(03-26-2017 04:16 PM)monarx Wrote:  Kermit should be making $1m a year as should any CUSA coach that goes to the second round two years in a row. $750k should be barely average for this conference. If we want to be big time, it's time we all started acting like it.

Truth be told, I'm done giving a tinker's damn about what the rest of the league does. In our last two regular season championships (outright) we've gone 36-2 (2013 SBC, 2017 CUSA) Know how many of those got us top 100 wins? Not a damn one.
I don't care what the rest of CUSA does.

If y'all want to continue to suck, go right ahead. I think we'll be ok.

(03-26-2017 06:19 PM)theboro Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 04:16 PM)monarx Wrote:  Kermit should be making $1m a year as should any CUSA coach that goes to the second round two years in a row. $750k should be barely average for this conference. If we want to be big time, it's time we all started acting like it.

Truth be told, I'm done giving a tinker's damn about what the rest of the league does. In our last two regular season championships (outright) we've gone 36-2 (2013 SBC, 2017 CUSA) Know how many of those got us top 100 wins? Not a damn one.
I don't care what the rest of CUSA does.

If y'all want to continue to suck, go right ahead. I think we'll be ok.

Why limit it to just 2013 and then four years later? Middle is enjoying a good run but don't go acting like Middle has always done that...I believe you can go back the next 20 years and Middle might have been a top 100 team....

ONCE

Two of the last 3 years Middle was a 100+ RPI team regular season. Ride it while you can because mostly it doesn't last. So can we all cherry pick the years we want to look at?

This is like watching YG argue with himself.

(03-26-2017 06:54 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  This is like watching YG argue with himself.

If I did I would win both

I have no problem saying Middle has flat out had a great run for most of the last 6 seasons. But theboro is cherry picking so I just pointed it out. He seems to think this will continue. You and I both know the odds are against that over the long run.

(03-26-2017 06:59 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 06:54 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  This is like watching YG argue with himself.

If I did I would win both

I have no problem saying Middle has flat out had a great run for most of the last 6 seasons. But theboro is cherry picking so I just pointed it out. He seems to think this will continue. You and I both know the odds are against that over the long run.

I was just amused that the king of all cherry pickers was calling out another cherry picker.

(03-26-2017 04:44 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  A million a year is not going to keep a coach if some other schools wants him....

bigtime has nothing to do with the amount of money being paid. A longtime coach at a schools knows when a school has reached their limit or close to it. #WINNING

EDIT: BTW did I do that correct? I dont tweet or twitter

It might at least keep A10, MVC, MWC and lower AAC teams away. I don't expect us to be able to compete with the P5 on a financial basis because of all the built in advantages they've given themselves, BUT, CUSA should strive to be the best of the rest. On the field and in resources. If we have schools whose goal isn't to be as good or better as those teams, they should leave and join the A-Sun or Big South.

(03-26-2017 07:53 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 04:44 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  A million a year is not going to keep a coach if some other schools wants him....

bigtime has nothing to do with the amount of money being paid. A longtime coach at a schools knows when a school has reached their limit or close to it. #WINNING

EDIT: BTW did I do that correct? I dont tweet or twitter

It might at least keep A10, MVC, MWC and lower AAC teams away. I don't expect us to be able to compete with the P5 on a financial basis because of all the built in advantages they've given themselves, BUT, CUSA should strive to be the best of the rest. On the field and in resources. If we have schools whose goal isn't to be as good or better as those teams, they should leave and join the A-Sun or Big South.

Not to be combative, but who has left a C-USA school for a Big South or A-Sun school?

(03-26-2017 06:39 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 06:19 PM)theboro Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 04:16 PM)monarx Wrote:  Kermit should be making $1m a year as should any CUSA coach that goes to the second round two years in a row. $750k should be barely average for this conference. If we want to be big time, it's time we all started acting like it.

Truth be told, I'm done giving a tinker's damn about what the rest of the league does. In our last two regular season championships (outright) we've gone 36-2 (2013 SBC, 2017 CUSA) Know how many of those got us top 100 wins? Not a damn one.
I don't care what the rest of CUSA does.

If y'all want to continue to suck, go right ahead. I think we'll be ok.

Why limit it to just 2013 and then four years later? Middle is enjoying a good run but don't go acting like Middle has always done that...I believe you can go back the next 20 years and Middle might have been a top 100 team....

ONCE

Two of the last 3 years Middle was a 100+ RPI team regular season. Ride it while you can because mostly it doesn't last. So can we all cherry pick the years we want to look at?

Our last six RPIs
2017 - 34 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Season & tourney champs; Round of 32
2016 - 77 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Tournament champs; Round of 32
2015 - 145 (3 conference Top 100 wins) Tournament runner-up; CIT
2014 - 64 (1 conference Top 100 win) Regular-season c-champs; No postseason
2013 - 33 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Regular season title; at-large
2012 - 56 (0 conference Top 100 wins) - Regular season title; NIT quarterfinals

So that's a six year average RPI of 68 with only four Top 100 conference wins. Matter of fact, 75 percent of those came the year we had the outlier sub 100 RPI.

My point is if you have half a brain when you schedule non-conference, and win your freaking games, most of the time you'll be alright.

PS: WKUYG: You can cherry pick any of the last six seasons you want (seven, even) You won't find a year that WKU finished in the Top 100.

(03-26-2017 09:53 PM)theboro Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 06:39 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 06:19 PM)theboro Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 04:16 PM)monarx Wrote:  Kermit should be making $1m a year as should any CUSA coach that goes to the second round two years in a row. $750k should be barely average for this conference. If we want to be big time, it's time we all started acting like it.

Truth be told, I'm done giving a tinker's damn about what the rest of the league does. In our last two regular season championships (outright) we've gone 36-2 (2013 SBC, 2017 CUSA) Know how many of those got us top 100 wins? Not a damn one.
I don't care what the rest of CUSA does.

If y'all want to continue to suck, go right ahead. I think we'll be ok.

Why limit it to just 2013 and then four years later? Middle is enjoying a good run but don't go acting like Middle has always done that...I believe you can go back the next 20 years and Middle might have been a top 100 team....

ONCE

Two of the last 3 years Middle was a 100+ RPI team regular season. Ride it while you can because mostly it doesn't last. So can we all cherry pick the years we want to look at?

Our last six RPIs
2017 - 34 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Season & tourney champs; Round of 32
2016 - 77 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Tournament champs; Round of 32
2015 - 145 (3 conference Top 100 wins) Tournament runner-up; CIT
2014 - 64 (1 conference Top 100 win) Regular-season c-champs; No postseason
2013 - 33 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Regular season title; at-large
2012 - 56 (0 conference Top 100 wins) - Regular season title; NIT quarterfinals

So that's a six year average RPI of 68 with only four Top 100 conference wins. Matter of fact, 75 percent of those came the year we had the outlier sub 100 RPI.

My point is if you have half a brain when you schedule non-conference, and win your freaking games, most of the time you'll be alright.

PS: WKUYG: You can cherry pick any of the last six seasons you want (seven, even) You won't find a year that WKU finished in the Top 100.

Again let me point out that in the regular season Middle was not a top 100 RPI school in 2 of the last 4 years. As for Western....

It has nothing to do with what I said.

So should I repeat that...other than the last 6 seasons and even 2 of those...

Middle was not a top 100 RPI but maybe once in the previous 20 years.

Middle had a good run 5 out of the last 6 years but don't go acting like your school is all of a sudden a powerhouse and CUSA is holding you back. Just two years ago Middle was 1 game over .500 heading into the conference tourney.

So again some of you Middle fans are starting to remind me of Western fans...

trying to blame everyone else for holding their team back. The SBC wasn't the cause of Western not being the powerhouse our fans tought we should be. And CUSA is not holding Middle back

(03-26-2017 10:11 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 09:53 PM)theboro Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 06:39 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 06:19 PM)theboro Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 04:16 PM)monarx Wrote:  Kermit should be making $1m a year as should any CUSA coach that goes to the second round two years in a row. $750k should be barely average for this conference. If we want to be big time, it's time we all started acting like it.

Truth be told, I'm done giving a tinker's damn about what the rest of the league does. In our last two regular season championships (outright) we've gone 36-2 (2013 SBC, 2017 CUSA) Know how many of those got us top 100 wins? Not a damn one.
I don't care what the rest of CUSA does.

If y'all want to continue to suck, go right ahead. I think we'll be ok.

Why limit it to just 2013 and then four years later? Middle is enjoying a good run but don't go acting like Middle has always done that...I believe you can go back the next 20 years and Middle might have been a top 100 team....

ONCE

Two of the last 3 years Middle was a 100+ RPI team regular season. Ride it while you can because mostly it doesn't last. So can we all cherry pick the years we want to look at?

Our last six RPIs
2017 - 34 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Season & tourney champs; Round of 32
2016 - 77 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Tournament champs; Round of 32
2015 - 145 (3 conference Top 100 wins) Tournament runner-up; CIT
2014 - 64 (1 conference Top 100 win) Regular-season c-champs; No postseason
2013 - 33 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Regular season title; at-large
2012 - 56 (0 conference Top 100 wins) - Regular season title; NIT quarterfinals

So that's a six year average RPI of 68 with only four Top 100 conference wins. Matter of fact, 75 percent of those came the year we had the outlier sub 100 RPI.

My point is if you have half a brain when you schedule non-conference, and win your freaking games, most of the time you'll be alright.

PS: WKUYG: You can cherry pick any of the last six seasons you want (seven, even) You won't find a year that WKU finished in the Top 100.

Again let me point out that in the regular season Middle was not a top 100 RPI school in 2 of the last 4 years. As for Western....

It has nothing to do with what I said.

So should I repeat that...other than the last 6 seasons and even 2 of those...

Middle was not a top 100 RPI but maybe once in the previous 20 years.

Middle had a good run 5 out of the last 6 years but don't go acting like your school is all of a sudden a powerhouse and CUSA is holding you back. Just two years ago Middle was 1 game over .500 heading into the conference tourney.

So again some of you Middle fans are starting to remind me of Western fans...

trying to blame everyone else for holding their team back. The SBC wasn't the cause of Western not being the powerhouse our fans tought we should be. And CUSA is not holding Middle back

I never said the conference was holding us back. I think we're doing pretty well playing in a crap conference.

(03-26-2017 02:16 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Here is the problem. The NCAA is increasingly moving to the model first employed by the college football brokers in that sport. Achieving this in basketball requires making the NCAA Tournament and then doing damage when you get there. We see where this is headed when a 15-loss team from a "money" conference gets an at-large over a team that goes 27-5 from a mid major conference. It's getting worse every year. More and more difficult for teams not considered to be from the important conferences to get in the tournament. How much longer before they even remove the auto bid for mid majors? It's coming.

I'm trying to think of a school that has the following conditions:

1. Sponsors major college football
2. Made a Boise-esque type move in basketball that the Broncos made in football
3. Sustained the success in basketball

I exclude Temple, Cincy, and UCONN because at the times they made major runs in the NCAA Tournament they were in what was a power conference at the time (Big East).

The only schools that come to mind that play major DI football that have made those types of inroads in basketball are Memphis, Louisville and UNLV and UNLV hasn't made it past the Round of 32 since the Jerry Tarkanian days. But I believe it's going to be even harder to do that now than it was when those three did it because of the game has changed. The power brokers haven't just moved the ball on us. They've moved the entire goal line (or basket if you prefer). In other words, the chips are stacked against any of us doing it and conditions are worsening every year.

UConn won the NC in the AAC and has made the tourney 3 of those 4 years.

(03-27-2017 08:39 AM)cotton1991 Wrote:  UConn won the NC in the AAC and has made the tourney 3 of those 4 years.

UCONN is an established power with a P5 budget.

(03-26-2017 04:16 PM)monarx Wrote:  Kermit should be making $1m a year as should any CUSA coach that goes to the second round two years in a row. $750k should be barely average for this conference. If we want to be big time, it's time we all started acting like it.

That's a rather cavalier attitude about this league collectively spending millions we don't have.

Why stop there?

Our football coaches should all make at least $1.5M, our athletic budgets should all be at least $50M and if your football stadium or basketball arenas are more than 30 years old, they need to be replaced.

(03-27-2017 08:39 AM)cotton1991 Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 02:16 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Here is the problem. The NCAA is increasingly moving to the model first employed by the college football brokers in that sport. Achieving this in basketball requires making the NCAA Tournament and then doing damage when you get there. We see where this is headed when a 15-loss team from a "money" conference gets an at-large over a team that goes 27-5 from a mid major conference. It's getting worse every year. More and more difficult for teams not considered to be from the important conferences to get in the tournament. How much longer before they even remove the auto bid for mid majors? It's coming.

I'm trying to think of a school that has the following conditions:

1. Sponsors major college football
2. Made a Boise-esque type move in basketball that the Broncos made in football
3. Sustained the success in basketball

I exclude Temple, Cincy, and UCONN because at the times they made major runs in the NCAA Tournament they were in what was a power conference at the time (Big East).

The only schools that come to mind that play major DI football that have made those types of inroads in basketball are Memphis, Louisville and UNLV and UNLV hasn't made it past the Round of 32 since the Jerry Tarkanian days. But I believe it's going to be even harder to do that now than it was when those three did it because of the game has changed. The power brokers haven't just moved the ball on us. They've moved the entire goal line (or basket if you prefer). In other words, the chips are stacked against any of us doing it and conditions are worsening every year.

UConn won the NC in the AAC and has made the tourney 3 of those 4 years.

UConn came to prominence in the Big East not the AAC.

(03-27-2017 09:49 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(03-27-2017 08:39 AM)cotton1991 Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 02:16 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Here is the problem. The NCAA is increasingly moving to the model first employed by the college football brokers in that sport. Achieving this in basketball requires making the NCAA Tournament and then doing damage when you get there. We see where this is headed when a 15-loss team from a "money" conference gets an at-large over a team that goes 27-5 from a mid major conference. It's getting worse every year. More and more difficult for teams not considered to be from the important conferences to get in the tournament. How much longer before they even remove the auto bid for mid majors? It's coming.

I'm trying to think of a school that has the following conditions:

1. Sponsors major college football
2. Made a Boise-esque type move in basketball that the Broncos made in football
3. Sustained the success in basketball

I exclude Temple, Cincy, and UCONN because at the times they made major runs in the NCAA Tournament they were in what was a power conference at the time (Big East).

The only schools that come to mind that play major DI football that have made those types of inroads in basketball are Memphis, Louisville and UNLV and UNLV hasn't made it past the Round of 32 since the Jerry Tarkanian days. But I believe it's going to be even harder to do that now than it was when those three did it because of the game has changed. The power brokers haven't just moved the ball on us. They've moved the entire goal line (or basket if you prefer). In other words, the chips are stacked against any of us doing it and conditions are worsening every year.

UConn won the NC in the AAC and has made the tourney 3 of those 4 years.

UConn came to prominence in the Big East not the AAC.

I just googled Jenna Webb.
Durn...

(03-27-2017 09:44 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 04:16 PM)monarx Wrote:  Kermit should be making $1m a year as should any CUSA coach that goes to the second round two years in a row. $750k should be barely average for this conference. If we want to be big time, it's time we all started acting like it.

That's a rather cavalier attitude about this league collectively spending millions we don't have.

Why stop there?

Our football coaches should all make at least $1.5M, our athletic budgets should all be at least $50M and if your football stadium or basketball arenas are more than 30 years old, they need to be replaced.

In football we can't compete with the P5 consistently, in basketball we can get pretty close. I just think this conference needs to decide if it wants to rival the AAC, A10, MWC, MVC and if so demand that schools fund their programs, schedule, hire etc accordingly. Those who don't want to be at that level can leave. OR, if CUSA decides it is happy at its current level of success, those that want better should leave if they can. I just wish our schools would all be on the same page and have similar expectations and aspirations. One would have thought that would have happened before invites were handed out.

(03-27-2017 11:29 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-27-2017 09:44 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 04:16 PM)monarx Wrote:  Kermit should be making $1m a year as should any CUSA coach that goes to the second round two years in a row. $750k should be barely average for this conference. If we want to be big time, it's time we all started acting like it.

That's a rather cavalier attitude about this league collectively spending millions we don't have.

Why stop there?

Our football coaches should all make at least $1.5M, our athletic budgets should all be at least $50M and if your football stadium or basketball arenas are more than 30 years old, they need to be replaced.

In football we can't compete with the P5 consistently, in basketball we can get pretty close. I just think this conference needs to decide if it wants to rival the AAC, A10, MWC, MVC and if so demand that schools fund their programs, schedule, hire etc accordingly. Those who don't want to be at that level can leave. OR, if CUSA decides it is happy at its current level of success, those that want better should leave if they can. I just wish our schools would all be on the same page and have similar expectations and aspirations. One would have thought that would have happened before invites were handed out.

You're still oversimplifying things. Your very own Old Dominion, with the benefit of the largest budget in the conference, only pays your coach $500k.

Should ODU's invite have been withheld?

Who are you suggesting should have been invited instead? Because looking around the landscape of college athletics I'm not sure I see anyone that:

A) is a fit for the conference

B) would have interest in this conference

and

C) runs their MBB demonstrably better than the majority of the conference

(03-26-2017 10:11 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 09:53 PM)theboro Wrote:  Our last six RPIs
2017 - 34 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Season & tourney champs; Round of 32
2016 - 77 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Tournament champs; Round of 32
2015 - 145 (3 conference Top 100 wins) Tournament runner-up; CIT
2014 - 64 (1 conference Top 100 win) Regular-season c-champs; No postseason
2013 - 33 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Regular season title; at-large
2012 - 56 (0 conference Top 100 wins) - Regular season title; NIT quarterfinals

Again let me point out that in the regular season Middle was not a top 100 RPI school in 2 of the last 4 years.
So should I repeat that...other than the last 6 seasons and even 2 of those...

Is 77 not under 100 in Kentucky math? Am I missing something here? I don't have a dog in this fight, just confused.

(03-27-2017 01:08 PM)Luckyshot Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 10:11 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(03-26-2017 09:53 PM)theboro Wrote:  Our last six RPIs
2017 - 34 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Season & tourney champs; Round of 32
2016 - 77 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Tournament champs; Round of 32
2015 - 145 (3 conference Top 100 wins) Tournament runner-up; CIT
2014 - 64 (1 conference Top 100 win) Regular-season c-champs; No postseason
2013 - 33 (0 conference Top 100 wins) Regular season title; at-large
2012 - 56 (0 conference Top 100 wins) - Regular season title; NIT quarterfinals

Again let me point out that in the regular season Middle was not a top 100 RPI school in 2 of the last 4 years.
So should I repeat that...other than the last 6 seasons and even 2 of those...

Is 77 not under 100 in Kentucky math? Am I missing something here? I don't have a dog in this fight, just confused.

Maybe you missed the part about REGULAR SEASON? That was his complaint...No top 100 wins during conference play. So why shouldn't that apply to Middle?

So let me ask you...

do fans in Mississippi not understand the term REGULAR SEASON? You should since your season usually ends then.

I'm not sure what data you are looking at, but here are our pre-conference tournament RPI's for the last five years...

2017: 37
2016: 96 (Zero weeks over 100)
2015: 180
2014: 61
2013: 29

Even if your statement was true let's analyze that a bit deeper, and I'm going to put this in simple terms. If the conference weren't such a ****** league in terms of everyone else's performance then our RPI gets better as well. Just think how much better some of our RPIs could have been had the rest of the league won games. Never more true is the statement "Rising tides lift all ships" when it comes to the RPI.

It ought to tell us all something that our best RPI in the last five years came in a different league when we had more losses and an easier non-conference strength of schedule than we did this year.