we are in....No we are not in ...we go to the NIT.  

The previous paragraph is not fictional nor is it about the Billikens.  And the bolded statement is not me talking. That is what happened to Ind St last year when they went 28-6 ...and had a NET 28...the bolded statement was made by Coach Schertz after receiving the snub from the Committee. Btw...If you check my numbers in the above scenario if we go 18-0  plus 1 loss in the A10 tourney , we finished at 27-7...not as good as the 28-6 that ISU posted.

 If you don't believe me ...believe Coach Schertz ...he speaks from experience. 

I stand by my original post above.

According to T Rank's Teamcast DynamaRank projection tool going 18-0 would get us a NET rank of 57 with a 30.4% chance of making the tournament.  

[The Wiz]

2 minutes ago, brianstl said:

According to T Rank's Teamcast DynamaRank projection tool going 18-0 would get us a NET rank of 57 with a 30.4% chance of making the tournament.  

I rest my case.

[White Pelican]

35 minutes ago, brianstl said:

According to T Rank's Teamcast DynamaRank projection tool going 18-0 would get us a NET rank of 57 with a 30.4% chance of making the tournament.  

There ya have it.

[Billiken Rich]

So you're saying there is a chance?

 

[TheA_Bomb]

50 - 50