The Bobcat Nation

I have looked at several bracket projections and Weber is projected to be one of the play in teams. So the Big Sky's best team has to play early to even make the field of 64 only to end up playing the 1 seed. We did not even make the Big Sky tourney, which apparantly is about the worst conference since the projected winner has to play early. This distinction has to help with getting potential recruits.

allcat wrote:I have looked at several bracket projections and Weber is projected to be one of the play in teams. So the Big Sky's best team has to play early to even make the field of 64 only to end up playing the 1 seed. We did not even make the Big Sky tourney, which apparantly is about the worst conference since the projected winner has to play early. This distinction has to help with getting potential recruits.

Yep. The big sky has fallen a long ways when it comes to basketball. UM's embarrassments in the first round the past 2 years has not helped the impression of the league either. Falling to a play in game and ending up playing a 1 seed will only further cement that role.

I think that if ONE school in the Big Sky would take a step (and the losses at first) and play 5-6 big time programs every year, it would turn that school around. Sure it would sting at first, but your name gets out there, and you start to see kids looking at your program and saying "Hey, at least there I get to play against 4 great teams a year." I also think that the conference as a whole is to focused on the 3 and therefor no consistency game-to-game. The last Cat-griz game the griz shot 27 3's to the Cats 7 (sure we missed all 7) but the game still came down to the wire, because (again in my mind) the Cats played solid D and pounded it down low....

I can't argue with anything that's been said. The only thing I'll point out is that the "play-in" teams aren't always a 16 seed. I believe they've been as high as 11 seeds in the past.

LTown Cat wrote:I can't argue with anything that's been said. The only thing I'll point out is that the "play-in" teams aren't always a 16 seed. I believe they've been as high as 11 seeds in the past.

Not with the brackets that I have seen. The ones that I have seen show Weber playin game winner playing the number 1, some of the others showed somebody else playing the number 3.

The problem is the Bobcats dragging down the RPI for the rest of the league.

LTown Cat wrote:I can't argue with anything that's been said. The only thing I'll point out is that the "play-in" teams aren't always a 16 seed. I believe they've been as high as 11 seeds in the past.

This is true, in fact wasn't VCU a play-in team a few years ago when they made a deep run? And they did not play a #1 seed in their 2nd game. I believe they played into one of the 11 or 12 seeds.

91catAlum wrote:

LTown Cat wrote:I can't argue with anything that's been said. The only thing I'll point out is that the "play-in" teams aren't always a 16 seed. I believe they've been as high as 11 seeds in the past.

This is true, in fact wasn't VCU a play-in team a few years ago when they made a deep run? And they did not play a #1 seed in their 2nd game. I believe they played into one of the 11 or 12 seeds.

Two of the 1st round (play in games) feature 16 vs 16 seeds, and will be four automatic bids from lower ranked conferences such as the Big Sky, or lower seeded teams that are upset winners of their conference tournaments. I'm sure this is where Weber or the Big Sky Champion would end up if they are placed in this round. The other two 1st round games can be variable seeds (probably 11, 12, or 13) and feature the last four at-large teams selected for the field, which will not include a Big Sky team any time in the near future!

allcat wrote:I have looked at several bracket projections and Weber is projected to be one of the play in teams. So the Big Sky's best team has to play early to even make the field of 64 only to end up playing the 1 seed. We did not even make the Big Sky tourney, which apparantly is about the worst conference since the projected winner has to play early. This distinction has to help with getting potential recruits.

While the BSC winner this year may well be in a play-in game, I wouldn't put much stock in the projected brackets. They've had the BSC winner projected in a play-in game the last four years, and I believe the worst seed given in those 4 years was a 14.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

DicTater wrote:The problem is the Bobcats dragging down the RPI for the rest of the league.

Yeah, Southern Utah isn't bad, but the Cats are just awful.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

FTG06' wrote:

DicTater wrote:The problem is the Bobcats dragging down the RPI for the rest of the league.

Yeah, Southern Utah isn't bad, but the Cats are just awful.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

SUU was one of the very worst teams in the entire country this season, and in our two games against them, we won by 2, and in OT. I'd say it's about a toss up.

John K wrote:

FTG06' wrote:

DicTater wrote:The problem is the Bobcats dragging down the RPI for the rest of the league.

Yeah, Southern Utah isn't bad, but the Cats are just awful.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

SUU was one of the very worst teams in the entire country this season, and in our two games against them, we won by 2, and in OT. I'd say it's about a toss up.

And WOULD have lost both games had SUU made even a reasonable percentage of their FT attempts.

grizzh8r wrote:

John K wrote:

FTG06' wrote:

DicTater wrote:The problem is the Bobcats dragging down the RPI for the rest of the league.

Yeah, Southern Utah isn't bad, but the Cats are just awful.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

SUU was one of the very worst teams in the entire country this season, and in our two games against them, we won by 2, and in OT. I'd say it's about a toss up.

And WOULD have lost both games had SUU made even a reasonable percentage of their FT attempts.

Ya, but keep in mind we beat some decent teams... and also lost some against good teams that were very close. I'm extremely disappointed (kind of... but actually turning more into disinterest) but let's keep thinks in perspective. SUU won ONE league game.

I have been following and watching BSC basketball for quite some time and this is easily the worst I have seen the league be as a whole. This season it was there for the taking to be the conference champs as there are no quality teams and the Cats can't even make the conference tourney? Wow! That is all there is to say about it. Time for a change ASAP or what few fans that are left who go to the games will stop.

catatac wrote:

grizzh8r wrote:

John K wrote:

FTG06' wrote:

DicTater wrote:The problem is the Bobcats dragging down the RPI for the rest of the league.

Yeah, Southern Utah isn't bad, but the Cats are just awful.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

SUU was one of the very worst teams in the entire country this season, and in our two games against them, we won by 2, and in OT. I'd say it's about a toss up.

And WOULD have lost both games had SUU made even a reasonable percentage of their FT attempts.

Ya, but keep in mind we beat some decent teams... and also lost some against good teams that were very close. I'm extremely disappointed (kind of... but actually turning more into disinterest) but let's keep thinks in perspective. SUU won ONE league game.

Yeah, but there were also several 25-30 point blowouts to BSC teams that will never be confused with Duke or Kentucky.

John K wrote:

catatac wrote:

grizzh8r wrote:

John K wrote:

FTG06' wrote:

DicTater wrote:The problem is the Bobcats dragging down the RPI for the rest of the league.

Yeah, Southern Utah isn't bad, but the Cats are just awful.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

SUU was one of the very worst teams in the entire country this season, and in our two games against them, we won by 2, and in OT. I'd say it's about a toss up.

And WOULD have lost both games had SUU made even a reasonable percentage of their FT attempts.

Ya, but keep in mind we beat some decent teams... and also lost some against good teams that were very close. I'm extremely disappointed (kind of... but actually turning more into disinterest) but let's keep thinks in perspective. SUU won ONE league game.

Yeah, but there were also several 25-30 point blowouts to BSC teams that will never be confused with Duke or Kentucky.

True... and like I said, I agree we sucked BAD. However, SUU sucked way, way worse than us.

This shows the latest bracket projections. We are getting a lot more respect as they now have Weber as a lockdown 16 seed instead of a play-in 16 seed. With the respect that the conference is now getting Huse should at the very least get another 2 years.http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/colleg ... ?eref=sihp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Skip that this is another projection, it has Weber as a play=in 16 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1988 ... l-68-teams" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These projections don't account for the fact that the #1 seeds won't win all the tournaments in the mid or bottom conferences. In each individual tournament, the #1 is usually the most likely to win, but it's unlikely that we'll have a year without any upsets. There will probably be a few teams to come out of these tournaments that are clearly not as good as Weber (unless Weber is one of the ones that gets upset). Whether it will be enough to push them up out of the 16s, I have no way of knowing.

BLACKnBLUEnGOLD wrote:These projections don't account for the fact that the #1 seeds won't win all the tournaments in the mid or bottom conferences. In each individual tournament, the #1 is usually the most likely to win, but it's unlikely that we'll have a year without any upsets. There will probably be a few teams to come out of these tournaments that are clearly not as good as Weber (unless Weber is one of the ones that gets upset). Whether it will be enough to push them up out of the 16s, I have no way of knowing.

Right, but the point is that this is how we are viewed. It might not account for actual seeding, but it is the perception.