Not ready for Prime Time

[AZGrizFan]

I do agree we need to schedule better teams, and I know for fact, Tinkle and O'day have tried.

Now there is a few problems.
(1) There are a lot of better programs that do not want to risk getting beat by Montana, with Cherry, and Jamar. Despite what we seen against Wisconsin, teams know the GRIZ are very capable of pulling upsets. Beating UCLA, Oregon State, and out playing Washington hurt the GRIZ future scheduling, more than it helped.

Gonzaga's non-conference schedule: Notre Dame; Illinois; Michigan State; Butler; Xavier; Arizona; and Butler, to name a few. I guess we can all figure out why they weren't too intimidated playing West Virginia yesterday in Pittsburgh. The formula for success for a small school is about 200 miles to the west.

Look at the schedule LBSU played (Pitt, UNC, San Diego St., Louisville, Kansas, Xavier, Kansas St.) & none of them at home. They didn't win their game either, but they sure looked like they belonged & got a better seed than the Griz. If the Beach can schedule those games their is no reason Montana can't.

They had a story about Mississippi Valley State on their OOC games at the beginning of the year, they played: Notre Dame, UNC, DePaul, South Carolina, Arkansas, Northwestern, Ole Miss, Florida, Wisconsin, and Iowa State. Now THAT'S an OOC schedule. Lost all those games, but they netted respect and I think $800,000. There's plenty of teams out west for UM to play and increase their cred, just need to schedule them, and make some cash on the side too.

Most SWAC/MEAC schools play schedules like that, not neccesarily to help their RPI but to bring in cash just to keep the program afloat. I have read stories about teams having to bus 16 hours & then getting one meal at McDonalds.

All these examples totally refute your argument against teams willing to schedule Montana. If Gonzaga, LBSU and Mississippi Valley State can schedule good OOC games, UM could. Guaranteed after that performance on Thursday teams will line up to get a perceived "W".

 

[WyomingGrizFan]

I'd be surprised if the NCAA doesn't have the BSC have to have a play-in game next year in the NCAA Tournament.

 

[MissoulaMarinerFan]

Montana had the potential to beat Wisconsin, but when the main five players didn't step up where else was there to go? Montana lived by five people and died by the same five. The bench players who did play that day hadn't played regularly so it was no surprise that they couldn't supply the much needed spark. The five person strategy worked all season, but when Montana played a bigger, deeper and equally-well coached team, the Montana horse was exhausted and easily defeated. It is what it is. Are there lessons to be learned for next season?

If the bench players got a whopping 2 minutes of total time at the end of the game (and wesiner got like 2? 3? minutes in the first half), how are they supposed to "provide a spark?"

 

[Griz Man]

I'd be surprised if the NCAA doesn't have the BSC have to have a play-in game next year in the NCAA Tournament.

I think this is more dependent on our non-conference record. If we win thewinnable games (San Fran, NV, ND this year)--and if we're truly good we will--I don't think the NCAA is suddenly going to turn up their noses at the Big Sky. MT, for example, in their last three tourney games has a victory, a well-fought game they would have won if the tourney darling hadn't laid an egg (I speak of AJ), and yes, a rout, but it seemed like we could have hung in there (and we did for the first 18 min.s or so, I would argue--it wasn't an obvious and huge mismatch).

I think people watching could see that our guys were tight, nervous, and not playing to their potential. That is not the fault of the Big Sky.

 

[AZGrizFan]

I'd be surprised if the NCAA doesn't have the BSC have to have a play-in game next year in the NCAA Tournament.

Honestly, outside of the winner having to play a #1 seed, that might not be a bad thing. Getting a game under your belt against a (supposedly) evenly matched opponent might be a GOOD thing....get rid of some of the tournament "jitters".

 

[MissoulaMarinerFan]

I'd be surprised if the NCAA doesn't have the BSC have to have a play-in game next year in the NCAA Tournament.

Depending on what seed you're playing in for -- it might not be a bad thing -- if I remember right, there was a play in for the 13 seed this year, not all the play in games are for 15/16 seed....however, the powers that be could possibly change that in the future.

 

[becker2117]

I'd be surprised if the NCAA doesn't have the BSC have to have a play-in game next year in the NCAA Tournament.

Depending on what seed you're playing in for -- it might not be a bad thing -- if I remember right, there was a play in for the 13 seed this year, not all the play in games are for 15/16 seed....however, the powers that be could possibly change that in the future.

the only play in game we would be in is the 16 seed, unless somehow the conf was good enuf for an at large....they are not going to put an AQ into the playin game for a 12 seed....the only aq teams that are in play in games are 16 seeds...but as long as the griz continue to have good seasons while winning the conf tourney, we will not be in a playin game...there will always be teams that win the conf tourney with records near .500 or in that area...a 25 win griz team will never be a 16 seed...now if we have a sub par season ..get in the conf tourney as a 4 or 5 seed or something, and win it....all bets are off, could be in a playin game...but the season we had this year, never a playin game...not even last years season

 

[EverettGriz]

There's no way the BSC entry is placed in the play-in game unless it is a situation in which a team that finished 3rd or below in the regular season wins the title game.