If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Welcome to the best UNI Panther forum on the net!
Become a PN Supporting Member! Get exclusive access to the Panther Den forum and more. Click here for info.
22 league games is a disaster. All you're doing is guaranteeing the league 12 more losses and a greatly reduced chance at an at large when those chances are already slimmer than they were. Going to 18 makes more sense than 22.
Sixteen team league with 22 games is better due to less non-conference travel. Our league is not good enough to get at large bids to either the Dance or NIT most seasons.The unfortunate part is it won't happen because the four new schools would not make us any better. So, the A10, MWC, WCC will continue to lap us. Meanwhile, the MAC, ASUN, Conference USA, and a few others have passed us by too. We're stuck with this marginal one bid league.
At the end of the day, we need teams at the top of the Valley standings to win non conference games. Drake got an at large last year and their non conference was trash.
To avoid confusion - my username is baseball (Cy Young award) related, NOT for the Cyclones.
At the end of the day, we need teams at the top of the Valley standings to win non conference games. Drake got an at large last year and their non conference was trash.
The days of Creighton and the Shockers have long passed. We're a shell of that, now. Drake was not good enough last season. They got in with the last bid because someone owed them a favor or two.
Sixteen team league with 22 games is better due to less non-conference travel. Our league is not good enough to get at large bids to either the Dance or NIT most seasons.The unfortunate part is it won't happen because the four new schools would not make us any better. So, the A10, MWC, WCC will continue to lap us. Meanwhile, the MAC, ASUN, Conference USA, and a few others have passed us by too. We're stuck with this marginal one bid league.
Literally none of that is correct.
So, your theory is we should expand but not with teams that could possibly help us get more bids so that we're splitting the money from that one bid more ways while playing more games against teams that aren't good enough to get in the tournament? Do I have that right?
If Bradley wins one game against the better part of their schedule (while Mast was out) they are squarely on the bubble with a shot. Had Drake not pooped the bed against Richmond they would have been on the bubble.
It's all stacked against our level at this point but, even in a downish year, the league was really close to having legitimate at large chances.
B4A seems like a great opportunity to get some wins against teams that might start slow, but who's NET will keep rising throughout the season.
A lot of things have to fall in place and some luck will be required, but Jake has once again put UNI in a position to be a possible at-large team, and that's all you can really ask of him from a scheduling perspective.
__________________ The McLoud Center -Bob Lutz, Wichita Eagle, 2/3/2010
Sixteen team league with 22 games is better due to less non-conference travel. Our league is not good enough to get at large bids to either the Dance or NIT most seasons.The unfortunate part is it won't happen because the four new schools would not make us any better. So, the A10, MWC, WCC will continue to lap us. Meanwhile, the MAC, ASUN, Conference USA, and a few others have passed us by too. We're stuck with this marginal one bid league.
Give me a break. The MAC, with their one team getting a 13 seed, and the ASUN, with their one team as a 14 seed, have passed by a league that had two teams in the dance two years ago, had a #10 seed last year, and a 12 seed this year.
B4A seems like a great opportunity to get some wins against teams that might start slow, but who's NET will keep rising throughout the season.
A lot of things have to fall in place and some luck will be required, but Jake has once again put UNI in a position to be a possible at-large team, and that's all you can really ask of him from a scheduling perspective.
Got two really good Ws there last time. Might as well do it again.
So, your theory is we should expand but not with teams that could possibly help us get more bids so that we're splitting the money from that one bid more ways while playing more games against teams that aren't good enough to get in the tournament? Do I have that right?
If Bradley wins one game against the better part of their schedule (while Mast was out) they are squarely on the bubble with a shot. Had Drake not pooped the bed against Richmond they would have been on the bubble.
It's all stacked against our level at this point but, even in a downish year, the league was really close to having legitimate at large chances.
The would've could've should of. So, that would have given Bradley eight losses. You laughed at 8 losses getting in last week. It doesn't matter that we have 12, 14, or 16 in the league. We need fewer non-conference games because traveling is expensive. We can't afford it. It isn't about how good or bad 8 losses look. Our league has dropped off. So, we have next to no margin for error. So, we don't get in. Why would you want to travel to more non-conference venues. Anybody worth a damn isn't coming here.
We're fortunate the A10 schedules us. They don't need us. They only schedule us to get home and home. They would have to travel to ACC or Big East venues.
Give me a break. The MAC, with their one team getting a 13 seed, and the ASUN, with their one team as a 14 seed, have passed by a league that had two teams in the dance two years ago, had a #10 seed last year, and a 12 seed this year.
Pure nonsense. Stop your silly.
The 10 seed from last season resides in the A10, now. Last season Drake was the very last at-large because the committee was incompetent. This season Drake was legit, but got seeded one line too high. They were really a 13 seed.
The 10 seed from last season resides in the A10, now. Last season Drake was the very last at-large because the committee was incompetent. This season Drake was legit, but got seeded one line too high. They were really a 13 seed.
They were pretty much universally projected to be a 12 seed. As far as the woulda coulda shoulda with Bradley, it's a much more reasonable game when you realize the number of injuries they had to deal with while in Cancun.
They were pretty much universally projected to be a 12 seed. As far as the woulda coulda shoulda with Bradley, it's a much more reasonable game when you realize the number of injuries they had to deal with while in Cancun.
Injuries have nothing to do with the committee's decision. They look at body of work, SOS, net ratings etc. To them it's a bunch of numbers a game is either 1 loss or one win. True, it is logical that injuries play a part in the statistics, but a loss is a loss. We know injuries kill a season, but the committee doesn't care. Especially, if you reside in a mid major league.
Comment