MWC BB added games

[ProvoAggie]

31 minutes ago, Headbutt said:

So, SDSU could get a regular season championship over CSU based on forfeits?

While I'd normally have a problem with that, there is no way that SDSU would have lost to UNM had they played and the games in no way should have been canceled.

[thedude15]

16 minutes ago, FinnaSmash05 said:

Completely agree.

As an Aztec fan, it feels appropriate and justified.
From a different perspective, it seems like either the biggest coincidence in the world or a crafty way to accommodate certain schools amongst the contenders.

Hopefully, SDSU and CSU both make the NCAAT regardless of how things shake out. I'll be rooting for that to happen along with Boise and/or Utah St and think that would take a little bit of the stink off any of these interesting scheduling decisions.

If the goal is to have the most fair regular season champ they made the right choice. If the goal is to assure as many teams as possible to ncaat they took a gamble. I mean if bsu/sdsu/csu win all these games it is a slight benefit (basically all the games would not help resume other than csu or nv) but if even a single game is lost amoung that group it will hurt a lot. Could very easliy be difference from getting and at large bid or not.

[Aztec Since 88]

The only reason we a playing these games is because Hair and the MW are wanting to fulfill the TV contract obligations of games shown on TV.  This way the MW gets a full payout for this year.  If we had already met the TV obligations, I doubt they schedule any of the games.

[Bob]

1 hour ago, Headbutt said:

If things shake out that way, it'll come down to who played the most games between the two teams.  I get where an Aztec fan is good with it, but as a RAM fan you can see where we would feel we were shorted an opportunity while you were handed one.

Probably won't matter though, as it's all hypothetical right now.  Still plenty of ball to play.

I'd be concerned too. CSU hasn't won a championship in decades! You never know when this opportunity may arise for you guys again

[KingBronco]

4 hours ago, thedude15 said:

For the mw sake they better hope csu/bsu/sdsu win all those games. Only one game ([email protected]) would be a resume building in anyway and any loss for any of those teams would be devastating.

Also wonder if bsu or sdsu will try to add another ooc game. They play their one make game tues/wed so could still sch another game later in week if they want.

Yeah, BSU would be off for more than a week and SDSU right at a week prior to the MWCT as things stand right now...which probably isn't ideal. I would think both would at least explore adding an OOC game on the 5th/6th, but have no idea who either could schedule at this point...might need to be a non-D1 if they really want a tuneup.

[soupslam1]

3 hours ago, FinnaSmash05 said:

I posted this over on Aztec Mesa (so take the Aztec slant with a grain of salt) but this is my takeaway from the updated schedule and how it relates to conference championship/seeding:

SDSU now (fully) controls our own conference championship destiny.

With the New Mexico forfeits, we're now 13-3. So, if we sweep Boise and beat UNLV, that puts our conference record at 16-3.
If CSU, currently 11-3, also wins out against Air Force 2x, New Mexico and Nevada, their record will be 15-3.
First tiebreaker for conference seeding is winning %, so given 16>15, we'd have sole possession of the #1 seed. No other tiebreakers need to be applied.

Prior to the rescheduling of games and New Mexico forfeits, stay with me here, we needed to both sweep Boise AND have either CSU lose to Air Force or Utah State lose to Nevada (which would've given us the #1 seed tiebreaker because either CSU would have 4 losses or Boise would be the 3rd place team over Utah St. and our sweep over Boise would've given us the better head-to-head record vs. the next team in the standings, which is the first tiebreaker if teams have the same winning %). Yes, I thought about this a lot 
Even with us sweeping Boise, without one of those other things happening that was out of our control (CSU or Utah St. losing) and prior to the updated schedule, CSU would've had the tiebreaker over us (given without another loss, Utah State would be the 3rd place team who swept us and split with CSU).

IF we take care of business, the decision by the MWC will actually be one we're all glad about, assuming you care about conference championships as much as I do.

Yes, UNLV is a landmine, but the #1 seed gives us a banner for life and a better shot in the MWC tournament.
That's all in our control now.

IMO the MWC championship is nice, but is secondary to making the Dance. I’m hoping Boise State gets a split this weekend mainly for that reason. I see the Aztecs as being in regardless of this weekend. Not so much for Boise State. 

Its going to be a dog eat dog series like the games with USU were. This is the first time we’ve played the Aztecs where we can matchup in talent and athleticism. We’ve always had a couple of good players, but not the depth we have now. Our guys need to embrace the challenge. 

[thedude15]

15 minutes ago, KingBronco said:

Yeah, BSU would be off for more than a week and SDSU right at a week prior to the MWCT as things stand right now...which probably isn't ideal. I would think both would at least explore adding an OOC game on the 5th/6th, but have no idea who either could schedule at this point...might need to be a non-D1 if they really want a tuneup.

It won't happen but honestly sdsu/bsu just playing each other again that Saturday is probably the best realistic thing they could do resume wise. Well IF bsu/sdsu spilt their series this week and they both win their make up game next week. In that case a round 3 of bsu/sdsu would help both teams resumes. They would both already be ncaat locks regards of the outcome of the game. 

If one gets swept this week (or drops their make up game) then they would be more on edge at large bid wise and couldnt risk another loss.

[TrueAg]

3 hours ago, Headbutt said:

So, SDSU could get a regular season championship over CSU based on forfeits?

Are these supposed forfeits actually official somewhere or are SDSU fans just making claim for them? And what stops other teams from just claiming forfeit victories over opponents in games that won't happen. Does USU get a forfeit win over Wyoming for a game that won't occur?

[Headbutt]

9 minutes ago, TrueAg said:

Are these supposed forfeits actually official somewhere or are SDSU fans just making claim for them? And what stops other teams from just claiming forfeit victories over opponents in games that won't happen. Does USU get a forfeit win over Wyoming for a game that won't occur?

Yes.  Official forfeits that count as W's for final standings and tourney seedings, but are not recognized by the NCAA for Dance implications.

 

[jdw]

 

 

 

Geoff Grammer

 

@GeoffGrammer

·

8m

 

STRIKE THAT! Mountain Wet standings online have reverted BACK to show SDSU 11-3 & UNM 2-13. The "forfeits" will NOT show up, just used for seeding or reg. season champ and will NOT appear on standings, as they did when I posted pic below. The fixed link https://themw.com/standings.aspx?path=mbball

[FinnaSmash05]

1 hour ago, TrueAg said:

Are these supposed forfeits actually official somewhere or are SDSU fans just making claim for them? And what stops other teams from just claiming forfeit victories over opponents in games that won't happen. Does USU get a forfeit win over Wyoming for a game that won't occur?

As others have stated, the forfeits are official and according to the MWC press release:
https://themw.com/news/2021/2/23/mountain-west-announces-revised-mens-basketball-schedule.aspx

To your second question around why just the SDSU/UNM series are forfeits, it's also referenced in the press release: "The San Diego State at New Mexico series initially scheduled for Feb. 3 and 5 has been declared a “forfeit” by the Conference membership due to the circumstances involved."

My opinion (informed by Zeigler's and Grammer's various comments):
Those circumstances being New Mexico opted not to play the games without a directly-related COVID-reason for doing so. Emphasis on directly-related because UNM is essentially claiming that the lack of players available for the game is due to mental health reasons stemming from COVID and the restrictions/travel their team has faced. But because there were no COVID positives that led to the lack of available players, the conference views that decision not to play as a forfeit, as opposed to a COVID-related cancellation.

Asking honestly, any New Mexico fans that are more in the know have a difference in interpretation than mine?

[ProvoAggie]

2 hours ago, FinnaSmash05 said:

Emphasis on directly-related because UNM is essentially claiming that the lack of players available for the game is due to mental health reasons stemming from COVID and the restrictions/travel their team has faced. But because there were no COVID positives that led to the lack of available players, the conference views that decision not to play as a forfeit, as opposed to a COVID-related cancellation.

We don't know the full story on the USU/Wyoming cancelations but we do know that there were no positive tests in either program and that Wyomings coach mentioned watching out for his players mental health as well as a reason to not play those games. Based on your description, those games should have been declared a forfeit as well. I'm guessing that there are details of each situation that as fans we don't have access to. If the situations are actually the same but the conference is only counting 1 series as a forfeit then that would be pretty crappy.

[soupslam1]

45 minutes ago, ProvoAggie said:

We don't know the full story on the USU/Wyoming cancelations but we do know that there were no positive tests in either program and that Wyomings coach mentioned watching out for his players mental health as well as a reason to not play those games. Based on your description, those games should have been declared a forfeit as well. I'm guessing that there are details of each situation that as fans we don't have access to. If the situations are actually the same but the conference is only counting 1 series as a forfeit then that would be pretty crappy.

The conference appears to be making a lot of assumptions regarding the cancelled games. You would probably need a thorough investigation into every cancellation to arrive at the truth. To somewhat arbitrarily forfeit the UNM games with SDSU versus all the other cancellations makes the conference administration look like they are playing favorites. 

[thedude15]

8 hours ago, soupslam1 said:

The conference appears to be making a lot of assumptions regarding the cancelled games. You would probably need a thorough investigation into every cancellation to arrive at the truth. To somewhat arbitrarily forfeit the UNM games with SDSU versus all the other cancellations makes the conference administration look like they are playing favorites. 

Yep. I mean it seems like COVID cancelation policy came from individual schools/states not the conference. So they could have just been following local guidelines. 

And you got to be a tiny bit careful just dismissing mental health. I mean if NM says they cancel games because of mental health issues related to COVID you kinda have to take their word for it. Otherwise they might actually be able to claim discrimination. 

Without very clear guidelines (with no exceptions) from the conference it is basically a free for all.   

[BacksThePack]

Rams can't run from the Pack anymore now! You have to play us!

[Swoll Cracker]

34 minutes ago, BacksThePack said:

Rams can't run from the Pack anymore now! You have to play us!

Sorry we gave your program COVID.

Nice ethics Troy!