Agree or disagree?
- Thread starter PURPLEFIRE
- Start date
That is why a team that finished 8th in the regular season and got knocked out in the first round of their conference tournament, beats out at team that finishes 2nd in the same conference, and makes the finals of their conference tournament.
How crazy is that. By the way that was ASU over USC. From the terrific conference that did not have one team win a game in the tournament.
How crazy is that. By the way that was ASU over USC. From the terrific conference that did not have one team win a game in the tournament.
No, but neither did MTSU. OU played like crap down the stretch and I would rather see MTSU in over teams that don't finish .500 in their league. However, OU beat teams and MTSU didn't. That's why they got in, fair or not.
MTSU only has themselves to blame. They didn’t show up down the stretch. OU didn’t belong.
Glad to see all the “ upsets”. Hopefully the committee will realize the mid majors can ball.
Glad to see all the “ upsets”. Hopefully the committee will realize the mid majors can ball.
That’s precisely what is being questioned. How fair the system is, or isn’t. When a team has 20 shots at a quality win, as opposed to 5 or 6, of course that isn’t a level playing field. MTSU can’t help that one fckng bit.
OU didn’t get in because they beat teams, although that was the justification. OU lost more “quality” games than they won. They got in because they are a P5 program that the NCAA panders to.
OU also has one of the top players in the nation. I think that helped sway the commitee.
How in the hell did Texas get in? Why weren't people complaining about them?
OSU had a better profile than OU and UT I think
OSU had a better profile than OU and UT I think
I hated that UT, OU, ASU, Alabama and Syracuse all got in.
MTSU because they won their conference, but it’s still their fault for not finishing strong. IMO
The P5 schools should be required to play at least 3 games against mid majors each season. That would give the mids chances at improving their record against "better" conference teams. To solely judge based off the stats is misleading because schools like OU have to play a so-called tougher schedule just because they are in a bigger conference. Anyone believe MTSU wouldn't give their left nut to be in the ACC? In addition, you should be required to have at least a 500 record in whatever conference you are in. You chose to be in that conference. Win more or get out and go to another conference you can win in.
I sort of get where they are coming from (selection committee) but they easily lean toward their bigger better conferences to make sure they get the cash. We can't automatically give a spot the the regular season champ in addition the the tourney champ because I guarantee some regular season champs would toss games just to get another team in from their conference..
How about 1 representative from EVERY conference being on the selection committee? No conference can have 2. I bet the balance would even out....
I sort of get where they are coming from (selection committee) but they easily lean toward their bigger better conferences to make sure they get the cash. We can't automatically give a spot the the regular season champ in addition the the tourney champ because I guarantee some regular season champs would toss games just to get another team in from their conference..
How about 1 representative from EVERY conference being on the selection committee? No conference can have 2. I bet the balance would even out....
You're joking right? There are 32 conferences. It's hard enough doing it with 10 people, much less 32 people.
There are the current committee members:
Bruce Rasmussen Creighton Athletic Director
Bernard Muir Stanford Athletic Director
Mitch Barnhart Kentucky Athletic Director
Tom Burnett Southland Conference Commissioner
Janet Cone UNC Asheville Athletic Director
Tom Holmoe BYU Athletic Director
Jim Phillips Northwestern Athletic Director
Jim Schaus Ohio Athletic Director
Craig Thompson Mountain West Conference Commissioner
Kevin White Duke Athletic Director
I think that's a pretty good representation.
OU non conference: Omaha, Ball St, Arkansas, Portland, Oregon, North Texas, UTSA, USC, Wichita St, Northwestern St, and Northwestern.
I see a MAC, WCC, 2 CUSA, and an AAC team there. 5-0 record against them of course.
Texas non-Conference: Northwestern St, New Hampshire, Lipscomb, Butler, Duke, Gonzaga, Florida A&M, VCU, Michigan, LaTech, Tennessee St, Alabama.
1 WCC, A-10, CUSA. 2-1 record and only 1 of those games was in Austin.
Syracuse non-conference: Cornell, Iona, Texas Southern, Oakland, Toledo, Maryland, Kansas, UConn, Colgate, Georgetown, Buffalo, St Bonaventure, Eastern Michigan.
1 Ivy, MAAC, 3 MAC, AAC, A-10. 6-1 vs those teams.
Alabama non-conference: Memphis, Lipscomb, Alabama A&M, UT-Arlington, BYU, Minnesota, Louisiana Tech, UCF, Rhode Island, Arizona, Mercer, Texas.
2 AAC, Sun Belt, WCC, CUSA, A-10. 5-1 vs those teams.
Arizona St non-conference: Idaho St, San Diego St, Northern Arizona, UC-Irvine, Kansas St, Xavier, San Francisco, St John's, Kansas, Vandy, Longwood, and Pacific.
MWC, 2 Big West, WCC. 4-0 vs them.
They're already playing mid-majors and beating them up. Go through CUSA teams schedules and see who they beat. The mid-major teams do not beat anybody and the ones that do, blow it later against bad teams. The P6 have enough good wins to cover a bad loss or two.
If Coach Terry is going to have the same scheduling philosophy as Floyd, we will never get an at-large bid. UTEP needs to play road games against anybody. No team is afraid of playing UTEP. NMSU played at Duke a few years ago and Kentucky would have played us if not for Floyds stupid "rule".
Playing home games vs Incarnate Word do not help anyone anymore.
Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe, it’s easy for those P5/6 schools to schedule whoever it is they want to schedule? Even most of the pundits say that the mid majors are at a distinct disadvantage because nobody wants to play a dangerous, or even middle of the road mid major because of it’s potential to be a lose-lose situation.
Everybody knows the answer is to schedule stronger. That’s nothing revelatory. Haven’t you heard the mid major coaches saying “nobody will ink us into their schedule”? It’s a legit hurdle.
With that said, I do think Floyd went beyond cupcake, most probable in an attempt to pad the win column.
The power teams can schedule a lot easier. If nobody wants to schedule a dangerous mid-major, how did MTSU land on 3 SEC teams schedules? They beat Michigan St and Minnesota in back to back tournaments.
The problem is, mid majors want home games. Too bad, you play on the road if you have to.
The problem is, mid majors want home games. Too bad, you play on the road if you have to.
Ultimate dangerous mid-major VCU had Virginia, Texas, and Seton Hall on their schedule this year. Played in Maui too and didn't have to play Chaminade in the first round.
Davidson played Virginia and North Carolina. They also played at Nevada.
The problem is UTEP, they haven't been interested in being a good program. Only interested in home and homes with P12 and scheduling junk teams for their 70 year old season ticket holders. Look what that got us....
Davidson played Virginia and North Carolina. They also played at Nevada.
The problem is UTEP, they haven't been interested in being a good program. Only interested in home and homes with P12 and scheduling junk teams for their 70 year old season ticket holders. Look what that got us....
I had a long answer written out but I deleted it and will keep it very simple.
MTSU didn’t win the games it was supposed to. They had the schedule for an at large. Going 4-6 vs top 100 hurt them. Losing to a 200+ team in the conference tournament double hurt them. One was the loss and second was the matchup vs a top 90 team they missed out on.
This year Nevada played 12 top 100 teams and went 8-4 against them to earn the at large. By comparison the last time UTEP earned an at large they playy 12 top 100 teams and went 8-4 vs them. Very similar amount of games vs top 100 teams to MTSU this year had they made the CUSA semifinals.
That’s it really, schedule 10-12 games vs top 100 and have a winning record against them and you should be in.
MTSU didn’t win the games it was supposed to. They had the schedule for an at large. Going 4-6 vs top 100 hurt them. Losing to a 200+ team in the conference tournament double hurt them. One was the loss and second was the matchup vs a top 90 team they missed out on.
This year Nevada played 12 top 100 teams and went 8-4 against them to earn the at large. By comparison the last time UTEP earned an at large they playy 12 top 100 teams and went 8-4 vs them. Very similar amount of games vs top 100 teams to MTSU this year had they made the CUSA semifinals.
That’s it really, schedule 10-12 games vs top 100 and have a winning record against them and you should be in.
I agree with most of what you’re saying. Even said as much about UTEP ‘s scheduling. You’re reiterating my point, though, by highlighting that even perennially strong mid majors ONLY get 4 or 5 quality opponents. All I’m saying is that the margin for error is extremely narrow and hopefully in the near future the playing field becomes a bit more level. Fortunately, there was a lot of media backlash against leaving some quality mid majors out while catering to less than mediocre P6 teams.
Good luck with that. Ain’t gonna happen. And not because several mid majors aren’t willing.
They're only getting 4 or 5??? How many should they get? 4 or 5 games is plenty to show your worth against P6 teams.
If you're the AD at VCU, why would you WANT to schedule 10 ACC teams in the non-conference? There's a good chance you will lose at least 50% of those. Everybody needs wins. No mid-major is going to over schedule and take multiple losses like that. Only SWAC teams do that; and they do it for money and not to earn credibility.
You have to have balance.
My point is that MTSU had the opportunities to lock up an at large. They played 10 top 100 teams. Go 6-4 or 7-3 against them and you’re almost in.
The conference didn’t do them any favors either. CUSA should make sure that the projected top teams are scheduled h/a against each other. By not hosting ODU they lost out on another top 100 team. By getting knocked out early in the conference tournament they lost out on two top 100 teams. That’s three more chances against good teams to build their resume.
I already mentioned Nevada’s resume for an at large. St Bonaventure went 7-4 vs the top 100 and earned an at large. The committee isn’t really asking MTSU to do anything extraordinary. Simply demonstrate that you have a winning record vs teams on your schedule that have a pulse.
Are the 2019 CUSA Basketball schedules set already? NO!
Simply pick the projected top 6 teams for next year and schedule h/a with each other.
Problem fixed bob.
Because that 50% has shown that it’s good enough to get a team in. That’s why. Hell, if you’re UT, ASU, Syracuse, Bama, OU...you don’t even need to win (quality wins) at a 50% clip.
Ok, I get it. You see complete equality in terms of opportunity the way the system is arranged. I don’t. This will just keep going round and round so I’m going to opt out of this convo.
Actually they are already set.
This is UTEP's schedule next year:
Home:
Rice
UNT
Southern Miss
LA Tech
UTSA
UAB
Middle Tennessee
Charlotte
Old Dominion
Away:
Western Kentucky
Marshall
FAU
FIU
Rice
UNT
Southern Miss
LA Tech
UTSA
Agreed. MTSU had their opportunity. They blew it. But you’re going to honestly tell me OU deserved to be in more? OU won 3 of their last 10 games. How is that not blowing it? Oh yeah, cuz they have P5 favor. Yes they had more quality wins...because they had more opportunities. They will always have more opportunities.
It’s all good. I’m over pointing out the inequalities in opportunity amongst P5/6 and mid majors. To each their own.
Well I’ll be damned. The conference is not doing themselves any favors blindly scheduling ahead of time.
Do you have a link to that schedule?
They are not blindly doing anything. I'm not sure if you figured it out, but we play Middle Tennessee, UAB, Charlotte, and Old Dominion at home every other year. Scheduling is based on travel partners. For example, when Middle Tennessee plays UTEP they play UTSA on that Thursday or Saturday.
The same thing with football. We play the west teams at home every two years and the west teams every four years at home.
I thought this was common knowledge. I guess not.
I agree with you the P6’s have a lot more opportunities to pick up quality wins. This is an unofficial average just by quickly skimming through the RPI pages it seems on average P6 teams will play 20 or more top 100 teams. All they have to do is go 9-11, 10-10 and they’re in.
Good mid majors with at large aspirations will play around 12 top 100 teams. Winning 7 or 8 of those will most likely earn you the at large. It’s not a perfect model but it’s sort of fair. What’s not to say MTSU goes 8-12 or worse vs top 100 if given the chance. They went 4-6 in the sample provided. Then who would you take a team that went 10-11 (OU) vs top 100 or the one that went 8-12 (MTSU).
I understand the shitty way to end the regular season for OU but that 10 game final stretch is as brutal as it can get for any team. There’s a reason why the Big 12 is rated the #1 RPI League.
I’m a proponent of the G5’s but being 100% honest MTSU shit the bed this season. Give me a mid major with a worthy resume that got snubbed and I’ll argue in their favor all off season.
Not having any strategic plans to boost the RPI of the projected top teams is the same as blindly scheduling.
With top 100 games scarce CUSA needs to do everything in its power to make sure their projected top teams are doing h/a with teams in the top 100of the RPI and not with the 250+ teams.
That’s having common knowledge.
You clearly don't know how scheduling works.
Plus, the projected teams aren't always the top teams during the season.
Like I said, the scheduling is set in stone because of travel partners. Middle Tennessee isn't going to come to El Paso just to play UTEP and UTEP isn't going to go to Birmingham just to play UAB.
Why don't the top teams just play each other first in the conference tournament? #1 plays #2 and then #3 plays #4. Then the winner plays each other. The other teams can battle each other to battle the top team.
That solution is silly. Just keep it as it is. If Middle Tennessee didn't lose to Southern Miss they would have had a chance to get an at large bid.
Why don't the top 6 teams just play each other the whole season and you can just forget about the other teams and they can just play against each other. Solved!
The travel partners isn’t working out for us. We haven’t received any at large bids. It’s time to change the conference scheduling philosophy.
Why wouldn’t MTSU come to El Paso just to play UTEP? What else do you want them to do?
Because that's not how scheduling works. They aren't going to come to El Paso and play on Thursday and then travel to Old Dominion to play on Saturday.
What I’m suggesting is reasonable and productive. Replace a conference h/a with a 250+ RPI team with a h/a with a top 100 team. Your suggestion is a troll response. Is it even legal to only play five out of the 14 teams in your league?Well then just have the top 6 teams play each other the whole season.
Of course sometimes a good team that’s projected to be good will underachieve. So this model isn’t perfect but at least it shows a proactive attitude towards helping our top teams earn an at large.
Our travel partner is UTSA. So let’s assume MTSU plays them on Thursday night. After the game they have to jump in a plane and fly 1.5 hours to El Paso. Is it really that inconvenient that instead of flying to El Paso they fly 3 hours to Birmingham for their Saturday game?
There is way to still keep travel cost low and have the top teams play each other. If I can figure it out I’m sure the offices at CUSA can do a much better job of it.
No, it's not reasonable and productive for Middle Tennessee to come all the way to play UTEP and not play UTSA at the same time.
Since you have all the solutions I suggest you e-mail the CUSA commissioner.
Also, basketball teams don't jump on a plane right after the game because they don't have private planes and there are no flights after the game is over.
Ok man we’ve done this old dance many times. I find a good solution you find a negative reason why it won’t work. You act as if UTSA and UTEP are next to each other and we use buses to transport the teams.
For all the shit you’ve given UTEP Athletics you seem very comfortable with the current status quo of CUSA.
Similar threads
