Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
jcohen42 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 157
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 2
I Root For: Drexel
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
(03-25-2019 11:31 AM)dan10 Wrote:  
(03-25-2019 11:24 AM)jcohen42 Wrote:  If we look at the losses on the road, it's hard to say that the mid-majors are not at least close:

Hofstra lost to NC State by 6
Harvard lost to NC State by 1
Wright State lost to Clemson by 6
South Dakota State lost to Texas by 6
Loyola Chicago lost to Creighton by 9

The big disappointments have been Furman losing at home to Wichita State, and Lipscomb being matched up against UNCG rather than TCU or Arkansas. Change a couple things here and there, and there could easily be 2-4 mid-majors still alive.

It never works that way, though. Mids get paired all the time. Still gotta get wins, not just get close. Wichita State came on strong late and they continue that push by knocking off Clemson. Losing competitive games is not going to help change perception that they should get the nod over middling power teams. At the core, teams need to win, even on the road. A tournament setting like the NIT is also helpful for seeing how they might do in the NCAA. So far results are exactly why middling power teams keep getting considered and mids are easily refused access.

Right, but I'm not sure such a pessimistic view is warranted here. Most of the teams, despite playing on the road, are not getting blown out by power teams. That's not insignificant, because it lets us assume that the midmajor teams and power teams that make the NIT are about equal in strength.

More midmajors winning these games is good, I agree. But what you're suggesting requires either a decent jump in quality from midmajor teams to be able to beat power teams on the road consistently, or having good midmajor teams be snubbed from the NCAA Tournament. Sure, Belmont could have won the NIT, but it's a bigger statement when they can win a First Four game and come within a possession of pulling off an upset.

I can see why the results are frustrating, but given the strengths of the teams involved, are they entirely unexpected? Once you get within close margins, the winner or loser becomes a coin flip. What you envision seems to require more wholesale changes than just winning more games here and there.
03-25-2019 03:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #22
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
(03-25-2019 03:25 PM)jcohen42 Wrote:  Right, but I'm not sure such a pessimistic view is warranted here. Most of the teams, despite playing on the road, are not getting blown out by power teams. That's not insignificant, because it lets us assume that the midmajor teams and power teams that make the NIT are about equal in strength.

To me it is about moving the needle. When decisions in the future are being made and perceptions formed, losing by 1 or losing by 40 typically does not matter. It is still seen as a loss, as unfair as that sounds. So if the mids want to change perception the only choice is win and win consistently. We all know the top tier of mid majors are equal or better than middling power conferences, however without consistent winning to prove it out, nothing will change.

I was hoping when I had looked into the NIT that there would be better results, but they are what they are. Typically 3 of the 4 teams that go to MSG are from power conferences and from there the title has a mid major playing in it, just 1 out of every 3 years. That is just not getting it done.

Mids just are not winning the tournament. In the last decade 3 mid majors won (George Washington in 2016, Wichita State in 2011 and Dayton in 2010). That is the highest rate of winning in its history. That means the gap is slowly closing, but we are far from getting there.

Prior to that the last mid major winner was 2002 with Memphis. 2001 and Tulsa. Then you have to go all the way back to 1987 with Southern Miss. As cruel as it sounds, winning is how you change perception.

Gonzaga felt it forever before they finally broke through past the sweet sixteen. But having a single team hold the torch is not good either. That is why I am saying in the NIT there has to be more consistent winning happening if as a collective group they want more consideration for at large bids. Once there its about taking your opportunity. This year there were 3 mid majors well above a normal team (Buffalo, Nevada, Wofford). None of them made it out of the first weekend (Yes how you are bracketed matter, but it is still the facts). Nevada making consecutive runs could have started to move the needle again, then they had an absolute clunker against a not great Florida team. It happens, but the timing could not have been any worse.
03-26-2019 06:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jcohen42 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 157
Joined: Feb 2016
Reputation: 2
I Root For: Drexel
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
(03-26-2019 06:42 AM)dan10 Wrote:  
(03-25-2019 03:25 PM)jcohen42 Wrote:  Right, but I'm not sure such a pessimistic view is warranted here. Most of the teams, despite playing on the road, are not getting blown out by power teams. That's not insignificant, because it lets us assume that the midmajor teams and power teams that make the NIT are about equal in strength.

To me it is about moving the needle. When decisions in the future are being made and perceptions formed, losing by 1 or losing by 40 typically does not matter. It is still seen as a loss, as unfair as that sounds. So if the mids want to change perception the only choice is win and win consistently. We all know the top tier of mid majors are equal or better than middling power conferences, however without consistent winning to prove it out, nothing will change.

I was hoping when I had looked into the NIT that there would be better results, but they are what they are. Typically 3 of the 4 teams that go to MSG are from power conferences and from there the title has a mid major playing in it, just 1 out of every 3 years. That is just not getting it done.

Mids just are not winning the tournament. In the last decade 3 mid majors won (George Washington in 2016, Wichita State in 2011 and Dayton in 2010). That is the highest rate of winning in its history. That means the gap is slowly closing, but we are far from getting there.

Prior to that the last mid major winner was 2002 with Memphis. 2001 and Tulsa. Then you have to go all the way back to 1987 with Southern Miss. As cruel as it sounds, winning is how you change perception.

Gonzaga felt it forever before they finally broke through past the sweet sixteen. But having a single team hold the torch is not good either. That is why I am saying in the NIT there has to be more consistent winning happening if as a collective group they want more consideration for at large bids. Once there its about taking your opportunity. This year there were 3 mid majors well above a normal team (Buffalo, Nevada, Wofford). None of them made it out of the first weekend (Yes how you are bracketed matter, but it is still the facts). Nevada making consecutive runs could have started to move the needle again, then they had an absolute clunker against a not great Florida team. It happens, but the timing could not have been any worse.

Nothing you're saying is wrong, but it's still a fairly gloomy way of looking at it. Of course results are the only thing that really matters, but if it's the only thing you care about, then it's a recipe for constant disappointment. I don't think anyone is under the impression that mid-majors are anywhere close to equality, and if they are, they're delusional.

To me, the most important part of your post is "the gap is slowly closing". There's no miracle solution. Slow and steady improvement is the only way.

I do disagree a little bit with "We all know the top tier of mid majors are equal or better than middling power conferences". Equal, yes, as has been proven by this year's NIT. Better? The evidence isn't really there to bear that out.
03-26-2019 08:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #24
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
Fair point on the better than, its close. Then again we are talking about the top of the mid majors, not all of them. The 1 and done that the NCAA has allowed by not enforcing APR's to effect tournament eligibility is a main driver to why the gap has slowly closed the past 10 years. The constant turnover of the big programs does not help them, while your mid majors can build a squad for 3 or 4 years. However this change with the grad transfer has hurt that cause and shifted the balance back to the majors. Because now the majors can just use the mid majors as a recruiting tool instead of competing against them.
03-26-2019 08:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #25
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
Indiana with Bru failed again. They fell last night at home in the quarterfinals of the NIT to 6th seeded Wichita State. So no trip to MSG, again, for Bru.

Should be a good one tonight between Lipscomb and NC State
03-27-2019 06:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EvanJ Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,645
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 18
I Root For: Hofstra and FSU
Location: 5mi south of Hofstra
Post: #26
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
(03-26-2019 06:42 AM)dan10 Wrote:  This year there were 3 mid majors well above a normal team (Buffalo, Nevada, Wofford). None of them made it out of the first weekend (Yes how you are bracketed matter, but it is still the facts). Nevada making consecutive runs could have started to move the needle again, then they had an absolute clunker against a not great Florida team. It happens, but the timing could not have been any worse.
Regardless of how well Gonzaga does, I judge if a team is mid-major by what conference a team is in, and I disagree with calling Nevada a mid-major but not Gonzaga. The Mountain West has been ahead of the West Coast in the Conference RPI (Conference NET this season) in 6 of the last 10 seasons including being third in 2012-2013 and fifth in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. In all three of those seasons, the Mountain West was ahead of the Pac-12 (2010-2011 was the last season it was the Pac-10) for the best western conference. Furthermore, teams don't play themselves, and if you take out the best Mountain West team of the last ten seasons the remaining teams would be much better than the West Coast teams other than Gonzaga.
03-27-2019 10:15 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #27
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
(03-27-2019 10:15 AM)EvanJ Wrote:  
(03-26-2019 06:42 AM)dan10 Wrote:  This year there were 3 mid majors well above a normal team (Buffalo, Nevada, Wofford). None of them made it out of the first weekend (Yes how you are bracketed matter, but it is still the facts). Nevada making consecutive runs could have started to move the needle again, then they had an absolute clunker against a not great Florida team. It happens, but the timing could not have been any worse.
Regardless of how well Gonzaga does, I judge if a team is mid-major by what conference a team is in, and I disagree with calling Nevada a mid-major but not Gonzaga. The Mountain West has been ahead of the West Coast in the Conference RPI (Conference NET this season) in 6 of the last 10 seasons including being third in 2012-2013 and fifth in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. In all three of those seasons, the Mountain West was ahead of the Pac-12 (2010-2011 was the last season it was the Pac-10) for the best western conference. Furthermore, teams don't play themselves, and if you take out the best Mountain West team of the last ten seasons the remaining teams would be much better than the West Coast teams other than Gonzaga.

Gonzaga is a major in a mid major conference. Actually without them they are a low major. Only one team in their conference spends even half of what they spend. Gonzaga is only 38th in the country in spending. The only non power conference teams above them in spending is Memphis and UConn.

Gonzaga spends more than Michigan and Virginia. Gonzaga would rank 10th in the ACC in spending, 7th in the Big 12, 5th in the Big East, 6th in the Big Ten and 8th in the SEC.

'16 budgets (most recent readily available):

WCC:
Gonzaga: 8.87M
BYU: 7M
San Franscico 4.2M

MWC:
SDSU: 5.92M
UNLV: 5.89M
Nevada (6th in MWC): 3.4M

PAC12:
Washington: 10.15M
UCLA: 9.86M
Arizona: 9.85M
Oregon: 9.22M
The rest spend less than Gonzaga

CAA:
UNCW: 2.98M
JMU: 2.91M
Drexel: 2.86M
Hofstra (5th in CAA): 2.61M
(This post was last modified: 03-27-2019 11:36 AM by dan10.)
03-27-2019 11:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #28
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
Fantastic game last night between Lipscomb and NC State. Lipscomb has had a fantastic year and should have been in the at large talk, then their loss to Florida Gulf Coast killed that hope, and they fell in their title game to Liberty. They got rewarded with a 5 seed. They went on the road and beat Davidson, then went on the road and beat UNCG (Lipscomb was actually favored against the 1 seed as a 5 seed) and then upset NC State on the road. Both teams showed how offensively talented they were in the high scoring affair. The teams combined for 25 offensive rebounds. Defense was shaky for both teams, very similar to the issues UNCW had with Keatts. NC State gave the game away, Lipscomb took advantage. I was actually impressed how involved the NC State fanbase was for the NIT. Usually bigger programs scoff at the NIT, but the NC State fans have really brought high energy, in the smaller arena setting. It was a tough place to win at and Lipscomb now gets to join Texas, TCU and Wichita State in MSG. 1 mid major will make the finals. Wichita State is on their own big time run since the end of the season. 2 middling Big12 teams face off a long way from home.
03-28-2019 07:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #29
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
One other thing that was interesting watching last night was the balance of the officiating. I actually thought despite the crazy crowd, they did a good job staying balanced and not be influenced by the atmosphere and showing bias towards the bigger name program. I thought Lipscomb got a few calls they were lucky to get, I thought NC State got away with fouling a bunch without it being called. To me it stayed even. The only problem I had was Keatts should have been tossed. He was going absolutely nuts and they gave him 4 or 5 warnings before finally giving him a single technical. At which point he kept riding them and they did not throw him out. Then a handful of minutes later, they gave a bench restricted line warning to the Lipscomb coach for being out of the coaching box, when he was clearly still in it. Was curious to me that they gave him a stern warning (stopped the game to issue it) for a violation that was not even there, but let Keatts rip into them as long as he did while doing so near midcourt, well outside of his box.

I think that stupid line is too close to the end of most benches, however enforcement of that line is terribly inconsistent. We saw it with Bru. He never stayed in the box, but they only ever called him on it when they felt like it or to get him under control. It seems to me they either need to move it to a more reasonable spot or they need to get rid of it since it is serving no purpose and is not being enforced consistently. The third option is actually enforcing it, which seems too harsh because of its placement.
03-28-2019 07:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #30
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
Some great games over the weekend. Some thrilling finishes. The most talked about is obvious the Purdue ending when they fouled up 3, and UVA made the first missed the 2nd and tipped the ball back out for the rebound and then beat the buzzer to send it into OT, where they went onto win.

Final Four of Michigan State vs. Texas Tech and Virginia vs. Auburn. # of the 4 are different teams that normally are not there, which is a nice breath of fresh air, even though they are all major players.
04-01-2019 06:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #31
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
Question for Timer if he is around...

Seemed quite bizarre in the Kentucky/Auburn game that they mentioned there were 4 or 5 changes to fouls. I.e. changes made that differed from the call on the court. Which then led to a bunch of confusion for who wanted to sub who out based on not knowing who had how many fouls. My question is through a game what would dictate or prompt a crew changing who fouls were called on? Does this happen very frequently or was yesterday's game just a strange exception on one of the biggest stages?
04-01-2019 10:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Timer Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 112
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
I Root For: CAA
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
(04-01-2019 10:57 AM)dan10 Wrote:  Question for Timer if he is around...

Seemed quite bizarre in the Kentucky/Auburn game that they mentioned there were 4 or 5 changes to fouls. I.e. changes made that differed from the call on the court. Which then led to a bunch of confusion for who wanted to sub who out based on not knowing who had how many fouls. My question is through a game what would dictate or prompt a crew changing who fouls were called on? Does this happen very frequently or was yesterday's game just a strange exception on one of the biggest stages?

Unfortunately I had an all afternoon obligation and didn't see either game so I didn't see the changes you mention. Changes aren't all that frequent and usually are handled quickly either by another official talking to the calling official or by the bench challenging the reported number...off to the monitor.

if there was that much confusion, I'd guess there was something going on at the table, maybe the book had a mistake entered on a prior foul, PA announced the wrong number and it wasn't caught. Also don't discount the assistant coach on the bench not having the fouls correct. Now if the game announcers were confused it wouldn't surprise me in the least. They tend to be clueless at time about rules and things in general.

I've been surprised at times with the questions we've been asked by assistants (not ours of course!)
(This post was last modified: 04-01-2019 01:29 PM by Timer.)
04-01-2019 01:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #33
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
It had everyone confused. Pearl started trying to substitute to find out his guy didnt have the fouls they thought, they updated the visual on tv for foul trouble multiple times to adjust who had what fouls. It was a whole big mess that made little sense. The announcers (take that for what its worth), mentioned there were 4 or 5 (can't remember which) changes at that point on who fouls were assigned to.
04-02-2019 11:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Timer Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 112
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
I Root For: CAA
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
(04-02-2019 11:12 AM)dan10 Wrote:  It had everyone confused. Pearl started trying to substitute to find out his guy didnt have the fouls they thought, they updated the visual on tv for foul trouble multiple times to adjust who had what fouls. It was a whole big mess that made little sense. The announcers (take that for what its worth), mentioned there were 4 or 5 (can't remember which) changes at that point on who fouls were assigned to.

Anything is possible. From the officials mechanics: flashing the player number reversed, to saying one number and flashing another, to flashing us the number of the shooter, to whoever is updating the stats getting it wrong as well. Book could be perfect but any mistaken entry on the stat program propagates to the announcers' stat monitor and the teams stat sheets.

Could be any number of things, but agree it's odd in this type of venue with multiple cross checking that should take place.
04-02-2019 02:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #35
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
Thanks. Good information for how things work behind the scenes that most of us never see or know.
04-02-2019 02:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Timer Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 112
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
I Root For: CAA
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
(04-02-2019 02:47 PM)dan10 Wrote:  Thanks. Good information for how things work behind the scenes that most of us never see or know.

Also helps to show them the "WTF" face when we know something is goofy...04-cheers
04-02-2019 04:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #37
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
Lipscomb won last night to advance to the final where they will face Shaka's Texas squad
04-03-2019 06:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EvanJ Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,645
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 18
I Root For: Hofstra and FSU
Location: 5mi south of Hofstra
Post: #38
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
When giving Gonzaga's budget, it's a big deal that they don't play Football because Men's Basketball is a much higher percentage of their budget. Were your budgets for all sports or just Men's Basketball? The McCarthey Athletic Center seats 6,000. To compare to another good team outside the top seven conferences that doesn't play Football, VCU had an average attendance of 7,637, so that would be significantly higher than Gonzaga even if Gonzaga sold out every game. Furthermore, the A10 is on national TV more than the WCC.
04-03-2019 11:05 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #39
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
Those budgets were just mens basketball

VCU's budget was: 6.1M (tops in the A10; Dayton, St Louis and UMass are the only others above 5M in the A10, Davidson is low at 2.64M)
(This post was last modified: 04-03-2019 11:23 AM by dan10.)
04-03-2019 11:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dan10 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,422
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Drexel
Location: Indianapolis
Post: #40
RE: Postseason Discussion (NCAA, NIT)
NIT final tonight should be a good one. Will be interesting to see if Texas loses, whether they retain Shaka or not. His seat certainly appears quite toasty. I hope Lipscomb can come through, which would be an impressive run to have done it all on the road or at the neutral place of MSG.
04-04-2019 06:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.