No Temple - We need out of this Conf | Page 3 | The Boneyard

No Temple - We need out of this Conf

Status
Not open for further replies.
tzznandrew said:
The old Big East had 3 and 4 bid years. We had a 3 bid year and a 4 bid year. It's a young league with a lot of returning players.

Not where I want to be, but I think next year the league is much better, and is treated better.

Having 5 sub-200 teams is killer. That's the biggest problem.

And no team really winning marquee OOC games. Except Temple, who killed Kansas, lost the remainder of their games.
Expand ...
I was really lookin at our RPI today our like 9 worst RPI games were conference games. Like sub-Coppin St and CCSU level.
 
uconnell said:
Oklahoma. (State) ? Record is 18 and 13.
Expand ...

But but but best conference in America!

I'm no selection committee member or bracketologist, but some of these make me scratch my head.
 
Football is the driving force...Lew Perkins knew this in 25 yrs ago when, he said we need to go D1 in Football. Yes, our football team is not good, now, but football is where the money is. The Big East is not a good fit anymore and wont take us. They are all catholic bball schools not a good fit. WAKE up Nelson ur FOS!!!
 
Too bad TCU, Boise St. and San Diego State didn't join like they were going to. That would have helped basketball and football in this dumpster fire of a conference.
Things would have looked a lot better than they do today.
 
.-.
So what are our football aspirations? To be as marginal as a Rutgers in the hopes that the B1G may some day take us? Seems like a huge waste of time and money plus if CT residents want our football fix we all just follow a real team like the Patriots. Football at UConn seems like a fools errand to me. We have a better chance at getting on ESPN and increasing UConn's exposure by scrapping football and starting a D1 Lacrosse program.
 
don't blame the conference, blame a biased selfish ignorant committee

my guess is the AAC is yet to have representation on the committee
 
The 2014-15 NCAA men's basketball tournament selection committee is chaired byUtah State AD Scott Barnes. He will be the one tasked with doing the television interviews and defending the 68-team field after it is announced on the Selection Show on CBS.

Barnes' Vice Chairman is Oklahoma AD Joe Castiglione. He will serve as chairman for the 2015-16 season.

Here is a complete list of the rest of the 2014-15 NCAA men's basketball tournament committee:

  • LSU AD Joe Alleva
  • Michigan State AD Mark Hollis
  • Conference USA associate commissioner Judy MacLeod
  • Creighton AD Bruce Rasmussen
  • Northeastern AD Peter Roby
  • UNC-Asheville AD Janet Cone
  • Stanford AD Bernard Muir
  • BYU AD Tom Holmoe
 
LOL at Waylon thumping his chest about his prediction of football dragging down the basketball coming to fruition while they are still the defending national champions.

You seriously cannot make up Waylon Smithers.
 
SaeHusky said:
Unreal - Temple had an RPI of 34 - The longer we stay - we will be truly screwed. Recruits aren't going to leagues that give out 2 bids. Can't we stay in American for football and return to Big East for all other sports?
Expand ...
No
 
Jimmy Serrano said:
LOL at Waylon thumping his chest about his prediction of football dragging down the basketball coming to fruition while they are still the defending national champions.

You seriously cannot make up Waylon Smithers.
Expand ...

The AAC got 2 bids when it deserved 4. You really showed me.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
UCLA got in because they only lost to Arizona by 6. That is what the Chair of the Selection Committee said.
Expand ...

Jeez, if they were only going to look at one game, I wish it would have been the Temple-Kansas game. Much better rationale for including one team over the other.
 
I'm almost thankful we didn't beat some combination of Yale/Houston/Texas or this Board would be out of control if we got snubbed like Temple.
 
Nelson has NEVER one time put together a proposed Independent football which was his solution for years.

Now he is proposing to drop football all together to join the BE.

The only way to save us long term is football and that's only going to be done in the AAC.
 
Larry Brown talking about Temple, UConn and Tulsa:

"I was hoping they would recognize our conference. Those three teams deserve to be in," SMU coach Larry Brown said. "We have to do a better job of figuring out who sits on that board. I guess they look at our league like it's not very good."

I think Temple deserved to be in. UCLA was terrible this year. The committee clearly threw a bone to the PAC, which as a conference, is just bad. Unfortunately it's a rigged game and there is bias. The AAC needs to be 10%-15% better on paper to compete for the same spot.

Cincy needs to upset Kentucky (which has been on the ropes by worse teams), and SMU needs to find a way into the final four to help build some credibility. A good performance in the NIT by Temple, Tulsa and UConn would also help.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
The AAC got 2 bids when it deserved 4. You really showed me.
Expand ...
The AAC got 2 and deserved 3. Last year it got 4 and deserved 5...although I thought last year's snub was more egregious.

Tulsa has little to complain about. Beat someone out of conference.

They got beat by 19 by Oklahoma
By 15 by Oklahoma State
By 20 by Wichita State
By 20 by a 15-20 Auburn team
By 9 by ORAL ROBERTS
and by a DII team

That's horrid, and not a team worthy of the NCAAs. They played some 3 good OOC teams and got killed by all 3. And then got beat by some bad ones too.

Temple I'm more sympathetic to, especially since they were missing key players. They also played some teams: Kansas, Duke, Villanova. But the rest of their OOC was pretty weak, and while they beat Kansas, Duke (by 20) and Villanova (by 23) blew their doors off. And they lost to a terrible St. Joe's team and a bad UNLV team.

This conference doesn't have to win all it's OOC games. But it's best teams have to win the games they should, and show in the games they probably shouldn't.
 
.-.
Huskies2324 said:
So what are our football aspirations? To be as marginal as a Rutgers in the hopes that the B1G may some day take us? Seems like a huge waste of time and money plus if CT residents want our football fix we all just follow a real team like the Patriots. Football at UConn seems like a fools errand to me. We have a better chance at getting on ESPN and increasing UConn's exposure by scrapping football and starting a D1 Lacrosse program.
Expand ...

Definitely on-board for the lacrosse team going back to D1.
 
CallMeBruce said:
Definitely on-board for the lacrosse team going back to D1.
Expand ...
Get the programs the B1G runs and get them D1. No team will ever be a full B1G member because of lacrosse. But it's a popular sport in the northeast, and it is growing. It couldn't hurt.

Just like hockey doesn't hurt.

Just like our basketball helps and is the only reason we are in the discussion tangentially.

Just like our academic growth and national profile makes us more palatable to the AAU.

If we get our football back to where it was in the late 2000s, and with our location (straddling NYC with Rutgers in a populous region), we have a real shot.

But we need football to have some years. This conference isn't good. And we've had some very good years in a much better conference. So it is certainly possible.

The other things just make us look better.
 
The AAC certainly put themselves at risk over the course the season with bad losses and missed opportunities, which is dangerous when you consider the bias involved in the process and the metrics. Having said that, the top 6 AAC teams unfairly get very little respect.

If you're a fan of RPI consider this. The top 6 of 11 teams in the AAC have, proportionally, a better baseline than the PAC and SEC. For instance, the 6th best team in the PAC comes in at (95) and the 7th best team at (102), while Memphis comes in at (83). Even the eighth best team in the Big Ten (Illinois at 73) is only somewhat better than Memphis. AAC victories among the top 55% in the AAC are not viewed the same way as they are in a P5 conferences. What contributes to this marginalization is the really bad RPI of the bottom 5 teams. The RPI's of the top 6 teams are further diluted by playing against 10 games against 200+ RPI teams (and the associated risk of a bad loss). The irony, is that playing bad teams doesn't necessarily make you any worse, even it says so on paper. The good news, the bottom 5 teams will improve in the next 2-3 years. The bad news, we have to stick around for 2-3 more years to reap any benefit.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
The AAC got 2 bids when it deserved 4. You really showed me.
Expand ...

Oh so you are the only one saying the AAC is a terrible conference for UConn to be affiliated with? That's new. Haven't heard anyone state that yet. Incredible insight.

What you do not seem to understand is that the athletic program is dead whether we are in the Big East or the AAC. Our only ticket out is football. It's P5 or bust. Can you name the only P5 school without a football program?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
That money is gone. We could invest another $200 million and the ACC and Big 10 are not going to take us as long as we are irrelevant in this spithole of a league. This league is a long term loser. I don't know how much more evidence you need of that. Do I need to dig up the thread from last year where 2/3's of this board tried to argue the American was just as good a league as the Big East for UConn?

The only way the Big 10 or ACC take us is if we remain a top tier hoops program. So we need to do whatever we have to in order to make that happen, or just pack it in now and find a northern league we can join to cut travel costs.
Expand ...
Then we need to do whatever we have to in order to make that happen. I think it is doable. If the AAC is a two bid league we have to be one of those two to make it. The schedule is right. The roster is not. That has to be fixed by getting people on staff who can recruit. It is a fixable problem. There's no difference between packing it in now, or packing it in 10 years from now, so why not give it 10 years before ragequitting?
 
junglehusky said:
Then we need to do whatever we have to in order to make that happen. I think it is doable. If the AAC is a two bid league we have to be one of those two to make it. The schedule is right. The roster is not. That has to be fixed by getting people on staff who can recruit. It is a fixable problem. There's no difference between packing it in now, or packing it in 10 years from now, so why not give it 10 years before ragequitting?
Expand ...
I think the conference will consistently be a 4-5 bid conference, provided the bottom teams stop sucking.

That's not old Big East, but it is on par or better than the PAC, SEC, BE most years.
 
.-.
The PAC12 only got 2 bids in 2012 so it isn't totally all doom and gloom. Hopefully the bottom feeders start improving their schedules so the conference as a whole has more respect from the NCAA selection committee.
 
I agree the AAC needs to do better OOC and schedule better. But you have to conclude an obvious bias when UCLA and Indiana get in while Temple and CSU are left out. Obviously they were concerned given the AAC's lack of impact on the tourney last year. It's hard to question their competence because they know exactly what they're doing twisting the criteria to suit their financial interests. The only factor left is a question of integrity but the media isn't in a position to ask tough questions so the kids just have to take the hit.
 
3rdbass said:
The PAC12 only got 2 bids in 2012 so it isn't totally all doom and gloom. Hopefully the bottom feeders start improving their schedules so the conference as a whole has more respect from the NCAA selection committee.
Expand ...
yes, and that's where Aresco has to step in with those schools and make it happen. This is something the conference can control now, and needs to do. The bottom of the conference has to get closer to the top.
 
dtrumpet said:
yes, and that's where Aresco has to step in with those schools and make it happen. This is something the conference can control now, and needs to do. The bottom of the conference has to get closer to the top.
Expand ...

Problem is Temple and CSU had solid RPI's and Temples worst losses were with a shorthanded roster. There really isn't that scheduling excuse for the NCAA to fall back on. Most of their losses were to high quality teams otherwise.
 
Colorado State 27-6 Undefeated in Conference Play, beat SDSU and Boise State.

Wow, what did they do wrong? More importantly why does UCLA deserve to bump them? Only 6 losses and UCLA had more than twice that @ 17 losses.

Makes our case look horridly insufficient.

I know we are not used to being on the outside looking in, but I now have compassion to the kids who get screwed 'royally'. I am SMU's biggest fan right now.
 
tzznandrew said:
I think the conference will consistently be a 4-5 bid conference, provided the bottom teams stop sucking.

That's not old Big East, but it is on par or better than the PAC, SEC, BE most years.
Expand ...

I'm worried long term about programs like SMU. We need them to be good and once Larry Brown retires (which can't be that far down the line) it's almost guaranteed that they're going to slide deep back into irrelevancy.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,158
Messages
4,555,351
Members
10,440
Latest member
Regan23


Top Bottom