2017-2018 Season

[justinhub2003]

Originally Posted by waterhead

The top seeded teams are from power conferences. They have the money to pay for better buy games. Not only do they have the benefit of better conference games but they don't have scheduling issues.

You don't think Cronin would like to schedule more 200+ games? Do you not think he hasn't asked? I am happy we can get the top 25 games home and away...our administration is not paying high dollar buy games.

Then the fans are to blame IMO. if our coach puts a top 25 team in our new arena and we don't sell it out every year then we don't deserve a top 25 team. Teams are funded by their fans and if UC fans are bad fans then no one can complain about scheduling or the product on the court.

[cincyguy13]

Originally Posted by waterhead

I just gave you examples. I can go back more years and give you more examples. The committee loves the power conferences...that doesn't mean they hate UC in particular. They want to see blue bloods. It's good for TV etc.

I also think we could do a better job of becoming known as a tourney team and that would help our chances with future seeding but it's hard to do when you get under seeded and face other under seeded teams. We also have to break that trend.

Do you think Xavier or Uconn have ever had these thoughts. they've had success as lower seeds. yes, Xavier has gotten breaks but the committee can't predict those

[waterhead]

Originally Posted by justinhub2003

I mean you guys are completely ignoring what i am saying.

For us to be a 1-4 seed with 4 300+ teams on the schedule we will need to severely beat the odds. The 2 teams that were exceptions to the rule were from the ACC.

My case is:

1. We didn't game the RPI at all
   [*]historically you have a absolutely rare chance of a protected seed with 4+ 300 games
2. UC's overall SOS will be WORSE than last years dispite the great games on the schedule
3. Our conference will be much improved but KP still predicts were the 7th best conference by a pretty safe margin.
4. Currently we don't have a ton of top 50 games on our schedule. Hopefully those teams in the 60's can move up. But not all will.

IMO for us to really get respect we need to schedule the top end games like we did this years and next year but sub those 300+ teams with buy games from 150-250. Those are hugely winnable games and they weigh much heavier on SOS. Look at Xavier for example, I hate them, but yea their AD gets and understands gamining the RPI. They dont have 2 games nearly as good as UCLA and Florida and yet, their NON conference SOS will be much better than ours. They understand that those back end teams affect your overall SOS.

You can probably say the same thing about "historically the top 4 seeds have more top 50 rpi games or wins. I really don't think the 300+ thing is all that relevant. It does have a small impact I am sure.

[cincyguy13]

Originally Posted by justinhub2003

wow dude. I AM NOT SAYING ITS A REFLECTION OF THE TALENT ON THE TEAM OR ANYTHING OF THE SORT. I am saying that FACTUALLY us getting a top 4 seed with 4 300+ teams is almost unprecedented.

I'm also saying that that we really need to go 4-1 against our top teams. Other wise if we go 3-2 or god forbid 2-3 then it will mean between 35 and 40% of our non conference wins came against teams Bellarmine would beat.


My only hope is that the selection committee recognizes that we are sharing an arena and that we had a pretty tough time getting high quality buy games. if they give us that benefit we might be fine.


There is no other good reason in the world for us to be playing 4 300+ teams when we are this good. And if this continues next year, someone needs fired because they don't understand basketball scheduling in the slightest

I didn't say anything about talent or a reflection of our team. I said if we win games, we control our own destiny. That's it. maybe we are agreeing, I have no idea anymore

[waterhead]

Originally Posted by cincyguy13

Do you think Xavier or Uconn have ever had these thoughts. they've had success as lower seeds. yes, Xavier has gotten breaks but the committee can't predict those

UCLA was ranked 3rd in AP and Coaches poll and got a 3 seed. We were ranked 15th and 18th and got a 6 seed. We were a potential 4 seed playing a potential 1 seed.

Maryland was #25 in AP and unranked in Coaches and got a 6 seed. Arizona was ranked 7th and got a 2 seed. Xavier got the bottom of both barrels.

[Jon Rycek]

I think one thing some people aren't realizing is that people's opinions of UC are changing. We are tagged to make runs all over the place, highest preseason ranking under Cronin. Probe yes by multiple people and outlets to make the FF. We aren't the same in the eyes of the rest of the country and as we've seen in the past, opinion matters. Yes they are gonna use your record, top wins and so on. But they in the end are people and they t.e choosing based on what they thing and believe. We continue to change the perception of our team and this year that will work in our favor.

[cincyguy13]

Originally Posted by waterhead

UCLA was ranked 3rd in AP and Coaches poll and got a 3 seed. We were ranked 15th and 18th and got a 6 seed. We were a potential 4 seed playing a potential 1 seed.

Maryland was #25 in AP and unranked in Coaches and got a 6 seed. Arizona was ranked 7th and got a 2 seed. Xavier got the bottom of both barrels.

Arizona was great last year. They were bottom of the barrel? Lot of people’s pick to win it all but ok. You just played yourself

We played creighton, Harvard, st. Joe in the 1st rounds and lost to all 3. But the committee has to make sure they set up the tournament to mak it as hard as possible on us. Ok

[Jon Rycek]

Originally Posted by justinhub2003

Im not saying they care or they don't care. I just know in the last 4 years out of 64 combined possible 1-4 seeds just 2 of those teams played 4 300+ teams.

Maybe the committee doesn't care at all. But I do see a trend that top seeded teams don't play this many junk games. Keep in mind, a great portion of those 64 teams i mentioned come from power conferences with deep conference schedules. They could in theory play 300+ games and get away it; Yet they didn't. They chose not to play those kind of games.

Have you ever thought that to just be coincidence. We all know that the same teams tend to end up as 1 seeds. Maybe those school in general just don't schedule plus 300 teams.

[Jon Rycek]

Originally Posted by justinhub2003

I mean you guys are completely ignoring what i am saying.

For us to be a 1-4 seed with 4 300+ teams on the schedule we will need to severely beat the odds. The 2 teams that were exceptions to the rule were from the ACC.

My case is:

1. We didn't game the RPI at all
2. historically you have a absolutely rare chance of a protected seed with 4+ 300 games
3. UC's overall SOS will be WORSE than last years dispite the great games on the schedule
4. Our conference will be much improved but KP still predicts were the 7th best conference by a pretty safe margin.
5. Currently we don't have a ton of top 50 games on our schedule. Hopefully those teams in the 60's can move up. But not all will.

IMO for us to really get respect we need to schedule the top end games like we did this years and next year but sub those 300+ teams with buy games from 150-250. Those are hugely winnable games and they weigh much heavier on SOS. Look at Xavier for example, I hate them, but yea their AD gets and understands gamining the RPI. They dont have 2 games nearly as good as UCLA and Florida and yet, their NON conference SOS will be much better than ours. They understand that those back end teams affect your overall SOS.

I think we are all listening, just disagreeing with your reasoning. I think the committee cares much more about your quality wins. Top 100/50/25

[Jon Rycek]

Originally Posted by cincyguy13

Arizona was great last year. They were bottom of the barrel? Lot of people’s pick to win it all but ok. You just played yourself

We played creighton, Harvard, st. Joe in the 1st rounds and lost to all 3. But the committee has to make sure they set up the tournament to mak it as hard as possible on us. Ok

You cannot deny the difficulty of our games in the tournament. Is it a conspiracy, no probably not. But we've consistently had bad draws and are almost always scheduled to play out west. Last time I believe we actually played in the region was in Nashville and as you prlkbably remember we went to the sweet 16 that year.