Well, we would have had Rhode Island, St Bonaventure, and Duquesne at home had we played them twice. No reason why we couldn't win all 3 of those. We beat Davidson twice, so maybe they would look a lot better at 10-7 had they not played us twice. It is what it is. We 100% have earned our second place spot in the standings right now.
Is this season a success?
- Thread starter SpiderTrap
- Start date
Well, we would have had Rhode Island, St Bonaventure, and Duquesne at home had we played them twice. No reason why we couldn't win all 3 of those. We beat Davidson twice, so maybe they would look a lot better at 10-7 had they not played us twice. It is what it is. We 100% have earned our second place spot in the standings right now.
Usually our home/away conference opponents won't be as bad as this season. If you had told me in November that Davidson and VCU would finish 7th and 8th I'm not sure I'd believe you.
Maybe, we lost to the Bonnies at home and we very easily could have lost to Dayton and to a lesser extent St. Louis. I don't like unbalanced schedules. I hope U Mass finds an all sport conference and Fordham moves on so we could be like the Big 12 and play every team home and away. I'm not complaining about our 2nd place finish, I thought it would be hard not to put the 2nd place A10 team in. I am concerned that a closer look at how we got there by the committee might hurt us getting in the Tournament. It didn't dawn on me until I looked at the standings last night.
We need to beat Duquense.... Go Spiders
How about LaSalle folds it’s tent, and Fordham decides it needs to be in CAA Football? Will that work?
I am going to blend a number of threads here instead of posting the same basic idea to all of them.
It seems that the general definition of success for a team in a mid-major conference from a fan perspective is getting to the NCAA tournament. A recent forum question posted by 8 Legger seems to bare this out with a small forum sample:
However, I think if the same question were posed on a forum for a P6 team the answer would be getting to the Sweet 16. A discussion of my P6 team being on the bubble is a sign of an unsuccessful season. In many cases, these "not really good" P6 teams are the ones that get upset by the underdogs (hopefully some mid-majors) as well, which isn't good for the P6 team's image either. But it IS good for first weekend play discussion, which is one reason why the NCAA wants teams with name recognition IN regardless of whether they deserve to be there or not. So the point is not really trying to get the best teams in, but creating the best tournament story.
As many have discussed on this forum since I have been following it, UR used to be known as a "giant killer"; however, that has faded from the major media's memory due to the lack of NCAA appearances. There are other mid-major teams with name recognition now and that is why Spider fans have to be upset about the state of the program. The move to the A10 has not done what it was supposed to do - get UR to the tournament more often. To add insult to injury one of the teams that is the "new shiny object" is that team on Broad Street; however they hit hard times this season. It also doesn't help that the OOC schedule was a sham that a "consultant" helped design and that the A10 has an unbalanced schedule, so UR did not have to play this year's top teams more than once. All this adds up to where the predictions are - last 4 out.
So here's to hoping the Spiders can keep winning and at least get to the A10 final. Go Spiders!
It seems that the general definition of success for a team in a mid-major conference from a fan perspective is getting to the NCAA tournament. A recent forum question posted by 8 Legger seems to bare this out with a small forum sample:
However, I think if the same question were posed on a forum for a P6 team the answer would be getting to the Sweet 16. A discussion of my P6 team being on the bubble is a sign of an unsuccessful season. In many cases, these "not really good" P6 teams are the ones that get upset by the underdogs (hopefully some mid-majors) as well, which isn't good for the P6 team's image either. But it IS good for first weekend play discussion, which is one reason why the NCAA wants teams with name recognition IN regardless of whether they deserve to be there or not. So the point is not really trying to get the best teams in, but creating the best tournament story.
As many have discussed on this forum since I have been following it, UR used to be known as a "giant killer"; however, that has faded from the major media's memory due to the lack of NCAA appearances. There are other mid-major teams with name recognition now and that is why Spider fans have to be upset about the state of the program. The move to the A10 has not done what it was supposed to do - get UR to the tournament more often. To add insult to injury one of the teams that is the "new shiny object" is that team on Broad Street; however they hit hard times this season. It also doesn't help that the OOC schedule was a sham that a "consultant" helped design and that the A10 has an unbalanced schedule, so UR did not have to play this year's top teams more than once. All this adds up to where the predictions are - last 4 out.
So here's to hoping the Spiders can keep winning and at least get to the A10 final. Go Spiders!
I don't think we need to worry about our conference schedule. I don't think the committee will be looking at our conference standings to figure out who was a good win and who was not. Davidson has a NET about 40 spots higher than St Bonaventure. I don't think committee members are going to be saying, "but they played questionable Davidson twice and only played really good St. Bona. once."
This part I singled out because I agree with it, BUT these “not really good” teams that are on the bubble are not the teams that are playing the mid majors. Those bubble P6 teams that you were referencing here are getting in as 10-11-12 seeds and are the underdog. The “not so good” teams getting beat by mid majors are usually 4-5-6 seeds and not the bubble teams.
Since the selections have not been made, there is nothing to analyze; however, every bracket always has a number of "stories" that have been crafted by the committee. It is not always David vs Goliath, but that is one of the common themes. Two of the "first four" games have the potential to be the type of game I am referring to (11 and 12 seed games).
The Spiders will have a compelling story of redemption that the announcers will hawk. The billboard calling for CM's ouster, two players missing a season due to medical issues (Grant and Sherod), this year's leading scorer missing 6 games with a broken sternum, two back to back 20 loss seasons. Makes for a compelling story of redemption.
Keep winning and make them tell it to the nation! Take care of business tonight and take a step closer.
Keep winning and make them tell it to the nation! Take care of business tonight and take a step closer.
In most years - I think the simple answer here would be YES. My personal expectation for the program is to be in the bubble conversation most years (75% in my mind - 3 out of 4 years we should be in the conversation) come February and March. I don't expect to make it every year - I have given up on the pipe dream. But if we can have a team that every 3 out 4 years is in the mix, some years we will make it and others will be NIT years. With the 1 year to reload/rebuild in between.
Issue with this year - is the previous 2 years were as bad as they get and we have had a long drought. No NCAA in last years and only 1 of those years did we have a shot where we just missed and were a 1 seed in the NIT.
Issue with this year - is the previous 2 years were as bad as they get and we have had a long drought. No NCAA in last years and only 1 of those years did we have a shot where we just missed and were a 1 seed in the NIT.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Womens - Oklahoma State @Daytona Beach Classic 11/30 Saturday - 545pm- Latest: Section 204and5
-
-
-
