BASKETBALL Seeding issue exposes larger problem

[RaiderDawg78]

If you have not read Casey's front page article, then take time to read it. Great job. Casey

I think the biggest issue for our conference is OOC scheduling. It's terrible. As much as I have complained about our scheduling in the past, we are the cream of the crop in C-USA. C-USA schools schedule entirely too many RPI 200 or worse non-confernce games.

The average C-USA team played 5 OOC games against RPI 200+ teams. Over half of UAB, UTSA, UTEP, and FIU's OOC games were against RPI 200+ schools. MT was the only school to play less than 3 OOC games against RPI 200+ schools (we played against 1).

I agree with Casey 100%. C-USA must have a scheduling mandate, like other conferences. Our schools must not be allowed to schedule games against schools that had an RPI of 200+ the previous year. Additionally, there must a concerted effort to schedule at least 5 games against RPI Top 50 teams. Only 2 C-USA schools played 3 Top 50 RPI schools. Five (5!!!!) C-USA schools did not play a single Top 50 school. For comparison, 3 of the last 4 in schools, played 15, 11, and 9 games, respectively against RPI 1-50 schools.

For everyone that is mad MT is a 15 seed, the conference is doing it to ourselves. MT and UAB should both be in the NCAA tournament this season; both are as good as teams on the 10 - 12 seed lines. C-USA needs to correct this fixable problem.

 

[MTBig Blue]

The scary thing is that no mid-major teams received at-large bids this year...NONE! I really don't count the AAC or A-10 as mid majors.

While we do have a problem with scheduling in our conference, this selection committee got a lot of things wrong this year.

 

[MTFNBY5]

I'm really, really glad that the men's program gets to hang a banner after so many years and here's to hoping for many more in the upcoming years. I'm happy for Kermit and all involved in the program. The last four years have been a fun time to be a Blue Raider basketball fan.

But (You knew a but was coming) the recent success is tempered with where the program, and by extension C-USA, is status wise. Forget the 15 seed. For MT to be in a "one bid" league along with our in-state so-called "&$%-major" friends in the OVC, A-Sun, and SoCon, not to mention The Belt we just moved "up" from, is unacceptable to this long-suffering fan.

I was fortunate to become a fan during the years of the OVC's greatest success. (Can't say for sure, didn't keep up at the time, but IIRC one ranking had the conference among the top 10 during some of the years when I became a fan) Once I realized the conference was fading in status and reputation it was too late for me, I was already a Blue Raider fan whose most fervent wish was for my team and its conference, somehow, to regain and possibly even exceed previous standing in basketball. I was so envious when WKU left the OVC for The Belt (a conference formed in large measure to provide a place for high-achieving basketball programs w/o D-1 FB to try to maintain status in BkB) and would have wished the same for MT no matter how it affected MT FB. It has been a real concern as UT-C, TSU, UT-M, Belmont and Lipscomb have all moved up to D-1 and become our equals in perception and status while our program rocked along in mediocrity.

I have, over the recent few years, been overjoyed to see MT make moves which I thought could possibly cause us to separate from the other eight in-state $#%-majors and become perceived as one of the in-state Big 4 along with Memphis and the two $EC schools.

> I hoped the move to D-1 FB would drag the basketball program up to a higher level - NOT

> I thought the entrance to the once-strong in basketball Sun Belt would provide momentum up - NOT

> I just knew that moving "up" to C-USA would bring us entry to a conference with status and two or three bids each year - NOT

It may be impossible, primarily because of budget, for a league made up of schools such as those now in C-USA to have D-1 FB and respectable (A-10 level - where C-USA was a few short years ago) basketball. I don't know. I do know that this fan finds it frustrating that MT has grown so much, so much has been invested, and we are still in a one-bid basketball league. As far as basketball is concerned we are still at the OVC level. It's sad, so sad.

 

[C-Bow]

If you have not read Casey's front page article, then take time to read it. Great job. Casey

Appreciate the kind words. I think MacLeod most certainly needs to address this sooner rather than later. To be ranked 22 out of 32 in RPI and 21st in SOS is absurd to me. Not saying CUSA needs to land in the top 10, but certainly shoot for something like that!

A mandate amongst the schools is certainly the easiest way to go. There needs to be a concerted effort by everyone involve .

 

[Blueraider_Mike]

There is another theory on the CUSA board about winning %. You can schedule tougher but if you don't win it hurts you.

I think the NCAA tourney is just like the College FB world, the select few get the coveted spots.

You know we can do something about this, we can win on Friday. Just a thought.

 

[SpaceRaider]

I heard a bit of a Coach Calipari rant about mis-seeding and I think some of what he said about the committee's checklist being a moving target. IIRC, it used to your record in the last ten games, then it was strength of schedule , then it was road games, no bad losses. Whatever is done, the committee will adjust to move the finish line.

I agree somethings need to be changed. I think the tournament needs to be cut down to eight or six or even four. Standings could be used for the top half of conf tourney seeds and the other half drawn from the highest remaining rpis in the conference. The conference can draw up all the guidelines and rules for scheduling up, but if there are no consequences for not doing it, then all will be meaningless.

As far as moving up in conferences, while it has been about moving up, it's also been about staying afloat, treading water, keeping pace with our piers.

 

[Raiderclyde]

I like a top 8 tournament with top two seeds getting double byes and third and fourth place teams getting one bye. It's not perfect and upsets happen (see Belmont). But the odds are better for the top two to make it to the championship game and it provides incentives to win the conference. Ties are settled with head to head or overall record. I see no value in the #13 seed in C-USA playing the #12 for the right to play #5 in the second round. Five games in five days? That is a little much for a 7-22 team or similar record. We love Cinderella, but there are limits to what is practical and we have to work on SOS getting out of the 300s. C-USA has become too much like the OVC to the point as to why we ever joined...I guess football, but looking at last three years, it's hard to prove that basketball is really any better. The 15 seed didn't surprise me, as we deserved a little better. A nine-loss record won't get much national respect in a non power Conference.

 

[JohnDavidBlue]

At some point you have to look in the mirror and realize the problem is you.

"As far as basketball is concerned we are still at the OVC level. It's sad, so sad."

If we have different conference logos on our jersey and we have the same problem then the problem is us and the ilk we run with.