(09-13-2013 11:35 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(09-13-2013 08:37 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 08:50 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 11:49 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(09-11-2013 05:14 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Fox isn't picking the schools. They prob made suggestions but they are not saying "You guys are going to expand with these two schools"

Please, be serious.

Fox doesn't have to pick the schools. They just have to be able to veto them.

Be serious, it's just four schools in the running. Richmond, Saint Louis, Dayton and VCU. That's it. We know Fox isn't vetoing any of them.

You're telling me that Fox is going to pony up another $100 million so they can get Richmond or Dayton on the schedule???

Even St Louis still has a lot to prove. Two hood seasons in a mid major conference don't establish them as a program capable of competing in a conference over the long run. especially when the coach who built the program is unfortunately no longer there.

A mid-major conference? You mean a conference with Temple, Xavier, VCU, Butler, Lasalle, St. Joe's, Charlotte, UMass etc? Thats a lot deeper than some "power conferences" like the Pac.

I'll use Sagarin's ratings simply because his is probably the most widely read.

The A10 last year ranked behind the PAC 12 last year and every other one of the 6 power conferences. It also ranked behind the Mountain West.

Why?

Because not all of the schools you mentioned weren't so great last year:

83 - St. Joe's
88 - Richmond
89 - UMass
109 - Charlotte

And it's not like that was the bottom of the conference. The A10 also included:

120 - GWU
122 - St. Bonaventure
190 - URI
234 - Duquesne
247 - Fordham

Is that what we're calling depth?

In contrast, the worst school in the Pac 12 ranked 116. And only 4 in total had a ranking worse than 80.

A10 was .01 behind the SEC for 7th. That's nothing.

Also, the way the A10 did the scheduling, the weaker teams didn't hurt the stronger teams anywhere near as much as other big conferences. VCU played RI, Duquesne, and Fordham once for instance. Top 3 teams- SLU, Butler, VCU had conference SOS of 43,57,74. SEC's top 3 teams conference SOS was 83,58,102. Pac 12 top 3 teams was 75,38,50.
A10- 58
SEC- 81
P12- 54.3

So, for the top teams in the A10, they weren't getting hurt playing the weaker teams. I mean, look at Pac 12. Arizona last year had to play 152 Utah 2x, 180 Oregon St 1x, and 191 Washington St 2x. So, 5 conference games against teams ranked worse than 150.
Florida- 224 South Carolina, 232 Mississippi St, and 254 Auburn- all 3 1 time each
St Louis- 201 Rhode Island, 229 Duquesne, 230 Fordham- all 3 1 timeseach.

So, St Louis compared to Florida- both played bad teams 1 time each, but the SEC bottom was worse than the A10 bottom. Pac 12 had better bottom teams, but Arizona for example had to play 2 more games against those bottom teams.

Oh, and in the RPI(which is what matters for the NCAA tourney), the A10 was ahead of the SEC and very close to the Big 12 and Pac 12.

(09-13-2013 12:52 PM)stever20 Wrote:  A10 was .01 behind the SEC for 7th. That's nothing.

Also, the way the A10 did the scheduling, the weaker teams didn't hurt the stronger teams anywhere near as much as other big conferences. VCU played RI, Duquesne, and Fordham once for instance. Top 3 teams- SLU, Butler, VCU had conference SOS of 43,57,74. SEC's top 3 teams conference SOS was 83,58,102. Pac 12 top 3 teams was 75,38,50.
A10- 58
SEC- 81
P12- 54.3

So, for the top teams in the A10, they weren't getting hurt playing the weaker teams. I mean, look at Pac 12. Arizona last year had to play 152 Utah 2x, 180 Oregon St 1x, and 191 Washington St 2x. So, 5 conference games against teams ranked worse than 150.
Florida- 224 South Carolina, 232 Mississippi St, and 254 Auburn- all 3 1 time each
St Louis- 201 Rhode Island, 229 Duquesne, 230 Fordham- all 3 1 timeseach.

So, St Louis compared to Florida- both played bad teams 1 time each, but the SEC bottom was worse than the A10 bottom. Pac 12 had better bottom teams, but Arizona for example had to play 2 more games against those bottom teams.

Oh, and in the RPI(which is what matters for the NCAA tourney), the A10 was ahead of the SEC and very close to the Big 12 and Pac 12.

What's your point, Steve?

The A10 was- and may still be a lot closer to the big boys than you were giving them credit for. They had a lot of depth last year- with 10/16 top 100 RPI schools. The Big East by comparison had 11/15 top 100 schools. They still have 6 schools that were top 100 last year(and Davidson, joining next year, was 62nd). Dayton was 111- so not too far off last year from being top 100. SEC had 9/14 in the top 100 last year. Pac 12 had 8/12 in the top 100. So the A10 was pretty much there last year.

Also- top 65
A10- 7/16
BE- 9/15
P12-5/12
SEC 6/14
ACC 4/12
B12- 5/10
A10 looks like 3rd to only the Big East and Big 12.

(09-13-2013 04:38 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  What's your point, Steve?

I'm presuming that its that the SEC played BBall like a mid-major last year ~ they were ranked the same as the A-10, the most successful of the BBall mid-majors last year with 5 bids, and given that the SEC only had 3 bids, they were more top-heavy than the A-10. The only advantage that the SEC had over the A-10 is that their best performing team went one round deeper into the tournament.

And regarding the A-10 vs the MWC, I think the Mountain West flattered to deceive (as they'd say in Oz) ~ of five bids, four made the Round of 64, two made the Round of 32, and none made the Sweet Sixteen, with a tourney win percentage of .286, well behind the A-10's 5 in the Round of 64, 5 in the Round of 32 and 1 in the Sweet Sixteen with a .583 tourney win percentage.