Game Thread - @ Elon - Wed 12/17 7pm (FLO)

[97spiderfan]

The A10 is probably going to go like it does most years... We'll mostly win at home, mostly lose on the road, beat LaSalle in the play-in round of the tourney and then get smoked by SLU or Dayton.

100%, this is how it will play out. I'm sure you know Mooney's record in the A-10 tournament, but can't imagine it is good. He's good at getting an opening round win but as soon as we go up against quality competition, that usually is the end of things for us. The Gilly tournament run being the exception to this.

 

[Urmite]

The A10 is probably going to go like it does most years... We'll mostly win at home, mostly lose on the road, beat LaSalle in the play-in round of the tourney and then get smoked by SLU or Dayton.

I thought we were playing Davidson in the 8/9 game (both 9-9) before losing to SLU…

 

[vt4700]

We could have very much be in the at large discussion going into conference play with a 9-2 record ( 11-2 if we win the next 2) with the same wins we have now plus maybe one more good mid major win had our losses been to majors and not Furman and Elon, which would have made our SOS much more acceptable.

We don't have to have a hard schedule, just have a smart one. The OOC schedule a couple years ago is what we should try to get close to every year:

We had 5 300+ games and another 250ish game, but the other 7 included:

3 majors and 4 quality mid majors. 2 of the teams ended top 25, 2 more around 75, 2 more around 100, and one around 135. You never know where these teams will end up NET wise, but you have to give yourself a chance for an at large and schedule these types.of teams. We went 2-5 against these teams, but, even with all the 300+ games, had we just gone 4-3, we would have at least been in the discussion after a 15-3 A-10.

I just wish we could have found a couple majors this year, road only if necessary, and another good mid major or 2, and then see where we stand. Even 10-3 OOC with a Q1 win over Belmont and maybe 2 Q2 wins would at least give us an at large pulse going into conference play. I realize our losses are to Furman and Elon, but maybe ot would have worked out where we played majors instead of them. Finding a MTE with at least 1 major is what we should be looking for as well.

 

[sman]

we're about even with Elon ... like Vegas predicted.
we're about even with 4-4 Furman.
we're even with Southern Illinois (OT win).
we're not much better than W&M or Charlotte.

spoiler alert ... our record is inflated. sure, we might play better in-conference. but forget what the NET says. right now we're about a 150 team. at-large talk was never realistic, and not because we didn't schedule better.

 

[RichmondNative]

The A10 is currently a 2 bid league and it is going to take significant effort to become anything more. The conference is more likely to lose outstanding players than gain them and the scheduling is generally going to be weak. Dayton has consistently shown the ability to schedule well in the OOC for unknown reasons and VCU gets a bump for its recent success. Otherwise, you have a bunch of similar teams and just about anyone can win the tournament. All you have to do is look at the results for the last 10 years. 8 different champions and only VCU has more than one.

It is really kind of remarkable. However, many live in the distant past of the A10 when it was more of a major than a mid-major. Those days are long gone.

I put 11 years below since there was no conference championship in 2020.

Season	Date	Champ	Runner Up	MVP
2024-2025	Mar 12 - 16, 2025	#1 VCU	#2 George Mason	Jack Clark
2023-2024	Mar 12 - 17, 2024	#6 Duquesne	#5 VCU	Dae Dae Grant
2022-2023	Mar 7 - 12, 2023	#1 VCU	#2 Dayton	DaRon Holmes II
2021-2022	Mar 9 - 13, 2022	#6 Richmond	#1 Davidson	Jacob Gilyard
2020-2021	Mar 3 - 14, 2021	#1 St. Bonaventure	#2 VCU	Osun Osunniyi
2019-2020	Mar 11 - 15, 2020	N/A	N/A	N/A
2018-2019	Mar 13 - 17, 2019	#6 Saint Louis	#4 St. Bonaventure	Tramaine Isabell
2017-2018	Mar 7 - 11, 2018	#3 Davidson	#1 Rhode Island	Peyton Aldridge
2016-2017	Mar 8 - 12, 2017	#4 Rhode Island	#2 VCU	E.C. Matthews
2015-2016	Mar 9 - 13, 2016	#4 Saint Joseph's	#2 VCU	Isaiah Miles
2014-2015	Mar 11 - 15, 2015	#5 VCU	#2 Dayton	Treveon Graham

 

[Spiderguy]

One more thing, I can't tell you how many WIDE OPEN 3 pointers Elon had in the second half, it was seemingly every 3rd possession.

This is nothing new, and I've alluded to this for several seasons. I guess last night was Mooney giving Elon early Christmas with free opportunities. Waiting for the adjustment that never seems to come.

 

[SensibleSpider]

we're about even with Elon ... like Vegas predicted.
we're about even with 4-4 Furman.
we're even with Southern Illinois (OT win).
we're not much better than W&M or Charlotte.

spoiler alert ... our record is inflated. sure, we might play better in-conference. but forget what the NET says. right now we're about a 150 team. at-large talk was never realistic, and not because we didn't schedule better.

I disagree with the premise of what you're saying. At large bids aren't given by what vegas odds are. We were +6.5 against a Top 50 NET Belmont and won by 8 if that's the data you are using. But really all that matters is Quad 1 and 2 victories and avoiding Quad 3 and 4 losses so scheduling absolutely does matter. Yes our record is inflated and you can argue the NET is inflated as well but there are teams every year with inflated NETs that sneak into the tourney. The committee heavily weighs the NET ranking and teams are purposefully scheduling to benefit that metric alone, regardless of how "good" the team really is.

Also, when you schedule tough you get the benefit of the doubt more than other teams. When you have a SOS in the 300s, you automatically disqualify yourself from consideration, unless you are a P4 team that smokes everyone.

 

[SensibleSpider]

This is nothing new, and I've alluded to this for several seasons. I guess last night was Mooney giving Elon early Christmas with free opportunities. Waiting for the adjustment that never seems to come.

Like Oprah giving out cars on her show, you get A FREE 3, YOU GET A FREE 3..

 

[SFspidur]

Feels like yesterday that the A-10 had a 6-bid year, but that was 12 years ago now...I'm getting old. Coming up on a decade since we've had a 3-bid year.

 

[sman]

I disagree with the premise of what you're saying. At large bids aren't given by what vegas odds are.

you totally missed the point. I referenced Vegas to point out that us losing to Elon wasn't some wild upset. we're considered about their equal. do you think Elon is an at-large candidate?

We were +6.5 against a Top 50 NET Belmont and won by 8 if that's the data you are using. But really all that matters is Quad 1 and 2 victories and avoiding Quad 3 and 4 losses so scheduling absolutely does matter.

I'll be shocked if Belmont is an at-large candidate either. just inflating their NET with a schedule like ours. best win is Q3.

Yes our record is inflated and you can argue the NET is inflated as well but there are teams every year with inflated NETs that sneak into the tourney. The committee heavily weighs the NET ranking and teams are purposefully scheduling to benefit that metric alone, regardless of how "good" the team really is.

Also, when you schedule tough you get the benefit of the doubt more than other teams. When you have a SOS in the 300s, you automatically disqualify yourself from consideration, unless you are a P4 team that smokes everyone.

ok, that's confusing. I think you're saying teams that aren't very good are scheduling weakly to game the NET ... and I agree. we're one of them. so is Belmont. so does the committee heavily weigh the NET, or do they give the benefit of the doubt to the teams that schedule hard?

for example, if both improve their NET equally, I'd have Dayton (75 NET) in before Belmont (67).

 

[SensibleSpider]

you totally missed the point. I referenced Vegas to point out that us losing to Elon wasn't some wild upset. we're considered about their equal. do you think Elon is an at-large candidate?


I'll be shocked if Belmont is an at-large candidate either. just inflating their NET with a schedule like ours. best win is Q3.


ok, that's confusing. I think you're saying teams that aren't very good are scheduling weakly to game the NET ... and I agree. we're one of them. so is Belmont. so does the committee heavily weigh the NET, or do they give the benefit of the doubt to the teams that schedule hard?

for example, if both improve their NET equally, I'd have Dayton (75 NET) in before Belmont (67).

No one thinks losing to Elon is some wild upset. It's wildly upsetting to see the state of the program that losing to Elon is ho hum for the leadership.

All teams are scheduling weakly in the OOC to game the NET. Hence why everyone is syaing that scheduling in MBB is broken. None of the P4 teams want to risk losing to a mid-major because of what it does to your resume. But those P4 teams have the beenfit of having a ton of Q1 and Q2 games in conference so they can afford to do so. Richmond and other mid majors can't do so. You just proved my point by saying Dayton's tougher schedule is more appealing to a committee than Belmont's. You keep arguing that Richmond shouldn't schedule any tougher because it doesn't matter. Well A) to 4700's point above, if we replaced a D3 team and another cupcake with legit competition, losing to Elon wouldn't sting as much because other opportunities are out there. Instead, we have to be perfect in the OOC with this schedule to even have a blip of hope at an at large.

 

[ManiBenton]

Feels like yesterday that the A-10 had a 6-bid year, but that was 12 years ago now...I'm getting old. Coming up on a decade since we've had a 3-bid year.

6 bids and we were no where close either lol

 

[ur2K]

I had the unfortune of watching that game last night.

To answer Sman's questions - we did an awful job of penetration against the matchup zone altogether. We basiclaly threw the ball into a big man in the high post and then passed the ball around the perimeter. Lot's of really dumb mistakes like cross court passes going through guys hands or guys throwing really lazy passes. Elon applied virtually zero pressure all game and did not double team at all. It was entirely self-inflicted. Mooney in his post games comments even acknowledged the TO's were just sloppy play rather than good defense. AA just looked a bit more tentative than normal, not sure if he didn't like the match ups but I don't recall him taking the ball to the hoop.

To Native's comments - I don't care if that Elon team was picked 1st or 100th in the CAA, they are not a good basketball team. W&M is far better in the same conference after watching both games. That was an UGLY loss no matter how you slice it. That was entirely Richmond losing the game rather than Elon winning it.

I don't find that loss meaningless. I actually find it very meaningful. Any time you lose to an inferior opponent should be unacceptable. It showed that this team completely lost focus and was not able to regain any intensity or focus throughout the game to turn the momentum. I kept waiting for one of the team leaders to step up and take over the game and will the team to victory but instead found that Johnston had to be taken out of the game because he kept turning the ball over, tyne was almost entirely an after thought and the list goes on and on..

Now as we all knew, there was zero hope of an at large bid because of the schedule so in that sense, it really doesn't change how the team should view the rest of the season. If anything, it should serve as a wakeup call that you need to show up with focus and intensity every game.

Its jarring watching this team and how they turn the ball over - which (to Mooney's credit) has been something we don't do in most of his time here. We had 9 in the first half of the Southern Illinois game which were mostly unforced errors.

Zones have been the Mooney offense kryptonite (see Furman game) - I don't know how he hasn't figured out a way to run a good zone offense.

 

[SFspidur]

6 bids and we were no where close either lol

We were pretty decent that year, but not good enough. Played UNC, Florida and Wake reasonably tough (Wake game went to OT), beat a UMass team that was #13 at the time. But it all fell apart in early February when Ced Lindsay tore up both knees and D-Will left the team. Lost 5 of our final 6 regular season games, then got by Duquesne in our first game of the A-10 tournament before getting blown out by VCU.

RPIs in the A-10 that year:

18. VCU
23. SLU
28. UMass
34. Dayton
38. St. Joe's
39. GW
77. Richmond
94. Bona
98. La Salle
153. Rhody
177. Mason
211. Duquesne
234. Fordham

Can't remember what our RPI was before we lost those two guys.

 

[Urmite]

We were pretty decent that year, but not good enough. Played UNC, Florida and Wake reasonably tough (Wake game went to OT), beat a UMass team that was #13 at the time. But it all fell apart in early February when Ced Lindsay tore up both knees and D-Will left the team. Lost 5 of our final 6 regular season games, then got by Duquesne in our first game of the A-10 tournament before getting blown out by VCU.

RPIs in the A-10 that year:

18. VCU
23. SLU
28. UMass
34. Dayton
38. St. Joe's
39. GW
77. Richmond
94. Bona
98. La Salle
153. Rhody
177. Mason
211. Duquesne
234. Fordham

Can't remember what our RPI was before we lost those two guys.

Don’t know RPI, but after VCU away game we were 65 KenPom. After loss at Dayton we were 90.

 

[vt4700]

we're about even with Elon ... like Vegas predicted.
we're about even with 4-4 Furman.
we're even with Southern Illinois (OT win).
we're not much better than W&M or Charlotte.

spoiler alert ... our record is inflated. sure, we might play better in-conference. but forget what the NET says. right now we're about a 150 team. at-large talk was never realistic, and not because we didn't schedule better.

While I agree with the first part, did u think the same a couple years ago before we went 15-3 in the A-10? At large talk was never realistic before the 1st game this year because of the schedule. Who knows how the A-10 wil play out. We could be under .500, .500, slightly above .500, or go around 14-4. But, you always want to give yourself an at large chance before the season starts. Are u saying we will never get an at large so we should never worry about our schedule? We have gotton at larges before, we have been 1st 4 out before, and we have been probably a win or 2 from getting a couple more. Not sure I see your point here.

 

[Spiderguy]

Its jarring watching this team and how they turn the ball over - which (to Mooney's credit) has been something we don't do in most of his time here. We had 9 in the first half of the Southern Illinois game which were mostly unforced errors.

Zones have been the Mooney offense kryptonite (see Furman game) - I don't know how he hasn't figured out a way to run a good zone offense.

He’s going to run his offense come hell or high water. I’d love to see scouting reports on us and what they say about zone versus man defense.

 

[fan2011]

couple questions since I didn't watch ...
was the zone a problem for AA? only 5 shots (and only 1 from 3) and no assists in 26 minutes. was he unable to penetrate the seams? did we not push the ball at all?
and with the 20 turnovers ... were they forced by double teams in the zone? thanks.

When the refs don’t call any fouls it has a big impact on Aiden’s offensive game

 

[Dogspider]

Yes announcers mentioned these were usual ACC weekend refs. More physical competition and they really let the guys play. I thought it was good refereeing they refused to make bail out calls on wild drives to the hoop from both teams.

 

[sman]

I've always wanted a better schedule because it's more fun. I don't believe any schedule games the system. you're either good enough or you aren't. and in my opinion, though I hope to be wrong ... we're not good enough this year. we've seen a good amount of games. nothing screams at-large.

we cetainly should have added a HM game if possible. we have every year before recent years. but our schedule isn't that unlike SLU's ... and their NET is terrific. if we beat Elon and Furman, we'd have a strong NET too. then we'd test whether the committee value NET more or the SOS.