NCAA Championship question

[grizbymarriage]

This may be a silly question to many of you who know a lot more about basketball than I do, but why do we play against other schools our general size in a separate division for a national football championship, but schools of all sizes are thrown into the same pot when it comes time for a national basketball championship??

It's great to make the conference playoffs; it's fun to see the Griz play a huge basketball powerhouse if we get to the NCAA tournament, but wouldn't it be more fun if we were in playoffs with other schools our size where there was a real chance for us to move on and win a national championship?

And, I know some small schools have gone far in the NCAA tournament, but most are out in the first round.

Just wondering . . . .

 

[GrizLA]

for a lot of reasons, including its budget, Montana could not be successful over a full season of conference play right now, but one or two games and all bets are off. UM has done fairly well over the "big guys" but not in the NCAA tourney. But, that is what makes the tourney what it is. everyone roots for the underdog. And, most years, there is one or two mid level teams that do better than ok...I think this UM team, next year, has a genuine shot at going into the 3rd round! We do have some good talent and the coaching staff improves every season. Don't forget, UM is limited by geography and other teams are often limited by media contracts and conference rules in travelling to out of the way places. Tinks is trying to force the issue so UM can be invited to more holiday tourneys like we were. As for measuring up, UM over the years has defeated UCLA, Stanford, Oregon State, Long Beach, and a few others...in the tourney however, so much has to do with seeding and the BSC is simply not recognized as competitive so they get a low seed, 14,15,16...that is a tall order to get one win...but UM did it once or twice. I honestly lose much of my interest in the tourney when it comes down to Duke, NC, OSU, Kansas, Georgetown..the usual players...One huge advantage schools like Montana have over the Big Guys" is that our players do not jump to the NBA...look at UCLA this year...I think they would be third in the Big Sky....

 

[BelierPeaux]

That's what the NIT and all those other tourneys are for!

 

[DoubleNicks]

Yeah, and I can't recall the Griz doing any better in the NIT with lesser teams. Same with the LG, I would get excited seeing the matchups and possible opponents to a national championship and think that it was possible, only to see both lose in the first round anyways. Much more disappointing end to the season than losing in the first round of March Madness to a quality opponent and with all the hype/excitement.

 

[becker2117]

for a lot of reasons, including its budget, Montana could not be successful over a full season of conference play right now, but one or two games and all bets are off. UM has done fairly well over the "big guys" but not in the NCAA tourney. But, that is what makes the tourney what it is. everyone roots for the underdog. And, most years, there is one or two mid level teams that do better than ok...I think this UM team, next year, has a genuine shot at going into the 3rd round! We do have some good talent and the coaching staff improves every season. Don't forget, UM is limited by geography and other teams are often limited by media contracts and conference rules in travelling to out of the way places. Tinks is trying to force the issue so UM can be invited to more holiday tourneys like we were. As for measuring up, UM over the years has defeated UCLA, Stanford, Oregon State, Long Beach, and a few others...in the tourney however, so much has to do with seeding and the BSC is simply not recognized as competitive so they get a low seed, 14,15,16...that is a tall order to get one win...but UM did it once or twice. I honestly lose much of my interest in the tourney when it comes down to Duke, NC, OSU, Kansas, Georgetown..the usual players...One huge advantage schools like Montana have over the Big Guys" is that our players do not jump to the NBA...look at UCLA this year...I think they would be third in the Big Sky....

I really think in the future if UM or Weebs continue to have excelent regular seasons and go on to win the conf you will see the BSC getting anywhere from 14-12 seeds. In the past we have seen the griz with a 12 seed, and to this point of the season we have been better than that team....yes in 05-06 we had a win over stanford but also had back to back conf losses that year and i think 3 total conf losses. If we go on to beat weebs on feb 28th and win the conf i dont see how we would be any worse than a 13 which i like and i think everybody would given the fact that every single year one of the 4 seeds goes down! I really think the years of the BSC getting a 15 or 16 are over as long as one of the powerhouse teams gets the bid and its not an upstart UNCO or conf tourney upset. GO GRIZ, get it done in early march and we will be rewarded and hopefully all of griz nation can make a thursday/friday road trip to the tourney, not for one but two games!

 

[GrizLA]

for a lot of reasons, including its budget, Montana could not be successful over a full season of conference play right now, but one or two games and all bets are off. UM has done fairly well over the "big guys" but not in the NCAA tourney. But, that is what makes the tourney what it is. everyone roots for the underdog. And, most years, there is one or two mid level teams that do better than ok...I think this UM team, next year, has a genuine shot at going into the 3rd round! We do have some good talent and the coaching staff improves every season. Don't forget, UM is limited by geography and other teams are often limited by media contracts and conference rules in travelling to out of the way places. Tinks is trying to force the issue so UM can be invited to more holiday tourneys like we were. As for measuring up, UM over the years has defeated UCLA, Stanford, Oregon State, Long Beach, and a few others...in the tourney however, so much has to do with seeding and the BSC is simply not recognized as competitive so they get a low seed, 14,15,16...that is a tall order to get one win...but UM did it once or twice. I honestly lose much of my interest in the tourney when it comes down to Duke, NC, OSU, Kansas, Georgetown..the usual players...One huge advantage schools like Montana have over the Big Guys" is that our players do not jump to the NBA...look at UCLA this year...I think they would be third in the Big Sky....

I really think in the future if UM or Weebs continue to have excelent regular seasons and go on to win the conf you will see the BSC getting anywhere from 14-12 seeds. In the past we have seen the griz with a 12 seed, and to this point of the season we have been better than that team....yes in 05-06 we had a win over stanford but also had back to back conf losses that year and i think 3 total conf losses. If we go on to beat weebs on feb 28th and win the conf i dont see how we would be any worse than a 13 which i like and i think everybody would given the fact that every single year one of the 4 seeds goes down! I really think the years of the BSC getting a 15 or 16 are over as long as one of the powerhouse teams gets the bid and its not an upstart UNCO or conf tourney upset. GO GRIZ, get it done in early march and we will be rewarded and hopefully all of griz nation can make a thursday/friday road trip to the tourney, not for one but two games!

Before that happens, both UM and WSU need to win the out of conference games. The power index of the BSC is about 23rd....not good...UM lost to some mediocre teams this year in games they should have won. The up coming game with Hawaii is important and, if the Griz win the BSC, will give the committee grounds to raise the seed....

 

[EverettGriz]

Although the Griz have a few poor losses, they have two things which will really grab the attention of the selection committee if they win-out. First, they have a marquee win over a team with an RPI in the upper 20s. Second, they will be on one HELL of a run. The Committee tends to like teams playing good basketball at the end of the year.

 

[Potomac Griz]

Lunardi's bracket has Weber as a 15 seed against Kansas... That seems like a pretty bad seed for the Big Sky team, but as was noted, the Big Sky isn't a strong conference at all this year. That's really hurt both Weber and the Griz in terms of RPI. Still.. if it's Weber or Montana, I'd guess more like a 13. EverettGriz is right too... the Griz having this nice of a run late season will help if the Griz are the team that wins the Big Sky tournament. The committee really does reward hot teams.

Here are the RPI ratings for Big Sky teams (as well as the 2 future Big Sky members) as of yesterday morning. Realtimerpi.com doesn't have the updated RPI yet after yesterday's games. Probably not all that different.

88 Weber St.
99 Montana
189 Portland State
215 Eastern Washington
250 Idaho State
261 Northern Colorado
279 Montana State
309 Sacramento State
329 Northern Arizona

225 Southern Utah
272 North Dakota

 

[DoubleNicks]

Before that happens, both UM and WSU need to win the out of conference games. The power index of the BSC is about 23rd....not good...UM lost to some mediocre teams this year in games they should have won. The up coming game with Hawaii is important and, if the Griz win the BSC, will give the committee grounds to raise the seed....

OC Losses:
@ 15-8 Colorado State by 6 (RPI of 55)
@ 11-13 North Dakota by 7 in OT (RPI of 277)
vs. 17-10 San Francisco by 3 (RPI of 136)
@ 15-9 Oregon State by 25 (RPI of 121)
vs. 21-4 Nevada by 6 (RPI of 34)

Top 3 OC Wins:
Long Beach State (RPI 33)
Idaho (RPI 158)
Utah Valley (RPI 186)

Obviously, North Dakota was a game UM could have won (especially since three teams that UM has beaten, have, in turn, defeated UND. That would be Idaho State, Sac State, and Utah Valley).

In the San Francisco game, USF had a late 12-3 run and shot 54% from 3 and 42% from the field. I'm sure the players would like another shot at that team, but coulda, shoulda, woulda.........too late.

Even before the season, I kind of had a bad feeling about the Oregon State game. I didn't like our chances going into Corvallis after their humiliating loss in Missoula last season. I didn't expect UM to lose by that much but I guess, never underestimate the influence of revenge in college sports.

Also, I remember thinking we were going to regret the Colorado State game by year's end but actually it's turning out to not be such a bad loss. They are almost Top 50 RPI. It's too bad UM came close to adding another top 50 victory to the tournament resume. Same thing with Nevada. Three top 50 wins and having only one bad loss between UND and USF might have been enough to get a even better than 12 seed for UM (in the scenario that UM would win the rest of their games, as well, of course).



Hawaii currently has an RPI of 154, so even a win wouldn't officially be a "quality" (top 100) win. You just wouldn't want to lose because then it counts against you as a bad loss. Even so, a win will look better than against most of the rest of the BSC, at this point.

Hawaii should be a winnable game, though. Common opponents include:
89-72 loss to EWU
77-74 loss @ Nevada
76-70 win @ Idaho
88-79 loss to Nevada

Although, Hawaii does have some good wins having beat Xavier (when they were #15), Clemson, New Mexico State. They also have close losses to UNLV (#20 at the time) by 5 and Auburn by 3.

 

[DoubleNicks]

I wonder if the ladies (if ISU were to win out) have a chance at getting a respectable seed. I remember when there were 3 or 4 teams with double digits wins by the time that Weber and UM both had 10 wins for the mens this year.

Currently:
62 Idaho State
120 MSU
122 EWU
147 UNC
159 UM
177 PSU
279 Sac State
280 NAU
332 WSU

As a conference:
24 BSC mens (SOS of 22)
15 BSC womens (SOS of 13)

 

[BelierPeaux]

Before that happens, both UM and WSU need to win the out of conference games. The power index of the BSC is about 23rd....not good...UM lost to some mediocre teams this year in games they should have won. The up coming game with Hawaii is important and, if the Griz win the BSC, will give the committee grounds to raise the seed....

OC Losses:
@ 15-8 Colorado State by 6 (RPI of 55)
@ 11-13 North Dakota by 7 in OT (RPI of 277)
vs. 17-10 San Francisco by 3 (RPI of 136)
@ 15-9 Oregon State by 25 (RPI of 121)
vs. 21-4 Nevada by 6 (RPI of 34)

Top 3 OC Wins:
Long Beach State (RPI 33)
Idaho (RPI 158)
Utah Valley (RPI 186)

Obviously, North Dakota was a game UM could have won (especially since three teams that UM has beaten, have, in turn, defeated UND. That would be Idaho State, Sac State, and Utah Valley).

In the San Francisco game, USF had a late 12-3 run and shot 54% from 3 and 42% from the field. I'm sure the players would like another shot at that team, but coulda, shoulda, woulda.........too late.

Even before the season, I kind of had a bad feeling about the Oregon State game. I didn't like our chances going into Corvallis after their humiliating loss in Missoula last season. I didn't expect UM to lose by that much but I guess, never underestimate the influence of revenge in college sports.

Also, I remember thinking we were going to regret the Colorado State game by year's end but actually it's turning out to not be such a bad loss. They are almost Top 50 RPI. It's too bad UM came close to adding another top 50 victory to the tournament resume. Same thing with Nevada. Three top 50 wins and having only one bad loss between UND and USF might have been enough to get a even better than 12 seed for UM (in the scenario that UM would win the rest of their games, as well, of course).



Hawaii currently has an RPI of 154, so even a win wouldn't officially be a "quality" (top 100) win. You just wouldn't want to lose because then it counts against you as a bad loss. Even so, a win will look better than against most of the rest of the BSC, at this point.

Hawaii should be a winnable game, though. Common opponents include:
89-72 loss to EWU
77-74 loss @ Nevada
76-70 win @ Idaho
88-79 loss to Nevada

Although, Hawaii does have some good wins having beat Xavier (when they were #15), Clemson, New Mexico State. They also have close losses to UNLV (#20 at the time) by 5 and Auburn by 3.

Hawaii's win over Xavier, though they were #15, was right after the Cincinatti brawl when they had suspended players. So a bit misleading. Either way, the Griz should win, I think.

 

[becker2117]

for a lot of reasons, including its budget, Montana could not be successful over a full season of conference play right now, but one or two games and all bets are off. UM has done fairly well over the "big guys" but not in the NCAA tourney. But, that is what makes the tourney what it is. everyone roots for the underdog. And, most years, there is one or two mid level teams that do better than ok...I think this UM team, next year, has a genuine shot at going into the 3rd round! We do have some good talent and the coaching staff improves every season. Don't forget, UM is limited by geography and other teams are often limited by media contracts and conference rules in travelling to out of the way places. Tinks is trying to force the issue so UM can be invited to more holiday tourneys like we were. As for measuring up, UM over the years has defeated UCLA, Stanford, Oregon State, Long Beach, and a few others...in the tourney however, so much has to do with seeding and the BSC is simply not recognized as competitive so they get a low seed, 14,15,16...that is a tall order to get one win...but UM did it once or twice. I honestly lose much of my interest in the tourney when it comes down to Duke, NC, OSU, Kansas, Georgetown..the usual players...One huge advantage schools like Montana have over the Big Guys" is that our players do not jump to the NBA...look at UCLA this year...I think they would be third in the Big Sky....

I really think in the future if UM or Weebs continue to have excelent regular seasons and go on to win the conf you will see the BSC getting anywhere from 14-12 seeds. In the past we have seen the griz with a 12 seed, and to this point of the season we have been better than that team....yes in 05-06 we had a win over stanford but also had back to back conf losses that year and i think 3 total conf losses. If we go on to beat weebs on feb 28th and win the conf i dont see how we would be any worse than a 13 which i like and i think everybody would given the fact that every single year one of the 4 seeds goes down! I really think the years of the BSC getting a 15 or 16 are over as long as one of the powerhouse teams gets the bid and its not an upstart UNCO or conf tourney upset. GO GRIZ, get it done in early march and we will be rewarded and hopefully all of griz nation can make a thursday/friday road trip to the tourney, not for one but two games!

Before that happens, both UM and WSU need to win the out of conference games. The power index of the BSC is about 23rd....not good...UM lost to some mediocre teams this year in games they should have won. The up coming game with Hawaii is important and, if the Griz win the BSC, will give the committee grounds to raise the seed....

your 100% correct about our griz or weebs needing to win out...i failed to say that but that was in my thought process. That loss to ND and USF really hurt, and a game that could have been against nevada....But i did see somebody post about the great run we are on, and if we finish out the reg season and the conf tourney i think that would be 18 out of 19 or something along those lines....one hell of a run....if we accomplish that i think we are all going to be very pleased with who we draw in the first round, but i realize there is lots of basketball to play. GO GRIZ

 

[GrizLA]

for a lot of reasons, including its budget, Montana could not be successful over a full season of conference play right now, but one or two games and all bets are off. UM has done fairly well over the "big guys" but not in the NCAA tourney. But, that is what makes the tourney what it is. everyone roots for the underdog. And, most years, there is one or two mid level teams that do better than ok...I think this UM team, next year, has a genuine shot at going into the 3rd round! We do have some good talent and the coaching staff improves every season. Don't forget, UM is limited by geography and other teams are often limited by media contracts and conference rules in travelling to out of the way places. Tinks is trying to force the issue so UM can be invited to more holiday tourneys like we were. As for measuring up, UM over the years has defeated UCLA, Stanford, Oregon State, Long Beach, and a few others...in the tourney however, so much has to do with seeding and the BSC is simply not recognized as competitive so they get a low seed, 14,15,16...that is a tall order to get one win...but UM did it once or twice. I honestly lose much of my interest in the tourney when it comes down to Duke, NC, OSU, Kansas, Georgetown..the usual players...One huge advantage schools like Montana have over the Big Guys" is that our players do not jump to the NBA...look at UCLA this year...I think they would be third in the Big Sky....

I really think in the future if UM or Weebs continue to have excelent regular seasons and go on to win the conf you will see the BSC getting anywhere from 14-12 seeds. In the past we have seen the griz with a 12 seed, and to this point of the season we have been better than that team....yes in 05-06 we had a win over stanford but also had back to back conf losses that year and i think 3 total conf losses. If we go on to beat weebs on feb 28th and win the conf i dont see how we would be any worse than a 13 which i like and i think everybody would given the fact that every single year one of the 4 seeds goes down! I really think the years of the BSC getting a 15 or 16 are over as long as one of the powerhouse teams gets the bid and its not an upstart UNCO or conf tourney upset. GO GRIZ, get it done in early march and we will be rewarded and hopefully all of griz nation can make a thursday/friday road trip to the tourney, not for one but two games!

Before that happens, both UM and WSU need to win the out of conference games. The power index of the BSC is about 23rd....not good...UM lost to some mediocre teams this year in games they should have won. The up coming game with Hawaii is important and, if the Griz win the BSC, will give the committee grounds to raise the seed....

your 100% correct about our griz or weebs needing to win out...i failed to say that but that was in my thought process. That loss to ND and USF really hurt, and a game that could have been against nevada....But i did see somebody post about the great run we are on, and if we finish out the reg season and the conf tourney i think that would be 18 out of 19 or something along those lines....one hell of a run....if we accomplish that i think we are all going to be very pleased with who we draw in the first round, but i realize there is lots of basketball to play. GO GRIZ

both UM and Weber can boost the conference and their own ratings by winning over their bracketbusting foes...Hawaii is a highly competitive and very fast team with a good record against some very strong competition and with the ratings released today, Weber can do a great deal by beating Texas Arlington as they are approaching top 25....two good games coming up...alas, I have to miss them....

 

[IdaGriz01]

This may be a silly question to many of you who know a lot more about basketball than I do, but why do we play against other schools our general size in a separate division for a national football championship, but schools of all sizes are thrown into the same pot when it comes time for a national basketball championship??

It's great to make the conference playoffs; it's fun to see the Griz play a huge basketball powerhouse if we get to the NCAA tournament, but wouldn't it be more fun if we were in playoffs with other schools our size where there was a real chance for us to move on and win a national championship?

And, I know some small schools have gone far in the NCAA tournament, but most are out in the first round.

Just wondering . . . .

Don't know how my basketball knowledge stacks up against yours, but the answer to your basic question (which people haven't much addressed) is not really so difficult.

If you listen to the NCAA big-wigs, they talk about their "championships" a lot. If they had their way, there would be just one championship for Division-I football. But they don't have their way ... because in football the cost vs money involved is so huge (at the very top) that they have lost any real control they might have had. That's not true of BBall, and probably won't ever be ... because the money, while it's not that bad for some, is just not there.

Personally, I have to agree with those who say that stars leaving early for the NBA has degraded (not ruined, but definitely lowered) the level of play in D-I college basketball. (And the 3-point shot line needs to be deeper, but that's another thread).

The only answer I see is to get hard-nosed on the whole leaving early (for the NBA) thing. Yes, I agree that kids should be allowed to "make the best decision" for themselves and their families. On the other hand: Why should colleges be the patsy in this? If a high school player (or his advisers) thinks he has NBA potential, then he should go straight to pro developmental play -- at whatever level makes the most sense. But if he takes a college scholarship offer, he should be committed for a minimum of three years. And the NBA should prohibit teams from signing players who violate that "contract" ... or exact a huge $$$ penalty. (I know ... evidence shows that contracts in sports don't mean that much, but we can try.) If they want to go play internationally, that's fine. The NCAA/NBA can consider exceptions on a case-by-case basis.

As to hoping for a better seed. I do think the top few teams in the BSC, including the Griz obviously, have raised their level of play to where we can hope for a somewhat higher seed. (At least we shouldn't need to worry about being stuck in a play-in game.) But what we should really be striving for -- as a conference -- is to get away from the "win or go home" position. That is, there should be some hope that at least one deserving team might get an at-large bid, even if they don't win the conference tournament. As it stands now, there is no chance that that will happen (IMO).