A10 Observations

[SpiderFan]

I don't know if anyone else has the SI subscription but if so here's the link to the college basketball mailbag:

Mailbag: Which Power Conference Has Disappointed the Most?

Plus, your questions on Duke, Wisconsin's potential, the Atlantic 10's pecking order and the MAAC.

www.si.com

This is what the A10 section showed--sounds like a 1 bid league right now to me.

"Brent asks: The Atlantic 10 has had a lot of up and down teams so far, how do you see the field shaking out after St. Bonaventure?

Several questions about the A-10 came in, but this one is the most broad and gives me the chance to answer part or all of the other A-10 questions, so we’ll tackle this one.

First, I still believe St. Bonaventure is the league’s best team. Its home loss to Northern Iowa was far from ideal, but it doesn’t ruin the team’s at-large NCAA tournament hopes. Every preseason goal is still in front of the Bonnies.

Right now, they’re the only A-10 team I see with a realistic path to an at-large bid. Richmond hasn’t looked bad, but it’s now 0–4 against top-100 KenPom teams and won’t have many more opportunities to bolster its résumé. I’d still lean toward the Spiders being the second-best team in the league.

I think Dayton’s at-large hopes are pretty much shot, even after beating Kansas on a neutral floor last week as part of a stunning ESPN Events Invitational title win. Three bad home losses are already on the Flyers’ résumé, and this is a young team that will inevitably have more bumps in the road. Count me as a believer in the talent, though. I’d throw Dayton in this rather large middle tier of A-10 teams that I would never want to play in an NCAA tournament game but will likely have to win the A-10 tourney to get to that point. Who else is in that group?

VCU proved in Atlantis that it is a tough out, despite having one of the more anemic offenses in the sport. The Rams’ defense is just taxing to play against. George Mason’s hot start has cooled quickly with four straight defeats, but it has old, experienced talent and will be feisty in the A-10. Rhode Island has started relatively well, albeit against a weaker schedule. Davidson and Saint Louis also probably belong in that “dangerous but not quite at-large” tier. I just don’t think there’s much separation between any of those teams."

Summed up the Spider perfectly--hasn't beaten anyone good and their OOC resume is not good.

Sounds like another contract extension on the way!

 

[Eight Legger]

I will say that vcu has made a living over the years of claiming "no bad losses" and getting a huge boost in RPI/NET simply by winning the games it should have won and doing little else that was super remarkable. Maybe we can do the same this year.

 

[SouthJerseySpiderFan]

I see Lofton out last two games. Read high ankle sprain so maybe miss more time and Bonny has next three that could be a W or a L? Hopefully they win at least two.

 

[SFspidur]

He was out of the boot last night, so hopefully he’ll be back soon.

 

[spider fan]

We joined the A-10 to move from what was in most years "a one bid league". Sad that with defections and poor play we are back in what is predicted to be "a one bid league". Don't want that prediction to be accurate

 

[97spiderfan]

We joined the A-10 to move from what was in most years "a one bid league". Sad that with defections and poor play we are back in what is predicted to be "a one bid league". Don't want that prediction to be accurate

The A-10 will get more than 1 bid but we have cornered ourselves into relying upon our winning the our league championship every year by underperforming in the regular season. And given the strength of our league and the fact that we have Mooney (who has one of the absolute worst A-10 tourney records), this is not a good combo for us to be in.

We might as well move back to the CAA where we stand a better chance of winning the auto bid since that is our best and realistically only option under Mooney.

 

[Spider B]

UR not getting at large bids is not an A10 issue, it's a UR issue. The A10 gets at large bids every year. UR continues to accept underperformance and mediocrity. The administration does nothing to address these issues other than throwing money at facilities and grossly over paying a bad coach and AD. The move to the A10 could have paid off big time with the right leadership, but we choose to squander the opportunity year after year after year.

 

[urmite]

Did we ever publicly state that we were moving to the A-10 because of the possibility At-Large NCAA bids?

Or did we say that the demographics of the student bodies of the institutions of the A-10 more closely resembled our own than the CAA did at the time of our departure?

 

[GKiller]

Did we ever public state that we were moving to the A-10 because of the possibility At-Large NCAA bids?

Or did we say that the demographics of the student bodies of the institutions of the A-10 more closely resembled our own than the CAA did at the time of our departure?

yes the former. Many times. I'm sure they said the latter too, but the driver was men's basketball and exposure that comes with NCAA bids. Even VCU said that when they moved from CAA.

Also it looks like SI agrees with Bart Torvik.

 

[32counter]

Did we ever public state that we were moving to the A-10 because of the possibility At-Large NCAA bids?

Or did we say that the demographics of the student bodies of the institutions of the A-10 more closely resembled our own than the CAA did at the time of our departure?

How about with Temple and Xavier in the A10 in 2001 is was a far better league with national rankings than the CAA at the time.A huge upgrade in exposure.A10 with the quality of those nationally ranked teams was a multiple bid league.When Butler and UNCC entered at a later timeframe that only upgraded exposure even further.Ironic that all those schools have left for “greener”pastures and now we are in a derivative of CAA which is a 1 bid league.Demographic profile is a nice term but in reality it was a considerably better roundball conference back 20 years ago than it’s today.

 

[8legs1dream]

We joined the A-10 to move from what was in most years "a one bid league". Sad that with defections and poor play we are back in what is predicted to be "a one bid league". Don't want that prediction to be accurate

If (when?) we don't make it back to the NCAA's it won't be the A10's fault. We will have no one to blame but ourselves.

 

[spider fan]

A-10 used to have multiple teams in the Top 25 rankings which gave us a better shot of having a Top 25 team at Robins and a chance for a quality win. Now it is usually one team from the A-10 ranked or none at all.

 

[97spiderfan]

How about with Temple and Xavier in the A10 in 2001 is was a far better league than the CAA at the time.A huge upgrade in exposure.When Butler and UNCC entered at a later timeframe that only upgraded exposure even further.Ironic that those schools have left and now we are in a derivative of CAA. Demographic profile is a nice term but in reality it was a considerably better roundball conference.

The A-10 is a far better men's basketball league than the CAA, when we left and it continues to be. It has always been and continues to be a multi-bid league without Temple and Xavier. Charlotte was in the league before us, I don't think their departure is really missed by anyone as that program had done literally nothing since leaving. The CAA also had ODU, VCU and Mason in it when we were in it, 2 of those 3 programs are now in the A-10. All of the top schools have left the CAA for greener pastures. Who exactly in the CAA is remotely equivalent with Dayton, SLU, VCU, St. Bonnies and frankly even us, despite the neutering of our program by our leadership.

 

[97spiderfan]

If (when?) we don't make it back to the NCAA's it won't be the A10's fault. We will have no one to blame but ourselves.

Except we won't blame ourselves, because that would involve taking accountability, which we never do. We will throw out some excuses and say next year will be better. Its what we do every year.

 

[fatherspider]

Really a ridiculous assertion from the initial NET rankings to state A10 is a one bid league.
They are saying 1) that it is impossible for teams to rise within the NET even with great play against quality competition. And 2) that the NET rankings are the absolute measurement of a teams performance and that the sight test means nothing. If thats the case why have a committee at all? Dayton, Bonnies, Davidson, at the very least have at large aspirations intact. Jeez we still have 4 or 5 games left in OOC.

 

[urmite]

yes the former. Many times. I'm sure they said the latter too, but the driver was men's basketball and exposure that comes with NCAA bids. Even VCU said that when they moved from CAA.

Also it looks like SI agrees with Bart Torvik.

I am sure the AD said the former. I am sure Cooper told me the latter.

Just couldn’t remember who said what to reporters and such.

 

[WCUR11]

Did we ever public state that we were moving to the A-10 because of the possibility At-Large NCAA bids?

Or did we say that the demographics of the student bodies of the institutions of the A-10 more closely resembled our own than the CAA did at the time of our departure?

The move was definitely based on possibility of more regular opportunities for at-large bids and not because A-10 schools more closely resemble our own demographics... no one in the A-10 is a peer institution except for Davidson and George Washington...all other schools have abysmal acceptance rate percentages and simply aren't competitive academically. If our goal was to mirror a more apples-to-apples student body demographic conference, then we would likely end up in the Patriot, which is also a 1(ish) bid league.

A-10 is not perfect and neither are we, but the competition within it is better than any other conference for a school of our size, status, etc. Can always hold out hope for Big East but that's a pipe dream.

 

[32counter]

The move was definitely based on possibility of more regular opportunities for at-large bids and not because A-10 schools more closely resemble our own demographics... no one in the A-10 is a peer institution except for Davidson and George Washington...all other schools have abysmal acceptance rate percentages and simply aren't competitive academically. If our goal was to mirror a more apples-to-apples student body demographic conference, then we would likely end up in the Patriot, which is also a 1(ish) bid league.

A-10 is not perfect and neither are we, but the competition within it is better than any other conference for a school of our size, status, etc. Can always hold out hope for Big East but that's a pipe dream.

A voice of reason and realism.You don’t belong on the basketball board.

 

[WCUR11]

A voice of reason and realism.You don’t belong on the basketball board.

Longtime lurker, reluctant poster ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[spider fan]

Reticence is a very overlooked quality in today's world.

 

[urmite]

The move was definitely based on possibility of more regular opportunities for at-large bids and not because A-10 schools more closely resemble our own demographics... no one in the A-10 is a peer institution except for Davidson and George Washington...all other schools have abysmal acceptance rate percentages and simply aren't competitive academically. If our goal was to mirror a more apples-to-apples student body demographic conference, then we would likely end up in the Patriot, which is also a 1(ish) bid league.

A-10 is not perfect and neither are we, but the competition within it is better than any other conference for a school of our size, status, etc. Can always hold out hope for Big East but that's a pipe dream.

It doesn't matter now because this was 20 years ago. That also means Davidson wasn't part of the equation.

I'm not saying that anything outside of athletics was part of the decision or should have been.

I am saying that at the time some parts of the administration were promoting to certain audiences that our 2000 student body would be more comfortable socially with many A-10 student bodies than CAA student bodies. I found it odd at the time and that is why I still remember it.

Now I wonder if that was some misguided attempt to appease those who didn't care about athletics...

 

[spiderman]

it was strictly basketball driven. we'd play better teams in a multi-bid conference. inevitably we'd have a better SOS. we'd be on TV more. we'd attract more talent.

and I think for the most part we've accomplished that. but it just didn't lead to tournament appearances.

 

[Spider B]

but it just didn't lead to tournament appearances.

Again, this is because the school's administration accepts mediocre results. We could have a much higher profile program with the right leadership.

 

[ur2K]

Since we last went to the tournament - the A10 has put the following # of teams into the tournament 4,5,6,3,3,3,3,2,COVID,2. We don't make it b/c of our performance, not our conference.

 

[8legs1dream]

Still so unimaginable that the A10 got FIVE and then SIX teams into the NCAA's and we weren't one of them. That should have been a red flag and a half to the AD right there.

 

[SpiderFan]

We joined the A-10 to move from what was in most years "a one bid league". Sad that with defections and poor play we are back in what is predicted to be "a one bid league". Don't want that prediction to be accurate

We moved 20 years ago and I doubt the A10 has had more than 2 seasons with 1 bid in that time span. We don't go to the tournament because we don't win enough to warrant it. If anything we're one of the leaches getting money from the NCAA tournament on the backs of other teams in the conference. Our "contribution" from 2011 ran out several years ago.

 

[8legs1dream]

We moved 20 years ago and I doubt the A10 has had more than 2 seasons with 1 bid in that time span. We don't go to the tournament because we don't win enough to warrant it. If anything we're one of the leaches getting money from the NCAA tournament on the backs of other teams in the conference. Our "contribution" from 2011 ran out several years ago.

going back to the 1990-91 season the A10 has been a one bid league twice.

 

[SFspidur]

Once was our first year in the league when we lost to X in the A-10 final and they were the only ones to dance.

 

[72Spider]

Saw Tony Bennet's post-game press conference at JMU. What a classy guy he is. Most interesting comment he made was that you build your program, any program, with defense. Implying it is not the other way around.

 

[SpiderAlways]

I am sure the AD said the former. I am sure Cooper told me the latter.

Just couldn’t remember who said what to reporters and such.

Ah yes, mr Mush told you.

 

[SpiderGuy]

Except we won't blame ourselves, because that would involve taking accountability, which we never do. We will throw out some excuses and say next year will be better. Its what we do every year.

I don't even think the swallowers can look in the mirror & believe next year will be better with the loss of 2 fifth & 2 sixth year seniors. If I had to guess, I think we struggle to be .500 next year.

 

[spiderman]

I don't even think the swallowers can look in the mirror & believe next year will be better with the loss of 2 fifth & 2 sixth year seniors. If I had to guess, I think we struggle to be .500 next year.

I'm the unrealistic fan that thinks we can be good next year. I like our young talent. there are some ifs of course. Walz has to be ready to contribute effectively and be strong on both ends. I'd prefer he was so good right away that he starts. and I need to land Buchanan.

 

[MrTbone]

What’s your starting five though? Sounds like you’d be leaning heavily on an double freshmen front court and a backcourt where we would minimally have one new starter who is likely barely seeing double digit mpg. This also presumes Burton is back.

I don’t see it, mostly because we’ve shown an inability to win at a high clip when breaking multiple new guys into the starting rotation. Better talent though so maybe?

 

[urfan1]

interesting metrics within conference at this time, not many top heavy records (1 - 3 losses), but only 2 teams below .500 at this point

 

[Not-A-Homer]

I'm the unrealistic fan that thinks we can be good next year. I like our young talent. there are some ifs of course. Walz has to be ready to contribute effectively and be strong on both ends. I'd prefer he was so good right away that he starts. and I need to land Buchanan.

Agree that their is some talent. I like the potential of Nelson, Noyes, and Bailey. I also like Crabtree as a player. HOWEVER, they will have virtually no game experience, and Mooney will be their Coach. Burton will see every defensive scheme known to man in an attempt to control him, and with a frontcourt relying heavily on Grace, Sal, and Walz, I see little chance that the team performance will be at a high level.

I'm not a regular gambler, but I would wager big that that team does not see .500. They may not even win 10-games.

 

[spider23]

I can see both sides of this coin, but yes Moon in charge is one issue not on the players.

Next year we can be pretty good if:
1) Zay and Dji continue to progress, and one of them steps up as a legit scoring threat. So far we have seen some flashes from Dji - but in limited minutes and not consistent scoring yet. Zay - I think has offensive potential - kind of compare him to Fore a little bit, but I do think he can progress and become more of a scorer.
2) We either land Buchanan, and he is ready from Day 1, or we pick up a transfer inside that can contribute in a pretty big way.
3) Need big man combo of Grace/Walz/Sal to not get beat too bad on a nightly basis
4) Burton back in red and blue
5) Nelson is KA second coming. I think he can be, but not sure on consistency in year one. KA the original was great freshman year, but not dominant player he became One plus for Nelson is he will have a year of adjusting to college and systems under his belt.
Also would be helpful if one of Randolph,Noyes,Dread are good enough to take minutes from any of the above.

A lot has to come together - don't necessarily need all of the above to happen but a good chunk to have a chance to be pretty good.

 

[spiderman]

We have a VERY veteran team this year. Young guys don't have big roles. That doesn't mean they aren't really good. And it doesn't mean they won't step into big roles when given the opportunity.

I expect our backcourt to be a real strength as usual. there's a lot to be excited about with Zay, Dji and Jason. Heck ... Goose may be back.

The wings should be very good and might be terrific. It's a heck of a start with Tyler and Crabtree, but I'm also excited about the young guys. If we land Buchanan, then I REALLY love the forwards. I think he'd have a chance to start with Tyler. If not then he'd certainly rotate in. Plus Sal could be back and while I don't expect a total transformation, he has shown improvement and is serviceable.

Clearly we'll be different without Grant. We run so much through him and late in the clock we can just feed him in the post. Matt isn't that kind of offensive player but the offense will run well with him. The most important piece will be Walz. If he's a strong defensive player and a rebounder, that will change a lot. And if so, then anything he gives on offense can be gravy. I expect him to back up Matt, but if he is good enough to win the starting spot then I think we can be really good.

 

[RichmondNative]

2) We either land Buchanan, and he is ready from Day 1, or we pick up a transfer inside that can contribute in a pretty big way.
3) Need big man combo of Grace/Walz/Sal to not get beat too bad on a nightly basis
4) Burton back in red and blue

These are the big three to me and as far as #2 goes, I think the transfer option is more likely. Need an upperclassman from a P5 that isn’t happy with his playing time or a seasoned scorer looking to make a jump to the Mid-major level. Definitely going to have to work the transfer portal, which of course has not been a strength in the past.

 

[KE Spider]

Believe we will be better next season than most here apparently think. Lot of talent on the roster. Assume Grace, Sal and Burton return. Up to Mooney to put the pieces together to generate wins. Can be done, doubtful he is the agent, bet we shall see.

 

[Long Island Spiders]

I can see both sides of this coin, but yes Moon in charge is one issue not on the players.

Next year we can be pretty good if:
1) Zay and Dji continue to progress, and one of them steps up as a legit scoring threat. So far we have seen some flashes from Dji - but in limited minutes and not consistent scoring yet. Zay - I think has offensive potential - kind of compare him to Fore a little bit, but I do think he can progress and become more of a scorer.
2) We either land Buchanan, and he is ready from Day 1, or we pick up a transfer inside that can contribute in a pretty big way.
3) Need big man combo of Grace/Walz/Sal to not get beat too bad on a nightly basis
4) Burton back in red and blue
5) Nelson is KA second coming. I think he can be, but not sure on consistency in year one. KA the original was great freshman year, but not dominant player he became One plus for Nelson is he will have a year of adjusting to college and systems under his belt.
Also would be helpful if one of Randolph,Noyes,Dread are good enough to take minutes from any of the above.

A lot has to come together - don't necessarily need all of the above to happen but a good chunk to have a chance to be pretty good.

This was a very good take. Thank you.