Jump to content

halfmanhalfbronco

Moderator
  • Posts

    53,063
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    407

Posts posted by halfmanhalfbronco

  1. On 3/20/2024 at 4:35 PM, Old_SD_Dude said:

    None of this addresses the original question, which was will the change to a 20-game conference schedule improve our seeding. You’ve made a really good case for why it’s good for your school’s scheduling and of course taken your shots at SDSU over issues that had nothing to do with basketball, but you haven’t addressed the original question at all. The selection committee and a very substantial majority on here disagree with you. 

    A 20 game schedule the past 3 years would have improved our metrics.  How about that?  A 20 game schedule does not reduce opportunities as those opportunities are owned by the P5 and they are reducing them

    The simple fact is nobody here can explain how this will reduce OOC opportunities against resume building teams.  All tSDSUf has accomplished is showing they disrespect the MWC so much they think the lost P5 opportunities are better made up by other mid major opportunities than the average MWC home game.

    SDSU was the only no vote because their incompetent leadership is doing what they do, thinking SDSU is waaaaaay better off than reality

  2. On 3/20/2024 at 2:21 PM, BoiseStateOfMind said:

    I've heard that before. Personally, I'm not getting my hopes up too high no matter who's on the roster, what seed we get or who we play, until the team doesn't come out looking like they're scared shitless in the opening minutes of their first game. After the last two years, I firmly believe now that this program has a mental block in the tournament. So far, Rice has had no answers. The longer the streak goes, the more I worry that it will start to perpetuate itself by heaping more pressure on the players to finally get that win.

    Fingers crossed that today is the day this all changes, but with the record being what it is, I have to actually see it.

    My bones are not good enough for you?

    We are winning this +++++ing game.

    • Cheers 1
  3. On 3/20/2024 at 3:14 PM, MWC said:

    This is a good point about fairness.    Nevada not getting Ut. State at home could have cost them a share of the title.  

    So to me the issue is, what is more important:

    1.  Conference title 

    2.  Ncaa tournament.  # of teams and seeding.

    The fact that you say this may hurt SDSU and then call them names for wanting this to help the possibility of getting to the ncaa tournament is not fair.

     

     

     

    I think this will most likely be a net benefit to the conference AND SDSU by extension.  I think SDSU believes this will hurt them and voted accordingly.  I do not believe they think an 18 game schedule is in the best interest on the entire conference moving forward, which is fine, and they should always vote for themselves.

    I get WHY SDSU thinks it will hurt them slightly.  I just don't think it will.  Cut a non D1 buy game and replace it with the best team that will have you and your overall schedule ill be an upgrade.  Sorry about the lost buy game, I guess?  You still have one more....

  4. On 3/20/2024 at 3:03 PM, Spaztecs said:

    Yes it is simple.

    Get used to seeing less MW invites and lower seeding from here on out. It's what the ten "smart" Schools want.

    You know our coaches and Athletic Directors have been aligning themselves about best scheduling practices for years now, right?  This was recently reported on.  Our AD's and leadership and stat nerds working at for the departments and conference have all been on the same page, evaluating the ever changing processes and metrics?  Again, this was recently reported on.  This cooperation and alignment of conference vision has culminated in the MWC doing the unspeakable, getting  bids.

    Clearly we have further adjusting to do but I REALLY like this conference leadership structure, outside of a few exceptions.  

    Based on what I have seen from our leadership, and my own easy logic, I think we made the right vote.

     

  5. On 3/20/2024 at 2:54 PM, AztecSU said:

    It's not complicated. Like it or not, a large portion of the conf has their wins at home measured differently because of elevation. What increasing conf games does limits the amount of games not at elevation we can all log in exchange for games we now know the committee def downgrades. Its an unfortunately reality for the MW but its reality. 

    The committee only downgrades those wins for the MWC though.  They did not have that same logic for any other conference.  The MWC was treated singularly, what they held against us they did not hold against Gonzaga, Saint Marrys, FAU, and so many P5s.  We had a really good OOC performance.  That is why we had so many highly ranked teams heading into conference play.

    I get your point but changing what should be sound scheduling logic because the MWC was held to standards when it came to seeding as an entire conference others were not is some +++++ing shit that sits gross.

  6. On 3/20/2024 at 2:47 PM, Beach Bully said:

    If you truly can’t get P4 teams, which you still can, then the solution is to schedule top G5 teams, not more games against Wyoming and San Jose.   SDSU played Gonzaga, st Mary’s, Grand Canyon, and of course LONG BEACH STATE.  All of them made the tourney, all G5.  Plus played BYU, Stanford, cal. Washington
     

    Nevada played zero non-conference games against teams in the NCAA tournament.  

    USU played Zero non-conference games against tourney teams

     Colorado state played  Creighton, st. Mary’s, and Colorado

     there are good G5 teams looking for games.  You shouldn’t punish your top teams soo teams can gain a little in attendance money

     your sdsu hatred is clouding your judgement.  If mwc had played 20 this year boise doesn’t make the tourney

     

     

     

    And the number of OOC games MWC teams have to schedule has nothing to do with your gripes on MWC teams OOC schedules this year.  You get that, right?  The two are not related?

    Yes, in light of the expected reduction in OOC availability among the P5 we want to play the best teams possible in their place.  We believe going forward that is more than likely to be MWC teams, as we expect to be a top basketball conference most years moving forward, or right there close to it.

    This is a better option than an A-10 or AAC scheduling agreement IMO given the benefits that 1, are a better conference than they are and two an extra conference home game.

    It's not earth shattering either way, but I think the positives outweigh the negatives and highlights a conference leadership body that is finally anticipating acting proactively to benefit the majority of institutions and voting accordingly.

    The MWC has been on fire this past year.  Completely punked the Pac 2 into forcing a full merger while cashing their checks and getting home and homes.  Punked SDSU into paying all legal fees.  The MWC ADs and coaches were aligned in OOC scheduling per reporting, resulting in 6 bids.

    Our current leadership seems to have it to-+++++ing-gether, looking at myriad data points in all decisions and making calculated concise decisions.  I trust the conference consensus aligns with my common sense and SDSU is wrong in what is best for all of us.  Call me crazy.

  7. On 3/20/2024 at 2:29 PM, MWC said:

    This will also take away a week that OCC games can be scheduled.  

    And that week is a week that the P5 will not be scheduling OOC games.  That's the point.  

    There is not a school here that will not be able to schedule as many P5 teams that are willing to schedule them because of the reduction in OOC games.

    We get a balanced conference schedule so it is "fair".  We get an extra conference home game (which as we have seen for years are lite and huge draws, way bigger on average than our OOC home games), and on good years more Q1 and 2 opportunities than we would have been able to schedule, while reducing the scheduling burden.

    SDSU might be slightly, worse off due to their ability to schedule, reputation and location, the rest of us will be slightly better off and voted accordingly.

    Seems simple enough.

  8. SDSU Fans: "OOC wins a and strength of schedule are important to the committee"

    Others: "Yes, cut out a non D1 buy in game and your ability to schedule OOC teams won't be impacted by this decision.  It will probably be impacted though by fewer opportunities to schedule them as they all move to more conference games"

    SDSU Fans:  "Buy in games are important though, need those easy games for chemistry"

    SUDS fans trying to have it both ways here.  The MWC games are garbage and hurt their  tournament but also this makes their schedule harder because they would have to eliminate a buy game to have the same OOC scheduling opportunities they currently do in a fantasy world where the opportunities to do so remain static.

     

     

    • Like 1
  9. On 3/20/2024 at 1:52 PM, roughrider said:

    I love your optimism.  I have been crushed too many times in the Dance and have felt much better going in than this year.

    Next year's team is going to win more than one game in the Dance.  This year's team lacks any level of consistency at PG and that's a killer post season.

    I feel it in my bones.  My bones are never wrong.

    • Haha 1
  10. On 3/20/2024 at 1:55 PM, AztecSU said:

     

    MW games on the road at elevation are less important than out of conference games against P5 programs. You are so emotional about SDSU that I feel embarrassed for you, halfman. 

    And nobody has pointed out how this is going to impact scheduling P5 teams.  P5 teams are going to have less games to schedule against us.  This seems a counter to that as we expect the average MWC game to be of higher quality than what we would be able to replace the reduced P5 OOC games with.  

    That logic just seems sound.  We are not taking away the top opportunities or even the one off non D1 game.  We are taking the burden off trying to find LMU and Idaho State at the last minute and replacing it with what will on average be higher quality games for our resumes and a slightly better home schedule for our fans.

     

    • Like 1
  11. On 3/20/2024 at 1:23 PM, Beach Bully said:

    And thinking like this is why Boise has never won a tourney game.  In this age of roster fluidity via the transfer portal, buy games are important to get squads to gel.

    Tons of ways to gel you would not miss a beat by a buy in game a year.  Closed scrimmages, Boise played 4 games in Canada this summer, etc...A buy game won't help you gel more than that.  And that is the ONLY thing these dumb ass SDSU fans can point to that they would lose that they would not otherise.  A buy game a year.  The horror.  The Aztecs sacrificing a buy game is a small price to pay for the modest benefit it will provide the MWC and our athletic departments.

    On 3/20/2024 at 1:23 PM, Beach Bully said:

     Also, the big 12 is only expanding to 20 games because they have 16 conference teams next year, you have 11.   That is the only reason why they are expanding and they wouldn’t expand otherwise.

    That's not the point.  In fact it reinforces mine.  That is 32 less OOC games a year the Big 12 will be scheduling.  We are looking at hundreds of less OOC games a year scheduled by the top conferences cumulatively in the coming years. 

    Any limitation in MWC school scheduling "up" will come from less opportunities from those conferences with no connection to the MWC to do so.  

    This is not taking away our ability to schedule signature games that will bolster NCAA tourney bid hopes.  It is, in theory, giving our teams better games by easing the scheduling burden most of us face so we don't have to add an LMU at the last minute but instead get an extra home game against a conference team.  Home games are huge for us.

    The only single argument any SDSU clown has put forth is "we all need body bag buy games for chemistry and this will make our schedule harder".

    Weak as +++++ing +++++ +++++

  12. On 3/20/2024 at 12:05 PM, MWC said:

    This is the key point, IMO.

    The decision is not about making the conference better or getting more teams in the tourney. 

    This just makes the the job of the president, AD, etc. easier. 

    Helps ease of scheduling for sure.  Plus most years you get a quality home game you would not otherwise so increases the value of season tickets as well.

    In years like this or the past two it will help in the Q1/2 metrics as a whole for the conference.  In years we suck like 5 years ago it could cost us a bid.

    It's a very small gamble on ourselves while making a little more money due to more quality home games and easing the scheming burden.

    Only downside is if teams like SDSU might lose a buy game.  The horror.  Lulz

  13. On 3/20/2024 at 9:19 AM, Beach Bully said:

    You do realize that both the SEC and big 12 elected to only play 18 conference games and you do realize that they have the most teams in the tournament, right?!?   Don’t confuse football and basketball.  If anything the P2 football teams will break off and olympic sports will become more regionalized.  Plus, the numbers say you’re wrong:

    Sec and Big 12 have 8 teams in tourney and play 18 conference games. MWC has 6 teams in and plays 18 conference games.

     Meanwhile, conferences that play 20 conference games put the least amount of teams in.  B1G 6 teams, ACC 5 teams, PAC 4 teams, Big East 3 teams.

    You can’t make conference policy based upon your lowest common denominator and be successful.   SDSU will nut it up and play power teams on the road, just like Gonzaga did.  Can usu and New Mexico say the same?

    Not for long....

    https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/38678737/big-12-expects-play-20-men-basketball-18-women-games

    Again not sure why SDSU fans like @East Coast Aztec think this will impact the ability to schedule quality.  It won't.

    The MWC increasing to a 20 game conference schedule won't impact MWC teams OOC strength of schedule or number of quality OOC opportunities.  You will still get the number of quality OOC opportunities you would get otherwise.  Oh wait ECA admitted that more or less  the worst case scenario is SDSU loses a buy game.  Boo +++++ing hoo.

     

    • Facepalm 1
×
×
  • Create New...