untgeorge
-
Posts
463 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Points
0 [ Donate ]
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
GoMeanGreen.com
Posts posted by untgeorge
-
-
I don't think JJ would go to UTEP either
Depends on the money. But they probably will be looking elsewhere.
-
Technically Ohio has 21 wins.
I also don't think they'd get in above us. They were something like 5th in the MAC East.
Two wins over Kent State and a tougher conference, maybe? If not that, i don't know.
-
and we are the top team in the country for drawing fouls.
Don't know how we finished but with about a week to go we led the nation in foul shots made. So we have another strength in common.
-
Sorry if this has been posted, I am not the most active in this Forum.
College Basketball Picks - NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Odds & Predictions:
- No. 3 seeds have gone 81-15 versus No. 14 seeds in the first round.
- No. 4 seeds are 79-17 against No. 13 seeds in the first round.
- No. 5 seeds are just 65-31 against No. 12 seeds in the first round, making them most susceptible to a first round upset.
- No. 6 seeds have fared better against No. 11 seeds than No. 5s vs. No. 12s, with a 66-30 record in the first round.
- No. 7 seeds are 60-36 against No. 10 seeds.
- No. 8 seeds have lost more than they’ve won against No. 9 seeds with a 44-52 record in the first round.
I think if you did this analysis for only the past ten years you would find the 12 seeds at nearly 50-50 vs the 5 seeds, and likewise the 11s vs the 6s and 10s vs 7s. I did an analysis a few years ago on the 2000 thru 2004 years but no longer have it; I could spend some time to prove this if people are interested if I can dig up old brackets.
The increase in wins which I believe exists by 9s thru 12s has occurred because the college game has become more balanced, and that has occurred because of the 64 team tournament.
-
After Western Kentucky, A-State, and UALR, we had the best attendance. A-State has a 3 hour drive and UALR just a one hour trip.
So I am proud of our attendance - it looked and sounded good on TV.
ULM and ULL were among the top five in attendance.
-
Actuall y it does imply just that. "If the division winners..."
shoot they don't even list the division champions in their historical list that CMJ linked to. That is of no significance to them except for seeding.
Aren't you bored yet?
-
I am no fan of the DaMN but they have had an editorial on the subject, a long article on the front page of their metro section last week, and at least two shorter articles, all after the article about the firing.
The DaMN is highly political and may back off, but so far they have been ok.
That having been said, three cheers for the FWST for their pursuit of the matter.
-
1
-
-
http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/03/02/2009551/unt-regents-make-a-drastic-mistake.html
Has anyone noticed that it is the Fort Worth Newspaper rather than the DMN that has really been pushing this topic.
I am no fan of the DaMN but they have had an editorial on the subject, a long article on the front page of their metro section last week, and at least two shorter articles, all after the article about the firing.
The DaMN is highly political and may back off, but so far they have been ok.
-
No, the rule is quite clear:
If the division winners have identical win/loss records, head-to-head record will determine the #1 and #2 teams.
It's an A or B question, and MTSU can "C" its way out of it.
The three division champions (yes, MTSU and Troy are co-champions)have identical w/l records and the head-to-head records determine that Troy is 1st seed.
The rule does neither says nor implies that the first step is to proclaim one of the two east co-champs a division champ. This is a seeding issue not a championship determining issue. The history of the Sun Belt shows clearly that in the past the teams that tied are considered champions no matter how they are seeded. See the link provided by CMJ; there three teams were considered co-champs in 2007 and 2008. The tie breaking formula was used only for seeding and NOT for determining a champion, division or otherwise.
Look I would have written the rule differently, as well. But it is what it is.
I am bored with this "issue". The Sun Belt is not out to get us and has applied the rule the way it was written. Can't we move on?
-
The first thing I thought when I saw someone had renewed this thread last night was "George is either shaking his head in disappointment or crying out to the heavens in frustration".
If it makes you any less annoyed that Morgan was brought up again... I'm off the "hope he transfers" bandwagon. Now that we've got Edwards to fill in, I'd rather see us get the 4 year kid from Nevada that averaged 35 ppg. I'll feel a lot better about our chances in 2011-12 if I know we'll have a guy like that sharing the backcourt with Alzee.
Right on.
-
But... clearly that applies only to seed 3-13, since there is a very specific tiebreaker rule for the #1 and #2 seeds, which SPECIFICALLY states that in the event of a tie between the two division leaders that head-to-head records will determine who is number 1.
It clearly applies to all three way ties.
Dumb rule, but it is the rule.
-
He showed up out of shape and not ready to play. Running the court was an issue for him.
Why is this of no significance to anybody?
-
1
-
-
You beat me to the keyboard. If Josh has to play 37, 38 mins 3 days in a row, it will cost us.
Both of you make good points.
-
I left something out.
(e) in the event of a three-way tie, the won-loss percentage of the tied teams against each other is first considered;
That clause is what the conf appears to be relying on.
-
I still can not believe that the Sunbelt has decided to do this three way tie breaker. So, I did my own investigative reporting to see exactly what the rules were and how they deduced comparing the western division champion with the runner up for the regular season title. Why have two divisions? All of these questions have been exhausted on this board. Questions like, we didn't even play the same number of games against each other and the other teams had home court advantage. So, here is the actual text from the Sunbelt official website.
Sunbelt Post Season Format and Tie Breaking Procedure
(e) in the event of a three-way tie, the won-loss percentage of the tied teams against each other is first considered (f) If the teams are still tied, records against the next highest seeded team in the conference are considered and so forth until the tie is broken; once the three-way tie is broken, then the two-way tie is broken in the normal two-tie fashion;(g) if there is still a tie, the seeded position of the teams will be determined by a random draw conducted by the Sun Belt Conference Commissioner; (h) for multiple ties larger than a three-way tie, the same procedure will be applied as used to break a three-way tie; (i) for all multiple ties, the tie is broken by first deciding the highest seeded team involved in the tie before deciding other seeded positions.
The seeding for top two seeds has its own tiebreaking for #1 and #2. A tiebreaker that only involves the division winners AND a coin toss if their records are identical and head/head matchup is identical. The "Top Three Seeds -Determination" clause specifically points out that the #3 spot is "next best ... regardless of division", which implies the division champions must be determined before determining number 3 seed.
The Tie-Breaking Formula comes into play for all of the seeds below these two seeds. Specifically, point © of the Tie-Breaking Formula section states that "if each team has the same record against the highest-seeded team in the division" ... Not the other division. THE top seed has to be established before you ever get to the infamous "three way tie" clause which is point (e) of the Tie-Breaking Formula.
But here is the real kicker. There is a statement that clearly states when the "Tie-Breaking Formula" is invoked. The last sentence of the "Seeding" clause:
In the event of a tie for any seeded position within a division, the seed shall be determined by utilizing the conference’s tie-breaking formula.
It is only to be invoked for seeded positions WITHIN a division.
So, the conference skipped and ignored its own rules to find a rule that that is embedded far into the tie breaking formula that shouldn't even be invoked. The rules clearly state to determine division winners and to determine head to head of those two to determine #1 and #2 seeds.
After reading and analyzing these rules, I just don't see how they came up with the seeds using this three way tiebreaker bull. I thought maybe the rules were ambiguous, but it is very clearly defined.
Why does this matter so much to me? This is a guaranteed post season berth to the NIT. And that means everything. That is visibility. That is more money. And above all else, our players deserve it. This was determined before the season. The conference chose to go another direction which tells me one of two things.
1. They were too frantic in making a decision because they didn't think it would actually happen, and resulted in not analyzing the rules properly because they rushed it after the last games played out.
2. They are incompetent.
Either way, I think it all boils down to number 2 (pun intended), even if number 1 is the root cause.
If we win out and go to the NCAA, then in my opinion the conference dodged a bullet. If not, I will be highly disappointed if UNT does not come out publicly with their lawyers and go after the conference. Quit pus-footing around these issues and be behind closed doors. Let us know you think it is bull and you are going to do something about it. Don't give me this crap that Rick V. is probably on top of this and trying to be "political" or some crap. This is not the time for this. The players and Coach Jones deserve it. Your alumni and donors want it.
-
Question,
Isn't this the second or third time we've gotten the shaft in some way from this conference? The others being the times we have had to rearrange our schedule in football?
If so, to me that's a lack of standing up to the conference and Wright Waters. And we may have and just haven't heard about it yet from Vitto? But as one of our other alumni has stated already, this time it's a done deal. But along the way during this process if we were to have raised holy hell about it they may think twice about it the next time?
Rick
I don't know about the football scheduling things but the tie-breaker rule has been on the book for some timne, certainly more than just this past week, and could not have been aimed at us.
-
2
-
-
I should have known as soon as it was obvious that we could end up tied with Troy and MTSU (the kings of the Sun Belt Co-Championship) that this wasn't going to end well for us.
So angry. So, so angry...
While it's easy to be angry, the fact is all three of us lost 5 games and finished in a tie. When you get yourself in that situation you are at the mercy of the fates. The reason to be angry is losing to FIU, a very bad basketball team which finished with a 4-14 conf record and lost 24 overall.
Besides, when we complain about tie breakers we sound like Mack Brown, and I don't like Mack Brown. Just as in Mack's situation, if the rule were written differently the outcome would be different. But the core problem is we didn't take care of business, and lost a game we should have won.
-
I am just curious, what was the thinking of building it so big. It holds what, almost 11K, right ? I know there used to be big crowds in the Snake Pit, so did they think there would be big crowds at the Super Pit as well or did they plan on making it an events type center where it could be used for a lot different things ?
I want to say and i would have to look back for sure but the first year it was opened it average about 5K but ever since then it hasnt been close to averaging that. There has only been like 6 or 7 years since it has been opened that it averaged more than 3K for a season. Its a wonderful venue and I wish that we could average 5 to 6K a game but not sure if we ever will again.
So for the people that were around during that time, what were the thoughts ?
The Pit is used for many events including but not limited to graduation. It has become too small for graduation, was always too large for basketball. I have been told that it is used 200 times a year, but I could not attest to that number. Whatever it is used for, the other events have interfered with basketball scheduling many times over the years. Once we played in Dallas (opponent was Southern Miss, as I recall) because the pit was unavailable, recently we played in the old pit.
-
The NCAA selection committee for the national championship tournament does not consider games against non-D1 teams. It is like they were not played.
For purposes of determining a team's RPI games against non-D1 teams are not counted.
Other NCAA stats and records include the results of such games.
Sagarin does not include games against non-D1 teams but frankly as to college basketball Sagarin is irrelevant.
-
1
-
-
I think it works out this way...
5 teams sit at 10-5. UNT, MTSU, Troy, A-State, and FAU.
FAU would win the East, A-State would win the West by virtue of their tie-breakers.
Troy has beat MTSU twice, so you would think that eliminates MTSU from consideration of the #3 seed.
However, the tie-breaking rules clearly state " in the event of a three-way tie, the won-loss percentage of the tied teams against each other is first considered;"
Troy has a .666 record against UNT and MTSU (they beat MTSU twice). UNT has a .500 record, and MTSU has a .333 record.
#1 goes to FAU
#2 goes to A-State
#3 goes to Troy.
#4 goes to UNT.
#5 goes to MTSU.
#6 goes to WKU
#7 goes to ULL
#8 goes to Denver
#9 goes to S Alabama
#10 goes to ULM
#11 goes to FIU
#12 goes to UALR
#13 goes to New Orleans
Assuming the higher seed wins, our path to the NCAA tournament is:
New Orleans -> MTSU -> FAU -> A-State
Of course, there are still some games to play but man what a mess the Sun Belt is right now.
What a mess is right!
Plus, the contenders play each other:
- ArkSt has WKU and Troy (both at home) to play;
- FAU has Troy (A) and MTSU (H)
- Troy has FAU (H) and ASU (A)
- MTSU has FAU (away)
- WKU has ArkSt and FAU (both away)
Anything can happen. Including that I might have gotten this right.
-
I think UNT wins out and finishes 13-5.
MT has three of four on the road and is probably looking at 12-6. ASU probably drops 2 of @ULL, WKU at home and Troy at home (not worried about UNO at home) for a 12-6 record.
We hope.
-
Something must have went on that we dont know about. I wonder if he got in some trouble? He was a long way away from home, he is from NY so that might have played a role in it. Also i noticed that he didnt play against Denver and his body language was of a person that wasnt very happy. Best of luck to him.
The explanation that he wants to play nearer home would be reasonable for a transfer at the end of a school year. It can't be the complete explanation for leaving the team now.
-
I think i would rather have a team that wins 20 games a year and has a chance to win the conference every year than a team like Drake or Kent St, where they have a great year and go to the NCAA's and then going back to winning 12 or 14 games.
Bad example. kent State has been to the NCAA 4 times in the past ten seasons and to the NIT 4 times in the same period. In total since 1985 Kent State has been in the post season 12 times.
By national standards we are consistently mediocre. Are you arguing that consistently mediocre is the standard we desire?
-
1
-
-
Interesting discussion, my opinion is that JJ certainly deserves to be considered one of the best coaches in NT basketball history, the only coach I would put above him based on teams I have seen would be Spika. Spika's teams beat several top twenty teams and he coached a very fast paced game and he managed to win in the MVC without the greatest talent.
Looking back at old scores can be very misleading unless you want to do a lot of research. However, most of NT's teams in the last fifty years have been mediocre at best and downright bad a lot of the time with only a handful of exceptions. It is much easier to win 20 games now than it was a decade or more back. More games and power-puff oc schedules have made the twenty game standard much less meaningful. However, despite serious injuries NT is posed to have it's best Belt season ever. Frankly, NT has no great wins and has more than a few loses that should not have happened but once again seems to be peaking at the right time.
I think most acknowledge the job that Jones has done, but still want the team to take the next step up. Winning 20 games is very good, but moving the team to consistently be a top 100 school should be the next objective. It should also be realized that Jones as well as every coach since moving up from the Southland is working against much better supported conference programs. To get to that next step is going to take a lot more support than NT currently has. Having a very generously counted attendance of less than 3,000 including in most games a few hundred students does not provide much of a base to build a program on.
Right on.
I especially agree that we have been competing against better supported conf programs. However consider Steve Shields, who during the same period won four west division championships in his first six seasons at UALR. I don't know that UALR is better supported, but maybe they are.
JJ got a two year extension and it was well earned. But in my we should be seeking consistent top 100 ranking and sometimes better. It wasn't long ago that the Belt had multiple bids and a 10 and 12 seed.
-
1
-
Summit League Contingency Plays For Ualr ?
in Mean Green Basketball
Posted
How would this strengthen the Sun Belt's image?