Seattle Thoughts: Larry, Nate, &the Senility of Mick Hol

[TrueGriz]

TrueGriz, the WAC usually gets atleast two teams in (atleast on the mens side). This year Nevada and UTEP. Plus if the Lady Griz were in the WAC the league would be better increasing a chance for a multiple bid.

Yes, for men's. But, last year, on women's side, the WAC was around 13th ranked and only got 1 team. This year, it is a top 10 ranked conference (I believe 8th) and has two teams in, La Tech and Rice.

WAC on the men's side have been higher ranked than with the women's side.

But, your right, Lady Griz would be better in WAC. With the stronger league and stronger schedule, Lady Griz RPI and power ratings would be higher and better chance of getting in. WAC conference would also be stronger with Lady Griz in it. Maybe chance of getting 3 teams in.

 

[jagur1]

True, TrueGriz. (I've always wanted to say that it just took me awhile to find something True. :lol: )

 

[Montana Gym Rat]

Get real! The Griz are doomed to a #15 or #16 seed as long as they continue to play 14 conference games each year in a Big Sky Conference that carried a 30 RPI ranking out of 31 schools playing D-1 basketball.The Griz would have to post road wins against a Louisville and/or a Wake Forest to have the slightest of chances for a higher seeding. Facts are the Big Sky is the Rodney Dangerfield among conferences and nobody...but nobody... takes seriously any team that comes out on top of this woefully weak league. BTW, the West Coast is #7, the MWC #11 and the WAC #13. For crying out loud, even the Sun Belt is #12[/b][/u]

Not completely true. Weber State was being considered for an at-large bid had they lost the BSC tourney a couple of years ago. Any team that plays a strong non-conf schedule and does well, barring losses in the conference, will get consideration (see Pacific).

Look at Montana's schedule this year. It was #85 non-conf. If they had won all their home games, lost only to Gonzaga and Stanford, and then proceeded to go 14-0 in conference, there's no question they would receive a single digit seed and an at-large birth.

 

[Silvertip]

Woulda, shoulda, coulda, and you forgot the Missouri blowout. What I'm saying is your scenario is all conjecture and my response is that nobody in the NCAA selection committee would be much impressed by a 14 game sweep of a lowly regarded Big Sky Conference (RPI rated 30 out of 31 conferences) . Sweep the WAC or the West Coast and you'd have something to get excited about. But the BSC? Naaaaww.

 

[Montana Gym Rat]

I was just using Montana's schedule as an example. I wasn't saying what if this year's team accomplished that. But since you'd like to dwell on this season's losses... How about the Western Kentucky blowout ?:roll:

You missed my point entirely.

You can't control the conference you play in and the committee knows that. If you go out and play a tough non-conf schedule and do well with it, you'll get consideration. Pacific proved that this year. The Big West is not a power conference. Montana beat the 3rd best team in that conference, so the competition isn't that much better than the Big Sky. If what you are saying is fact, then Pacific wouldn't be in the tournament as an 8 seed.

 

[TrueGriz]

I was just using Montana's schedule as an example. I wasn't saying what if this year's team accomplished that. But since you'd like to dwell on this season's losses... How about the Western Kentucky blowout ?:roll:

You missed my point entirely.

You can't control the conference you play in and the committee knows that. If you go out and play a tough non-conf schedule and do well with it, you'll get consideration. Pacific proved that this year. The Big West is not a power conference. Montana beat the 3rd best team in that conference, so the competition isn't that much better than the Big Sky. If what you are saying is fact, then Pacific wouldn't be in the tournament as an 8 seed.

Big West may not be a power conference but it still is ranked quite a bit higher than the Big Sky.

Weber State may have been considered as an at-large bid if they lost the tournament two years ago, but the Big Sky was ranked higher as a conference back then, than it is now. About where the Big West is ranked currently.

All the rest of your argument, I have to agree with Silvertip, is hypothetical conjecture.

NCAA is going to seed more teams from the highest ranked conferences. A 30th ranked conference stands no chance of multiple bids. As evidenced by this year, an 18th or so ranked conference can get a multiple bid, but there is no guarantee of it happening again unless the conference can improve it's ranking to be higher than 15th and more likelihood, higher than 10th.

Big Sky has no where to go, but up.

 

[Hells bells]

look at it this way - i am sure the 20 out of 31 for the big sky is just an abboration and next year is going to be different.

the griz return most if not all of their core players and are going to be tough to beat next year.

the only people the cats are loosing are at the end of the bench

i am sure portland state and weber are going to be tough next year also

what i am saying is that if not next year, then the year after, the big sky is going to be an exciting place to watch basketball

 

[Montana Gym Rat]

The first and foremost thing the committee spells out every year when selecting the field is: "Conferences don't get bids, teams get bids."

Look at the MAC. It's ranked 10th out of 31, yet they only sent one team and Ohio ended up with a 13 seed. The same goes for the Pac 10. It's shuffled around the top 4 for the entirety of the season. But you can't send 5 or 6 teams from there because they didn't have a strong enough resume.

The reason why the Big West looks good this year is because of Pacific. If one team out of the Big Sky was to have an RPI in the top 50, it would catapult the conference up to around 20th out of 31.

 

[NavyBlue]

Rat, Utah State and CS Fullerton had a pretty good year this year too. The only reason the BWC got two teams in this year is because USU won the tournament. If Pacific had won that game USU would have stayed home despite a pretty good record (not great) and RPI.

Had Pacific lost in the semi-final game as USU did last year I am not sure they would have went. Last year USU was ranked #19 had a RPI in the low 30s I beleive and did not get an at-large bid. And there was a lot of discussion about that which maybe helped UoP this year.

Also alot happens as far as upsets in other conferences. If the favorites all seem to be winning in a year then there are more at large bids to go around. But if a lot of upsets happen in the conference tournaments in a given year, especially in the bigger leagues there will be less at large bids for teams from mid-major leagues. Just my $0.02.

 

[TrueGriz]

The first and foremost thing the committee spells out every year when selecting the field is: "Conferences don't get bids, teams get bids."

Look at the MAC. It's ranked 10th out of 31, yet they only sent one team and Ohio ended up with a 13 seed. The same goes for the Pac 10. It's shuffled around the top 4 for the entirety of the season. But you can't send 5 or 6 teams from there because they didn't have a strong enough resume.

The reason why the Big West looks good this year is because of Pacific. If one team out of the Big Sky was to have an RPI in the top 50, it would catapult the conference up to around 20th out of 31.

Yeah, IF, IF, IF. Fact is, there weren't any team good enough in the Big Sky to be better than an rpi of 158.

There just ain't going to be two teams from a conference ranked 30th. If there were two teams really deserving to go to the big dance in the Big Sky, the Big Sky would have to be ranked much higher than 30th, more likely mid-teens. If there were actually two good teams in the Big Sky this year deserving to go the dance, the Big Sky would have been ranked higher than 30th. But, the fact is Big Sky is 30th, and has been dropping quite rapidly in the past two years. I just hope and pray that it starts improving next year, because it can't drop much more than it has.

But, Montana Gym Rat, conferences do not get bids, so your right there. But, the better conference your in, the stronger your schedule will be, which will translate into a higher RPI for each team, and more respect with the NCAA committee when it comes to seeding. A 30th ranked conference is not going to gain the respect of the NCAA tournament committee.

Sure there could be one team that stands above the rest and becomes the only participant in the conference. Even for a 10th ranked conference. Much lower than 10th the chances of multiple bids decline. More so in women's because I think there is more parity in mens basketball than womens. Thus some conferences in mens ranked below 10th can get multiple bids. Much lower than 10th (possibly 12th or 13th in mens) you will get a situation like Big West where Utah State beats the favorite, Pacific, and gets in due to automatic bid, but never would have had an at-large bid, while Pacific deserved an at-large bid.

 

[DuCharme]

The three UW wins in Alaska are impressive, but we should note... the learning curve for the new season was extremely in UW's favor with 5 returning starters. Things would be different at this point in the season.

 

[Montana Gym Rat]

Yeah, IF, IF, IF. Fact is, there weren't any team good enough in the Big Sky to be better than an rpi of 158.

I KNOW. I WAS USING MONTANA'S SCHEDULE MERELY AS AN EXAMPLE.

Can we please stop being hung up on this now? Sheeez.

I wasn't saying the Big Sky this year. My point was that the Big Sky is not always doomed to 14 - 16 seeds. To say that a move to the WAC is necessary to get an at-large bid is completely untrue. When a couple of Big Sky teams have good years out of conference then the conference's RPI goes up. Just like it did when Weber was being considered for an at-large bid. Just like what happened for the Big West this year. The Big Sky had a down year, yes. That does not prohibit the league from getting attention in the future.

Navy Blue, you're right about USU getting in. They wouldn't have made it had they not won the tourney. If there weren't so many teams having poor resumes this year, Pacific may not have gotten in like USU last year.

 

[puzzledinmt]

Yeah, IF, IF, IF. Fact is, there weren't any team good enough in the Big Sky to be better than an rpi of 158.

I KNOW. I WAS USING MONTANA'S SCHEDULE MERELY AS AN EXAMPLE.

Can we please stop being hung up on this now? Sheeez.

I wasn't saying the Big Sky this year. My point was that the Big Sky is not always doomed to 14 - 16 seeds. To say that a move to the WAC is necessary to get an at-large bid is completely untrue. When a couple of Big Sky teams have good years out of conference then the conference's RPI goes up. Just like it did when Weber was being considered for an at-large bid. Just like what happened for the Big West this year. The Big Sky had a down year, yes. That does not prohibit the league from getting attention in the future.

Navy Blue, you're right about USU getting in. They wouldn't have made it had they not won the tourney. If there weren't so many teams having poor resumes this year, Pacific may not have gotten in like USU last year.

Hey "Idahoshowerssloth!, it would seem you love being hung-up on this or anything else you don't agree with, you twinge!