Professional and College Basketball Forums banner
61 - 80 of 83 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,283 Posts
The majority of UD’s losses against ranked teams that I cited above, were on neutral courts. The P5 won’t even play Gonzaga in Spokane.
Huh?
UNC played their last year.
A&M and Washington the year before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,653 Posts
I would think after 10 years of me saying the same shit, people would understand it and not make me explain it over and over.

Yes, the top teams of the BCS conferences are better than the top teams in the A-10. But aside from Top 10 powers, it's a marginal difference. Rutgers got ranked for the first time in like 20 years, and I said "They're smoke and mirrors, we kicked their ass without our best player and we're not NCAA material!" And they went into Big Ten play and would have made the NCAAs last year.

The reason we can go look at all the terrible records by A-10 schools against BCS teams over the last 20 years is because: We always have to play them on their terms. Their refs, their rims. Which isn't a massive difference, just you know a few calls where the refs subconscious bias is that the football schools are just better, and it adds up to 6-or-8 plays and we lose by 1 to 12. Every season until someone is 3-13 vs the BCS when you look at those stats.


The BCS looks so strong because their BOTTOM OF THE LEAGUE TEAMS are all buying games and getting good OOC records even though they aren't good teams. While we have our bottom going 3-9 or something.

And yes, I want the bottom of our league play the worst OOC SOS imaginable and go 10-2 at worst. (Duquesne has been excellent at bringing in OOC wins despite not being NCAA bubble material. We need everyone to do that).

The whole argument for the "Quad system" was that beating 75 on the road was just as hard as beating 25 at home; Because there's not very much talent difference between 25 and 75 at all.

You're ranked 25th or 75th based on the mathematics of conference affiliation and how Conference play effects RPI.


Western Kentucky was 39th in the RPI in 2008, at .5823. They went to the Sweet 16. That same .5823 RPI won't get you a Top 50 RPI anymore. As the BCS conference expansion consolidated power, their math increased, even though Nebraska basketball sucks. They just have to buy 8 games, play 20 Big Ten games and no one else can match their RPIs.

WKU is now in C-USA and it's basically impossible for C-USA to send 4 teams to the NCAAs, because what USED TO get you 4 teams slotted 30-50 (aka 6 conference games that would count as marquee wins), now gets you 4 teams slotted 45-70 and losing the the 4th place team knocks the 1st place team out instead of putting the 4th place team into serious bubble talk.

Remember how "12-5 upsets" were so popular to pick in your NCAA bracket? Since the BCS expanded...
The percentage of 15-vs-2 upsets has jumped from 1 every 4 years, to 1 every 2.5 years.
The percentage of 14-vs-3 upsets has jumped from 1 every 2 years to 1 every 1.3 years.
The percentage of 13-vs-4 upsets has jumped from 1 every 1.25 years to almost 1 per year (11 of 12)
The percentage of non-BCS 12 seeds vs 5 upsets has jumped from 1 every 1.0 year, to 1.4 every year.

The tournament has become FAR LESS INCLUSIVE, and the non-BCS teams getting in are doing MORE IMPRESSIVE DAMAGE. Because expanding the tournament to 68 teams with the First Four bumped them down a seed line!

The win percentage of BCS 11 seeds vs 6 seeds has plummeted at the same time; because those teams getting 11 seeds from BCS leagues weren't good enough to be in the NCAAs before and now they're getting free bids they don't deserve because of conference math.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,408 Posts
Bona since 2017-2018 season:

Wins: Maryland, Syracuse, UCLA, Rutgers
Losses: TCU, Florida, Syracuse

Of the 7, both against Syracuse were true road games and none were home games.

2019-2020 Rutgers went 11-9 in the Big Ten. (NCAA lock)
2018-2019 Syracuse went 10-8 in the ACC. (NCAA round of 64)
2017-2018 Maryland went 8-10 in the Big Ten. (CBI Invite)
2017-2018 TCU went 9-9 in the Big 12. (NCAA round of 64)
2017-2018 Syracuse went 8-10 in the ACC (NCAA Sweet Sixteen)
2017-2018 UCLA went 11-7 in the Pac 12 (NCAA first four)
2017-2018 Florida went 11-7 in the SEC (NCAA round of 32)

I think you're buying into hype more than anything.
So you found the best Bona team in the last 20 years and they went 3-2 against P5 teams. Oddly one from each conference. But I would expect that. We went 14-4 in the A10. The 2019 team finished top 4 in A10 and got blown out of the carrier dome.

I dont know when this turned into .500 P5 team waltzes in and destroys the A10. I dont think anyone said that. I know I said I believed they would be upper echelon. And when you're comparing bubbly P5s to top A10 teams you're proving that point, and that the power conferences are in fact deeper and stronger.

I love A10 ball, and mid-major ball. I just like basketball. I root for the non power team to beat the P5 every time. But I'm also a realist. Their middle tier teams line up with our upper teams almost 100% of the time. I really wish there were more chances to see them settle it on the court. Or maybe not. The records vs. P5 aren't exactly flattering.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,026 Posts
So you found the best Bona team in the last 20 years and they went 3-2 against P5 teams. Oddly one from each conference. But I would expect that. We went 14-4 in the A10. The 2019 team finished top 4 in A10 and got blown out of the carrier dome.

I dont know when this turned into .500 P5 team waltzes in and destroys the A10. I dont think anyone said that. I know I said I believed they would be upper echelon. And when you're comparing bubbly P5s to top A10 teams you're proving that point, and that the power conferences are in fact deeper and stronger.

I love A10 ball, and mid-major ball. I just like basketball. I root for the non power team to beat the P5 every time. But I'm also a realist. Their middle tier teams line up with our upper teams almost 100% of the time. I really wish there were more chances to see them settle it on the court. Or maybe not. The records vs. P5 aren't exactly flattering.
I hear what your saying, ‘85. But remember, that 2019 team that got blown out at the carrier dome was 4-8 when they went to Syracuse, and not a very good team at the time. Plus, none of the games in which the Bonnies went 4-4 were at home.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,408 Posts
I hear what your saying, ‘85. But remember, that 2019 team that got blown out at the carrier dome was 4-8 when they went to Syracuse, and not a very good team at the time. Plus, none of the games in which the Bonnies went 4-4 were at home.
I agree with that, 84, and it will almost always be on "their" terms when we get to play. I will try and find some time to get more concrete data and run back through some years with A10 teams.

You mention the 2019 squad not having hit their stride. The same could be said of a young Rutgers team that the 2020 squad blitzed for 35 minutes in Toronto and hung on to beat.

Here's some quick analysis of SBU off the bat:
2012 Bonnies, 10-6 A10, T3/14
@ VT, L 64-73 .. VT 4-12 ACC, T9/12
@ Illinois, L 43-48 .. Ill 4-12 B1G, T9/12
(N) NCSt, L 65-67 .. NCSt 9-7 ACC, T4/12

2018 Bonnies, 14-4 A10, 2/14
(N) MD, W 63-61 .. MD 8-10 B1G, 8/14
(N) TCU, L 79-89 .. TCU 9-9 Big12, 5/10
@ SU, W 60-57 .. SU 8-10 ACC, T10/15
(N) UCLA, W 65-58 .. UCLA 11-7 Pac12, T3/12
(N) FLA, L 77-62 .. FLA 11-7 SEC, 3/14

Unfortunately 2016 only got one shot, a close-ish game @ SU which got out of hand late with the SBU fouls.

The 2012 team was good. Granted they hit their stride late, but missed on all 3 P5 chances. The 2018 team was arguably the best Bona team since the 2000 team, and they had good results. The UCLA win was obviously the best on the list, they were the only true top half P5 team they beat.

I think it is completely fair to say your average/middling/bubbly P5's would compete with the top A10 teams. And that's fine. It doesn't bother me. But I can't take the "they won't play us, we're actually better" talk. Truth is we don't know. We don't get the home game chances. But take 2018 SU, they play a lot at the dome definitely, but they went 10-2 OOC with losses to KU (MSG) and SBU. Among the teams they beat OOC, Toledo 1st MAC W, Buffalo, 1st MAC E, EMU 2nd MAC W, Maryland (common opp.), UConn (MSG), and Georgetown on the road. That team was 10th place in the ACC. That Maryland team was 10-2 OOC losing to us and SU. The P5's win their OOC games. Yes, disclaimer, the majority are at home, but the slip-ups are very few and far between.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
I'm not sure why this is all so Bona-Centric. A lot of teams in the A10 get home and homes with P5 schools, but SBU is not one of them. Playing a P5 on a neutral site is hardly, "on their terms."

Bona rarely plays more than one P5 on the road. We played Rutgers in Toronto, Maryland and TCU on a neutral and the same thing with Florida in Lakeland.

I agree that the top four or five in the A10 can compete with the middle and bottom tier of most power conferences. Unfortunately, the A10 consists of 14 teams, most of which have not faired well amongst top competition.

We have shown we can get the games with most anyone, but now we have to win them. SBU is in a tough spot, but Pappano has shown the ability to put together a pretty nice schedule in the years where we are expecting to be really good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,283 Posts
JP, the only thing that seems counter-intuitive in your discussion, are the changing P5 schedules.
As they go to 20 conference games (with your .500 math taking over) they are bringing in less chances of building good %'s with their OOC schedule....because they're playing other P5's in exempt tourneys and intra P5 made-for-TV challenges (like the ACC v Big10).

The last items lower the number of chances that other conferences have of scheduling games with them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
So you found the best Bona team in the last 20 years and they went 3-2 against P5 teams. Oddly one from each conference. But I would expect that. We went 14-4 in the A10. The 2019 team finished top 4 in A10 and got blown out of the carrier dome.

I dont know when this turned into .500 P5 team waltzes in and destroys the A10. I dont think anyone said that. I know I said I believed they would be upper echelon. And when you're comparing bubbly P5s to top A10 teams you're proving that point, and that the power conferences are in fact deeper and stronger.

I love A10 ball, and mid-major ball. I just like basketball. I root for the non power team to beat the P5 every time. But I'm also a realist. Their middle tier teams line up with our upper teams almost 100% of the time. I really wish there were more chances to see them settle it on the court. Or maybe not. The records vs. P5 aren't exactly flattering.
But isn't that the point? The best Bona team over the last twenty years went 3-2 over the P5 with no home games. 4 of the 5 were against NCAA tourney teams including two 6 seeds and a bubble team that went to the sweet 16. The one that wasn't a tourney team wasn't a dreg. They played both ECC games without their NBA player.

They were sent to the first four and would have been snubbed had there have been couple of more bid thieves.

The records are bad, but in any given year a bubble quality A10 team would do just fine in the P5 getting regular home games including home games against the dregs, shots at the blue bloods/top teams that are 'only help you' games, and the extra NCAA unit revenue that comes with the entire scam.

Their recipe is pretty simple. Buy and destroy cupcakes. Get preferable situations against the A10s of the world and do pretty well. Then in conference play beat the worst teams, win a low percentage of games against the top teams (but the losses are thrown out), and then everyone else splits with each other.

Who was a better team? 2017-2018 Bona or Rutgers last year? I think it's pretty clear, but Rutgers was projected to be a 9 or 10 seed. Seems to me that even our own fans are starting to buy into the gaslighting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,408 Posts
But isn't that the point? The best Bona team over the last twenty years went 3-2 over the P5 with no home games. 4 of the 5 were against NCAA tourney teams including two 6 seeds and a bubble team that went to the sweet 16. The one that wasn't a tourney team wasn't a dreg. They played both ECC games without their NBA player.

They were sent to the first four and would have been snubbed had there have been couple of more bid thieves.

The records are bad, but in any given year a bubble quality A10 team would do just fine in the P5 getting regular home games including home games against the dregs, shots at the blue bloods/top teams that are 'only help you' games, and the extra NCAA unit revenue that comes with the entire scam.

Their recipe is pretty simple. Buy and destroy cupcakes. Get preferable situations against the A10s of the world and do pretty well. Then in conference play beat the worst teams, win a low percentage of games against the top teams (but the losses are thrown out), and then everyone else splits with each other.

Who was a better team? 2017-2018 Bona or Rutgers last year? I think it's pretty clear, but Rutgers was projected to be a 9 or 10 seed. Seems to me that even our own fans are starting to buy into the gaslighting.
Yes that is the point. You had to find the best Bona team in 20 years to find a favorable record against average P5's.

I don't disagree with much of anything you write here. But my whole point is when you have to compare the better A10 teams against middling P5 teams, you're proving the point that a middling P5 would fare just fine in the A10. And the best/better A10 teams would fare just fine in a P5. That's why the bubble gets loaded with good A10-ish teams and middling P5 teams.

BTW.. that Rutgers team went 8-2 OOC, they beat SFA, Seton Hall, destroyed UMass. There's definitely bias, no argument about that here. And I've always said that winning should be rewarded. A mid-major bubble team that wins should get preference over any P5 team that hasn't, especially if they've blown any of those OOC buy games at home. But we could help ourselves a lot too by going out and setting up favorable OOC schedules and getting our own gaudy winning percentages. That goes for everyone in the A10. If you think you can rip through a cupcake schedule then do it. Don't lose to Canisius in the RC. If we would collectively do that, we wouldn't have landmines that give the committee the excuse to take 7-11 Monster University over 14-4 Little Guy State.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,026 Posts
Now '85, don't go all jp on us here. My only point has been that Bona has done ok against the P-5's, considering there have been no home games. Comparing the top A-10 teams to the middling P-5's is ok considering the unfavorable scheduling for the A-10 schools like Bona. It's like comparing the top P-5's to the middling P-5's. The top P-5's lose sometimes when they have to play the middlings on the road during their conference schedules. We'll never know the true comparisons, because we'll never have the Virginia's coming to the RC, or Rochester for that matter. Hell, we can't even get Boston College to come to the RC or Rochester. So, the best we can hope for are the occasional road game, and hope for favorable neutral court tournament matchups.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Yes that is the point. You had to find the best Bona team in 20 years to find a favorable record against average P5's.

I don't disagree with much of anything you write here. But my whole point is when you have to compare the better A10 teams against middling P5 teams, you're proving the point that a middling P5 would fare just fine in the A10. And the best/better A10 teams would fare just fine in a P5. That's why the bubble gets loaded with good A10-ish teams and middling P5 teams.

BTW.. that Rutgers team went 8-2 OOC, they beat SFA, Seton Hall, destroyed UMass. There's definitely bias, no argument about that here. And I've always said that winning should be rewarded. A mid-major bubble team that wins should get preference over any P5 team that hasn't, especially if they've blown any of those OOC buy games at home. But we could help ourselves a lot too by going out and setting up favorable OOC schedules and getting our own gaudy winning percentages. That goes for everyone in the A10. If you think you can rip through a cupcake schedule then do it. Don't lose to Canisius in the RC. If we would collectively do that, we wouldn't have landmines that give the committee the excuse to take 7-11 Monster University over 14-4 Little Guy State.
We already know the top of the powers are better than the top of the A10 and their bottom is better than our bottom. If you want to argue that our top is better than their middle/bottom half, then I'd agree. Not helping your argument much by saying the No. 1 A10 can hang with the No. 8 in the ACC, but whatever.

GT, BC, Pitt, WF and Miami are a combined 14-3 against the A10 in the past five years with only four of the 17 matches coming in ACC gyms.

Why are we so obsessed with being compared with the P5s? They are better, but that doesn't necessarily have to crush our spirits.

This is a great basketball conference that should aim for 4-6 teams in the NCAAs most years with one or two additional going to the NIT.

If the A10, AAC, MVC, WCC and MWC were deeper conferences and performed better, THERE WOULDN'T BE 10 TEAMS COMING OUT OF ACC/B1G, etc. on a yearly basis.

There are more than enough teams out there to put together a legit OOC schedule. Tell the powers to fuck off if they only want to buy you.

Bonaventure wants a game with SU but they only want to play in Syracuse? Move on to a H&H with Loyola, or Boise or Belmont.

A 20-game A10 slate would benefit us all and make the OOC scheduling process much easier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Now '85, don't go all jp on us here. My only point has been that Bona has done ok against the P-5's, considering there have been no home games. Comparing the top A-10 teams to the middling P-5's is ok considering the unfavorable scheduling for the A-10 schools like Bona. It's like comparing the top P-5's to the middling P-5's. The top P-5's lose sometimes when they have to play the middlings on the road during their conference schedules. We'll never know the true comparisons, because we'll never have the Virginia's coming to the RC, or Rochester for that matter. Hell, we can't even get Boston College to come to the RC or Rochester. So, the best we can hope for are the occasional road game, and hope for favorable neutral court tournament matchups.
Again, that's ONLY a Bona problem.

Dayton, VCU, Richmond, GW, SLU, URI, SJU and UMass get home and homes with P5.

Why would you want to play BC in the RC? Can't we try to get into an agreement for H&H with a top mid major?

Is one road game at a mediocre P5 a year really that egregious? Maybe if we added a second team each year we could use that $$ for more home buy games.

Make the tourney more than twice in 20 years, and we will get into more quality exempt tournaments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,408 Posts
...Not helping your argument much by saying the No. 1 A10 can hang with the No. 8 in the ACC, but whatever.
What?!

What do you think my argument is? That example is exactly my argument. And why we have a bubble with #1 in the A10 and #8 in the ACC. Because they're on par many years.

...

On the other topic, your scheduling thoughts are exactly what we need.

ETA.. I want 2 buys games - "good losses" or resume building wins, parlay the payout into buying ourselves 5 or 6 decent, winnable home games and get ourselves the 10-2 OOC we need.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
What?!

What do you think my argument is? That example is exactly my argument. And why we have a bubble with #1 in the A10 and #8 in the ACC. Because they're on par many years.

...

On the other topic, your scheduling thoughts are exactly what we need.

ETA.. I want 2 buys games - "good losses" or resume building wins, parlay the payout into buying ourselves 5 or 6 decent, winnable home games and get ourselves the 10-2 OOC we need.
Sorry for the confusion, 85.

I meant to say if the main argument is that our No. 1 can hang with their No. 8, but not their 1,2,3 and 4, then that P5 is better, but it doesn't even matter.

And agree. We will play at Canisius, Siena and Niagara, but are offended by playing at Syracuse, Pitt, Va. Tech, Seton Hall??

Come on now. Use that dough to get a better home slate and to do away with pointless road games against the MAAC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,026 Posts
Again, that's ONLY a Bona problem.

Dayton, VCU, Richmond, GW, SLU, URI, SJU and UMass get home and homes with P5.

Why would you want to play BC in the RC? Can't we try to get into an agreement for H&H with a top mid major?

Is one road game at a mediocre P5 a year really that egregious? Maybe if we added a second team each year we could use that $$ for more home buy games.

Make the tourney more than twice in 20 years, and we will get into more quality exempt tournaments.
I don't recall saying that I wanted BC in the RC. My point was that we can't get any P-5 in the RC, or even Rochester for that matter. I also don't recall saying that a game at a mediocre P-5 is egregious, or even really that egregious.

As for the H&H with a top mid major, I don't know why that is not done more. But I also don't know that they are not trying. What I do know is that there are plenty of scheduling experts here and on the Bandwagon that think that they can do a better job than Bona's athletic department.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
I don't recall saying that I wanted BC in the RC. My point was that we can't get any P-5 in the RC, or even Rochester for that matter. I also don't recall saying that a game at a mediocre P-5 is egregious, or even really that egregious.

As for the H&H with a top mid major, I don't know why that is not done more. But I also don't know that they are not trying. What I do know is that there are plenty of scheduling experts here and on the Bandwagon that think that they can do a better job than Bona's athletic department.
There's pretty obvious reasons why the RC doesn't work, but we did get UVM to Rochester which was a quality game regardless of conference affiliation.

Next year's schedule without a doubt is going to be one of the best we've had in a while. (Marquette, West Viriginia, Clemson, Boise State, + San Diego St/CSU) I have no problem with our schedule, and always try to say it's a two-way street. Not much appeal playing a team rated 85-130...

2012, 2018 and 2022 are going to be great schedules. It's not hard to see what leads to a quality schedule and what does not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,408 Posts
There's pretty obvious reasons why the RC doesn't work, but we did get UVM to Rochester which was a quality game regardless of conference affiliation.

Next year's schedule without a doubt is going to be one of the best we've had in a while. (Marquette, West Viriginia, Clemson, Boise State, + San Diego St/CSU) I have no problem with our schedule, and always try to say it's a two-way street. Not much appeal playing a team rated 85-130...

2012, 2018 and 2022 are going to be great schedules. It's not hard to see what leads to a quality schedule and what does not.
I'm excited about next year's schedule too, and with what will be our best/2nd best team in 6 years (or 20 years) it will be "put up or shut up" time. I really want to see Schmidt get those major wins that bring us to the forefront of conversation and it isn't even a question whether or not we're getting in, but on what line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
I don't care at all about how our at large contenders would slot in to the P5 or how the middling P5s would fare in the A10. My main point is the BS that Syracuse fans spew each year about how choose your non P5/BE bubble team would go 5-13 against an ACC gauntlet schedule is gaining traction with the selection committee a bit more each season. Every year winning percentage and good losses matter less and signature wins matter more. A10 schools get underseeded and left out, the bracketologists then predict it to continue which sets expectations, and then the P5 gets more of the unit revenue. It has a snowball effect. The non P-5 at-large is an endangered species despite objective and conclusive data that they perform better in the tournament than the teams replacing them. That's insane.

Look at the A10 this year. Here are all of our NET top 100 teams (in the conversation for at-large/NIT) against the P5/BE:

Saint Louis over LSU (safe projected 9 seed) by 4. (A10 Home - Q1)
Minnesota (free falling bubble team) over Saint Louis by 8. (Road - Q2)
Saint Louis over NC State (mid-table ACC, above .500) by 11. (Home - Q2)
West Virginia (projected 2 seed) over VCU by 12. (Neutral - Q1)
Penn State (11th Big Ten) over VCU by 3. (Road - Q1)
West Virginia (projected 2 seed) over Richmond by 16. (Road - Q1)
Richmond over Kentucky (9th SEC) by 12. (Road - Q1)
Richmond over Vanderbilt (last SEC) by 11. (Road - Q2)
Dayton over Ole Miss (mid-table, fringe bubble) by 3. (Home - Q2)
Dayton over Mississippi St (mid-table SEC) by 3. (Neutral - Q2)
Texas (projected 4 seed) over Davidson by 2 (Neutral - Q1)
Providence (8th Big East) over Davidson by 1 (Neutral - Q2)
Davidson over Vanderbilt (last SEC) by 20. (Home - Q3)

Hopefully, I didn't miss any.

So overall 7-6 record despite the A10 regular season champion having no games and a 4/5/4 H/R/N split.

2-4 against Q1, 4-2 Q2, 1-0 Q3. 4-0 at home. Low percentage against the good teams (0 for 3), took care of the bad teams (Vandy twice), 5-3 against the middle. Sound familiar? A couple of Davidson GW shots away from being very good. Instead, probably what you'd expect for a team in the 8-seed to bubble range.

Yet, Maryland, LSU, Rutgers, GA Tech, Louisville, Michigan St, etc will all be safely in the tournament and we are a Dayton/Duquesne quarterfinal parlay away from only putting the AQ in the dance.
 
61 - 80 of 83 Posts
Top