2024-2025 Around the League and Other Games of Interest

[CletusCat]

Clenz you made a ton of valid points and I agree with you. We don't need any form of validation from Iowa or Iowa State. They have made it clear they think they're better than us.

McCollum may very well succeed there simply because he has proven he can do more with less, but they won't and can't fund that program to be what they want it to be.

Heck they can't even fund their football program to the level they pretend to play at. Iowa has the same little man complex when it comes to Michigan/OSU and the SEC that we have had with them.

I really had hoped Drake would have been the 11 seed in Iowa State's region so we could have potentially gotten that matchup. The P5s don't want any of the smoke. They won't play us anymore because they want money to be the deciding factor not merit.

[PantherAlum09]

Another big issue coming up/already happening is this revenue sharing component. It heavily favors schools that don't have football to support.

[BCPanther]

This is 2025. This is the MVC. This is mid-major basketball.

One weekend in March determines whether UNI goes to the NCAA tournament now. Everything else is practice leading to and seeding for that tournament.

The portal and NIL changed college basketball, but that toothpaste is not going back into the tube. If anything, the power conferences will simply create their own tournament and split off or simply do that and pay off the NCAA for the name/branding.

That's why I've gone to just really enjoying the regular season. Of course we want to make the tournament but it doesn't invalidate the previous 4 months when we don't.

[GarretW1797]

It's clear the power schools are going to do everything they can to isolate and keep the rest of us away from the money and tournament. Drake was 30-3 going into selection Sunday. Are you confident in saying they get an at-large if they finished 29-4 and didn't win Arch Mandess? I'm not. You think they would really put them in over that 14th SEC team? I don't. They were 44th on the seed list. North Carolina was 46th and the only at-large behind them. So if Bradley beats Drake in the title game it comes down to Drake and North Carolina while Bradley probably falls abbout 50-54 on the seed list. Do you, in your heart, truly believe Drake would have recieved the selection over North Carolina or West Virginia? They 100% should have, but would they have? I can't think of a world in which they do.

They beat Miami, Vanderbilt, Kansas State. Those wins should have made them a lock with the rest of that resume. If anything, I bet it would have been spun as a negative for them behind closed doors. They were good enough to win games. They don't want Cinderella teams. Everyone loves them, but the TV networks and selection committee do not because the reality is the lowest rated games are those that involve the Cinderella teams. They are loving the fact there are zero mids in the S16 this year. They want chalk.

I don't think they would include them and a big reason is because of their 3 losses. They lost at home to a so so Murray State team and to Bradley, and also on the road to UIC. Northern Iowa in 14-15 entered Selection Sunday with the same record but the difference was that their 3 losses were all on the road. Yes, one of those was to Evansville but they ended their season with 24 wins after winning the CIT. The other two losses were to VCU and Wichita State, who were both in the tournament as 7 seeds. UNI also beat three power conference teams just like Drake did (Virginia Tech, Iowa, Northwestern). Keep in mind that I don't necessarily agree with how the selection committee makes their choices, but I can understand it. Why include a mid major that can't beat the 7th place team in their conference at home when we can include a power team that has proven they can beat the best of the SEC? The selection committee's only concern for at large bids is including the best teams they can. That's always gonna be the biggest hurdle for mid majors, because regardless of how the Q1/2 games go, you would have to go nearly perfect in Q3/4 games to even be considered for an at large. Again, I don't agree with it completely, but that's honestly how it has always been.

[clenz]

I don't think they would include them and a big reason is because of their 3 losses. They lost at home to a so so Murray State team and to Bradley, and also on the road to UIC. Northern Iowa in 14-15 entered Selection Sunday with the same record but the difference was that their 3 losses were all on the road. Yes, one of those was to Evansville but they ended their season with 24 wins after winning the CIT. The other two losses were to VCU and Wichita State, who were both in the tournament as 7 seeds. UNI also beat three power conference teams just like Drake did (Virginia Tech, Iowa, Northwestern). Keep in mind that I don't necessarily agree with how the selection committee makes their choices, but I can understand it. Why include a mid major that can't beat the 7th place team in their conference at home when we can include a power team that has proven they can beat the best of the SEC? The selection committee's only concern for at large bids is including the best teams they can. That's always gonna be the biggest hurdle for mid majors, because regardless of how the Q1/2 games go, you would have to go nearly perfect in Q3/4 games to even be considered for an at large. Again, I don't agree with it completely, but that's honestly how it has always been.

Drake also proved they can beat the SEC as well beating Vanderbilt in the regular season. Vandy was solidly in the NCAA tournament. Vandy beat Tennessee, Mizzou, Texas, TAMU. Kansas State didn't make the tournament but they beat NCAA teams out of the B12.

The losses would have been the public reason they were left out, but the real reason is eyeballs and they would know they are more than capable of beating the SEC/B10/ACC shools they would be put up against, which they did with Mizzou.

I'll use Vandy to go against the point I made earlier in this post. They included Vandy, multiple spots ahead of Drake on the seed line list. Vandy finished under .500 in the SEC. They finished 12th and lost in the first round of the SEC tournament to the 13 seed. So they finish 12th in the SEC, lose to a piss ant team like Drake who can't beat Murray State or UIC? Can't win a conference tournament game? Yes, Vandy beat the teams I listed above but they also got their **** pused in by Kentucky, Arkansas, Georgia, Texas, Alabama, Miss St


This is all just showing how stacked against a MM it is. The MM isn't good enough because they dared lose a conference game. However, they beat a P4 team in the OOC. They don't get credit for that P4 win while the P4 also isn't punished for losing to the lowly MM that dared lose a conference game.

It's all a circle meant to keep us out. Being a buy game for Iowa or Iowa State doesn't change that for us, or other MM programs. I hate repeating Hawk talking points, but, in 2025 what good does scheduling UNI or Drake do for those two? They win and it isn't padding their metrics as much as beating the hell out of Arkansas Pine Bluff. It becomes "Oh, you beat a team you should have? Cool, I guess.". They win but it's close and nearly lost? That's actively held against them for having to sweat out a MM. It also hurts their computer metrics. They lose? Absolute disaster within the state for PR. Within the eyball test for seeding lines, etc. Won't keep them out of the tournament, more than likely, but it may if they aren't the bigger name in the competition for that seed line. It will also cost them seedlings at a minimum.

I'm not entirely convinced it is "good" for us either. Yes, a win is a big thing for PR. It's big for engagement. It's big for eyeballs. Confidence. All of it. On the flip side a loss just reinforces we are 2nd class to them. A nice buy game for selling tickets to locals. A big loss and we arne't 2nd class citizens. We are 3rd or 4th and it won't really matter how the rest of our season goes for the general fan in Iowa because it will be "Yeah, but it's a mid major conference and they got killed by Iowa/ISU so how good are they really?"

I can understand the positives for us. I don't know that it's off set enough by the potential of a loss. There is also zero upside for either Iowa or Iowa State due to the way the system is set up now.

It's time to move past the Iowa/Iowa State thing. This coming season it will have been 10 years since we played Iowa State and 11 since we played Iowa. I feel, and I'm clearly in the minority so maybe I'm wrong, the time and efforts of the staff and players would be better spent focusing on other opponents that aren't going to carry the historical baggage or garbage that those two do.

[Panther Fan]

You're making my point while making your own point. Mids are being excluded. Us taking a buy game at Iowa or Iowa State isn't going to change that. Do we get a seed in the NIT this past season because we played Iowa instead of Wichita State? Do we get an NCAA bid by replacing Wichita State with Iowa State? It doesn't matter who we, or any of us, play. We aren't going to be included outside of the automatic bid moving forward. The system has always been rigged against mids, it's moved past rigged and into straight up walled off. We played an OOC SOS of 99 per teamrankings.com. Last season was 94. Our average over the last 10 years is 106. Average over Jake's entire tenure is 108. Some are much higher, like the year we had 35. Others are much lower, like a 262 7 years ago but that was bookended with an 83 and 62.

2025 is not 2012 in any sense of the world in or outside of sports. 2012 is closer to 1990 or even1978 when we moved D1 in terms of structure and rules than it is to 2025. We aren't getting those MTEs anymore. We aren't getting those H/H series back. Pining for them and going "it's better for the state" with no backing to that other than pure vibes does nothing to change that. Sure, I'd take the H/H back. I'd even be willing to listen to the B4 set up again. You want to make a case for being "good for the state" the B4 is about as close as you can get to making a case for the games actually being good for the state as a whole.

Iowa is seemingly looking to end the series with Iowa State yearly and replace those games with a low major in basketball and a CUSA or MAC school in football. The chances of us getting an at-large to the NCAA tournament at 22-10 is better than us getting those series back with either one of them.

Yes, it's fine compared to other mid-majors. Trying to compare ourselves to schools who spend more on basketball alone than we do as an entire athletic department is pretty silly. That doesn't mean we aren't, and shouldn't, strive to compete with them on the court. When it comes to the idea of scheduling ability we can't compete with the bigger schools. Trying to measure yourself on the same scale as they are rather than your peers is probably not the best scale to use.[/QUOTE]

So do we can make our own F***ing path, but that path is very limited and we're only allowed to hike around the lower part of the mountain now because the paths to the top have been closed by the larger schools?

[CletusCat]

I think we're all saying the same thing here: the NCAA and their tournament suck now, but we still support and want the best for UNI.

[clenz]

So do we can make our own F***ing path, but that path is very limited and we're only allowed to hike around the lower part of the mountain now because the paths to the top have been closed by the larger schools?

Yep. The path higher to the mountain was super narrow and impossible to get to 90% of the time, but there was a path. At this point that path has been destroyed by a mudslide.

Our path higher on the mountain by the end of the year is no more helped by playing Iowa than anyone else in the country at this point, sadly.

I get it. I'm one of the loudest anti-Iowa people here. I've been against playing Iowa and Iowa State since the original H/H series was ended. I hated the B4 but was willing to be okay enough with it. When that ended, I was done with them. They don't want us. I don't want them. I don't want to hitch my validation as a program, of fan base, to that a game against a team in Iowa City or Ames in November of the first week of December.

I may have come off far too strong initially, but that is my gut reaction to it. I'm capable of having a less over the top discussion of it, but I hate the questions of "will you schedule UNI and Drake?". The answer is no and will forever be no. We can give Fran all the crap in the world for being the one to kill it, but he didn't act alone. I'm not sure why Iowa gets all the hate for ending it when it's clear Iowa State was just as on board, possibly more so. Their coaches and ADs have been asked the same question and given direct answers of the "it does nothing for us". I don't know why they avoid the wrath for the series ending. Barta is gone, but it wasn't just Fran and Barta that didn't want to play that series anymore. Iowa State has changed coaches, and the answers have been the same.

[BCPanther]

What is always comes down to for me is this...

If you asked McCollum or TJ 'would you schedule Bradley or Belmont?', their answer would be an immediate 'No.'

I get that we're in the same state but other than that, they'd be crazy to schedule anyone from the top of our league with how the current system is set up.

[CincyPanther88]

It was smart for McCollum to go to Iowa. At D+ he would have to win Arch Madness every year. At Iowa he can finish in the middle of the pack and still go to the tournament.

As for our mid-major plight, there could be a tournament for MM's only but It probably wouldn't be the NIT since the NCAA owns it. Also, such a tournament is going to be seen as a second rate (at best) event. You're also going up against the NCAA tournament. Are you playing Monday through Wednesday? Then there's the transfer portal which inexplicably begins during the tournament. Not to mention the coaching carousel. About the only thing I could think of to do would be for the MMs (and perhaps the low majors) to band together and refuse to play P5 teams. Let them schedule each other. The difficult thing is defining what schools are MM's. Then you would have to get them all to agree to do that. That means ISUb can't play IU, tOSU can't play Miami, Akron, Kent St., etc. Villanova can't play the other members of the Big 5.

[BCPanther]

It was smart for McCollum to go to Iowa. At D+ he would have to win Arch Madness every year. At Iowa he can finish in the middle of the pack and still go to the tournament.

As for our mid-major plight, there could be a tournament for MM's only but It probably wouldn't be the NIT since the NCAA owns it. Also, such a tournament is going to be seen as a second rate (at best) event. You're also going up against the NCAA tournament. Are you playing Monday through Wednesday? Then there's the transfer portal which inexplicably begins during the tournament. Not to mention the coaching carousel. About the only thing I could think of to do would be for the MMs (and perhaps the low majors) to band together and refuse to play P5 teams. Let them schedule each other. The difficult thing is defining what schools are MM's. Then you would have to get them all to agree to do that. That means ISUb can't play IU, tOSU can't play Miami, Akron, Kent St., etc. Villanova can't play the other members of the Big 5.

The problem with that is you've done exactly what the networks want without them having to drop any more money to do it.

If we start refusing to play them, it gives ESPN all the ammo it needs to stop doing business with us.

[GarretW1797]

Drake also proved they can beat the SEC as well beating Vanderbilt in the regular season. Vandy was solidly in the NCAA tournament. Vandy beat Tennessee, Mizzou, Texas, TAMU. Kansas State didn't make the tournament but they beat NCAA teams out of the B12.

The losses would have been the public reason they were left out, but the real reason is eyeballs and they would know they are more than capable of beating the SEC/B10/ACC shools they would be put up against, which they did with Mizzou.

I'll use Vandy to go against the point I made earlier in this post. They included Vandy, multiple spots ahead of Drake on the seed line list. Vandy finished under .500 in the SEC. They finished 12th and lost in the first round of the SEC tournament to the 13 seed. So they finish 12th in the SEC, lose to a piss ant team like Drake who can't beat Murray State or UIC? Can't win a conference tournament game? Yes, Vandy beat the teams I listed above but they also got their **** pused in by Kentucky, Arkansas, Georgia, Texas, Alabama, Miss St


This is all just showing how stacked against a MM it is. The MM isn't good enough because they dared lose a conference game. However, they beat a P4 team in the OOC. They don't get credit for that P4 win while the P4 also isn't punished for losing to the lowly MM that dared lose a conference game.

The thing with Vandy though is they had 0 Q3/4 losses, which again is the major hurdle for mid majors. Seems the committee puts a lot of weight on beating up on your Q3/4 opponents for all teams, as well as protecting you home court nearly perfectly as a mid major. But I'm with you overall, I think the system should change to put more emphasis on the quality games you win and not as much on the games you lose, because playing against conference opponents is always gonna be a test regardless of what conference you're in. Unfortunately, like many of you have said, it seems like the system won't ever change. And as someone else just mentioned, trying to run an all mid major tournament doesn't really seem feasible in today's landscape.

[orangetennis]

It's a lot easier to go undefeated in Q3/4 games when they're all played at home and u only play a handful of them.
It's a lot more difficult to go undefeated when you play 25+ of those games, and half are true road games.

[BCPanther]

Remember, league play is only really hard in the power leagues

**Giant fart noise**

[clenz]

It's a lot easier to go undefeated in Q3/4 games when they're all played at home and u only play a handful of them.
It's a lot more difficult to go undefeated when you play 25+ of those games, and half are true road games.

Q3/Q4 also doesn't matter unless it helps the high major case.

Last year ISUb was left out because lack of Q1 wins. This year for UNC it was "They didn't win Q1 games (they are 1-13) but they won Q3 and Q4 games!" It is literally the opposite of what the knock on ISU was last year. UNC also lost a Q3 game. They had 14 chances to prove they could beat a quality team, and couldn't do it. They get rewarded with a bid because their uniform has the right name and patch on it. Not on merrit.

Garret needs to stop buying the garbage the media, P4 ADs, and selection committee sell him. He's doing their job for them by repeating the crap the spew and justifying it. "I don't entirely agree but they have a point and I agree with what they are saying". Stop. ISU had a NET of 28.RPI of 25. Had more Q1 wins. Had more Q1/Q2 wins combined. Had a better Q1 win %. Had a better Q3/Q4 win%.

They were left out because they dared lose the conference title team to a team with an RPI of 11 and net of 47 by 4. The team that ISU lost to was 7-5 vs Q1/Q2 and played a OOC SOS of 38 and a total SOS of 50. That team also, somehow, would have been left out if they lost. Would you, Garret, accept them being left out because "don't lose a Q3 game" because they had the nerve to lose to Stephen F. Austin on November, 20tH 2023?

This is why you spewing that crap, even hedging with "I might not agree", is silly. What they say isn't real. It is only that because it fit their narrative this time. Or for that specific team.

Hell, this year with UNC they got in over WVU. WVU had 6 QU wins. zero Q3/4 losses, UNC had them. They were 4-3 against Q2. Justify UNC being in over WVU if you want to justify them being in over Drake had they not won Arch Madness.

It's why it's futile to try to play their games anymore to make the tournament. To play their scheduling games. To take their requirements to be allowed to grace the court as the same time as them.