AAC in national perspective

[7774]

Talking about yourself again I see.

I don't think so. I'm not the crazy person who thinks the name of a conference will impact those team's seeding.

 

[Jerry1714]

What are you talking about? I listed for things. Record. Conf. record. SOS and RPI. I hope they consider more than that, but everything boils down to whether or not you beat the teams you played and were they any good. Nothing is more stupid than the "top 50 wins" and "top 100 wins" or "150+ losses". The gradients between beating #2 and beating number #49 are much higher than beating #45 and beating number #53.

Conference record is not looked at by the committee, and records on their own are meaningless and not looked at.

You may think top 50 wins is stupid, but the committee does not and it looks at it as a factor. Same with sub 150 losses and top 100 wins. Also advance metrics rankings like Kenpom, BPI, and KPI are given more weight than the RPI now (the RPI is being ditched after this year)

So yes you listed four things, but two are meaningless and not considered by the committee.

 

[UConnfan8]

I don't think so. I'm not the crazy person who thinks the name of a conference will impact those team's seeding.

See Mick Cronin's interview last week. And he's 100% right. The league sucks. You can keep your blinders on and think the AAC is wonderful for us. And in 6 years when our best OOC game is URI, I hope you take some joy in saying "I really rooted for this conference."

Sad how you could watch the conference we were in 10 years ago, the greatest college sports conference of all time, and then watch this conference and think that the committee has the same respect for this one then they did the BE. Absolutely ludicrous.

Meanwhile- I'll keep up the good fight in lobbying for us to GET OUT. Big East or Bust at this point.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Conference record is not looked at by the committee, and records on their own are meaningless and not looked at.

You may think top 50 wins is stupid, but the committee does not and it looks at it as a factor. Same with sub 150 losses and top 100 wins. Also advance metrics rankings like Kenpom, BPI, and KPI are given more weight than the RPI now (the RPI is being ditched after this year)

So yes you listed four things, but two are meaningless and not considered by the committee.

I'm aware BPI and Kenpom are replacing RPI. If the committee doesn't consider records and conference records then they are the stupidest people on earth. Those 50-100-150 points are also stupid, and artificial. Many teams flow fluidly around those markers, on either side all year. It would be more relevant to average the BPI of the wins and the losses. Who did you beat? Who beat you?

 

[pepband99]

Despite all of the whining, this has much more to do with Myron Medcalf being an idiot than the AAC. Go back and look at an of his prior predictions - they're wrong very very often.

 

[7774]

See Mick Cronin's interview last week. And he's 100% right. The league sucks. You can keep your blinders on and think the AAC is wonderful for us. And in 6 years when our best OOC game is URI, I hope you take some joy in saying "I really rooted for this conference."

Sad how you could watch the conference we were in 10 years ago, the greatest college sports conference of all time, and then watch this conference and think that the committee has the same respect for this one then they did the BE. Absolutely ludicrous.

Meanwhile- I'll keep up the good fight in lobbying for us to GET OUT. Big East or Bust at this point.

Just because I'm not a delusional moron and I have an actual understanding of how NCAA tournament seeding works doesn't mean I think this conference is wonderful, or that I take any joy in rooting for it.

Good luck in getting us back in the Big East with your lobbying. I think you'd be better off lobbying for a conference that isn't an 100% death sentence, but maybe that's just me.

BTW, Mick Cronin's comments had zero to do with teams getting their seeds lowered based upon the name of their conference.

 

[Adios]

UConn, Cincinnati, Houston, Temple, Memphis have to carry the league. But SMU also seems to want to emphasize bball. If most of these schools get back to where they've been over the past 25 years, the conference should be solid. Houston gets a new arena and SMU is new to being ranked regularly.

 

[spudzj6]

Despite all of the whining, this has much more to do with Myron Medcalf being an idiot than the AAC. Go back and look at an of his prior predictions - they're wrong very very often.

Thank you for bringing this thread back to my original point. Medcalf claims Cincy is one of the more frustrating and inconsistent teams this year. Please tell me how teams such as Duke and Kentucky are more consistent this year than Cincy? The only game they lost that they should have won (aside from URI in the beginning of the year) was to UCF. Consistently tough on defense and never being near the top offensively. Duke has been up and down more times than I can count.

 

[UConnfan8]

doesn't mean I think this conference is wonderful, or that I take any joy in rooting for it.

No..you do. You do. All 4 days this weekend to the tourney for you?

 

[7774]

No..you do. You do. All 4 days this weekend to the tourney for you?

It's amazing what alternate realities people create for themselves.

 

[champs99and04]

Houston has played 5 games against teams currently in the top 30 of the RPI, and they're 0-5 with losses by 9, 18, 21, 10, and 12 points. They have 3 top 100 wins. It won't be a conspiracy when they are left out.

Wake Forest has 9 top 100 wins.

I agree with you on this one, but there is a fundamental flaw in taking the sheer quantity of top 50/100 wins instead of weighing them as a percentage. P5 teams have way more opportunities to play top 50 games than mid-majors, and perhaps more importantly, they have way more opportunities to play those games at home. Take Syracuse: they have a bunch of good wins, but all of them came at home and they have a bunch of bad losses to offset them. Syracuse being in over Rhode Island is crazy to me.

 

[don356]

UConn, Cincinnati, Houston, Temple, Memphis have to carry the league. But SMU also seems to want to emphasize bball. If most of these schools get back to where they've been over the past 25 years, the conference should be solid. Houston gets a new arena and SMU is new to being ranked regularly.

+1, folks are letting the fact that we've had a down year weigh on this judgement to much. You do not have to be a p5 member to be very good in bball. I for one am not bothered by adding Witchita St, and/or a VCU or Dayton for bball only. It would only make the conference deeper.

 

[Jerry1714]

I agree with you on this one, but there is a fundamental flaw in taking the sheer quantity of top 50/100 wins instead of weighing them as a percentage. P5 teams have way more opportunities to play top 50 games than mid-majors, and perhaps more importantly, they have way more opportunities to play those games at home. Take Syracuse: they have a bunch of good wins, but all of them came at home and they have a bunch of bad losses to offset them. Syracuse being in over Rhode Island is crazy to me.

I do not get Cuse being in right now, but URI is not the team I would argue over them. URI has not done anything to be in the tournament.

 

[UConn_Top_Dog]

Some good points made on this article and only good things said about the job KO is doing.

"Regardless of what conference you're in, are you going to establish yourself as one of the premier teams in the conference?" said Jim Spanarkle. "I don't think good teams let the conference drag them down. The good teams drag the conference up."

UConn Men: Top College Hoop Analysts Assess Huskies' Future

 

[champs99and04]

I do not get Cuse being in right now, but URI is not the team I would argue over them. URI has not done anything to be in the tournament.

Rhode Island is 2-3 against the top 25 (granted VCU isn't a real top 25 team) and two of their three losses were decided by a combined four points. All of their challenging OOC games were either on the road or neutral sites.

Their best player missed a chunk of games and their starting point guard missed most of the season. Their RPI is solid and their BPI is even better (I imagine they'd be a few spots higher on KenPom without the injuries). They've won five in a row and nine of their past eleven, which doesn't matter in a vacuum but does, I think, when taking injuries into consideration.

If not Syracuse, who would you have in ahead of them?

 

[mustangxc]

Houston's BPI compares favorably to the bubble teams that Lunardi has in. There is absolutely a bias against the American. Unfortunately UConn, Memphis, and Temple did not have great seasons to help the cause. SMU and Cincinnati have to have deep NCAA tournament runs in order to gain some respect for the league.

 

[thedrowsyowl]

UConn, Cincinnati, Houston, Temple, Memphis have to carry the league. But SMU also seems to want to emphasize bball. If most of these schools get back to where they've been over the past 25 years, the conference should be solid. Houston gets a new arena and SMU is new to being ranked regularly.

This. I know you guys (UConn) are having the season from hell, and Temple is in the same boat (injured key players and having one of the worst seasons in recent memory), on top of an underwhelming Memphis and a young Tulsa team. It just seems that what should be the top teams (UConn, Cincy, Memphis, Temple, Houston, and SMU) are never all good at the same time.

 

[Waquoit]

I'd love to see Cincy have good run. I like Mick.