Game Thread - GMU @ RC Tuesday 2/10 7pm ESPN+

sman said:
agreed that I didn't think we deserved a bid, but a #1 seed in the NIT is the definition of being on the bubble.
Click to expand...
The definition constantly changes. I don’t recall there being any “rules” about the #1 seeds being the first four out back in the year being discussed. I think there were politics involved and on top of that I think the seeding makes 0 difference in the NIT anyway as many of the teams are not motivated to play in “the other tournament”.

Argue however you like, but the A10 standings show UR is not consistently in the top of the conference which is a requirement to be considered as nationally relevant.
 
UR was 15-11 with no good wins. Then beat up on the literal dregs of the A10 that year to finish 19-11. None of that pushed us on the bubble.

Beating mediocre GW in A10 quarters when they had a chance for a last shot to win game? That also did not push UR on to the bubble.

As NIT #1 seed, UR played an away game at Alabama. NIT seeds mean absolutely nothing with regard to the NCAA tournament and have no meaning overall either. It was a literal smokescreen by the NCAA to give lip service to non power teams.

Google 2017 ncaa tournament snubs. UR is not listed among the teams.

it was exactly the type of season that is NOT a true bubble season - bad OOC, no good wins, good conference season by beating up on mostly bad/mediocre teams, 1-1 in A10 tourney with flameout vs VCU and failure to make championship game, never made any big run to warrant inclusion on the real bubble.
 
For reference, 30-4 Wichita State got a 10 seed, while their conference mate and reg. season co-champs Illinois State was left out at 27-6.

Wichita's had OOC wins against LSU, Saint Louis, Colorado St and Oklahoma, while their 4 losses were to Louisville, OKST, Mich St. and 27 win Illinois St. They had won 14 in a row going into the tournament. 10 seed.

ISU tied Wichita for the regular season conference title, but beat no one except WSU once but also got killed twice by Wichita. So a similar resume to UR, with a much better best win, but far more victories and a conf. reg. season title (raise a banner and cut nets!!!), and were also left out.
 
Uh...in TJ's senior year of 2017, we were #80 in the RPI on Selection Sunday and a 6-seed in the NIT, not a 1-seed.

2015 was the year we were a 1-seed. We were #56 in the RPI on Selection Sunday, and that was the first year where the first four out automatically got NIT 1-seeds. Still a bit of a surprise we were that high.
 
SFspidur said:
Uh...in TJ's senior year of 2017, we were #80 in the RPI on Selection Sunday and a 6-seed in the NIT, not a 1-seed.

2015 was the year we were a 1-seed. We were #56 in the RPI on Selection Sunday, and that was the first year where the first four out automatically got NIT 1-seeds. Still a bit of a surprise we were that high.
Click to expand...
Thanks SF. I almost added that I'm sure you would jump in with the facts around that, but I didn't and yet you did.
 
brooklyn brownstone said:
SF, wish you were on east coast time so I would not have had to pull out all the stats on that 16-17 season.
Click to expand...
I am east coast (though not a particularly early riser). Regardless, it took me seeing your post to realize it made no sense that we would have been first four out with that résumé and actually think about the original claim lol.
 
SFspidur said:
Uh...in TJ's senior year of 2017, we were #80 in the RPI on Selection Sunday and a 6-seed in the NIT, not a 1-seed.

2015 was the year we were a 1-seed. We were #56 in the RPI on Selection Sunday, and that was the first year where the first four out automatically got NIT 1-seeds. Still a bit of a surprise we were that high.
Click to expand...
Wow so it was the first year. Of course, the actual year being discussed was a couple years after as you point out. Thanks for the details.

Regardless, another “almost” which only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
 
also a quick google search of 2015 ncaa snubs finds - not surprisingly - that Colorado State, Murray State and Temple were 3 teams left out that people had on the bubble or in, while UR is not mentioned. Which is unsurprising after a quarterfinal flameout in A10. Not a bubble team, no matter what they retroactively said (thanks to SF for making this correct in year, this is the year that UR was one of the smokescreens to cover for the big school bias.)

2014-15 UR Breakdown. Tell me that this is an NCAA at large first 4 out back them.

OOC 7-6. Losses to ODU, JMU, Northeastern, N. Iowa, NC State and Wake (who finished 13-19 on the year). 1 point win vs. W&M. No notable OOC wins. Stop me when this sounds familiar...

On Valentine's Day team was 13-12, having just lost to 9-22 (4-14) bottom feeder GooMoos. Also lost to Lasalle in conference play, lol. At that point clearly not on the bubble or anywhere near it. Stop me when this sounds familiar...

Went on a solid 6 game win streak to get to 19-12 and tie for 4th in A10, taking the tiebreak from VCU so getting a bye in A10 tournament. Immediately flame out with a loss to VCU in A10 quarterfinals. Stop me when this sounds familiar...

I'm assuming UR never cracked the top 50 in RPI and were never in real contention barring an A10 tourney run. And again, I was at that A10 tourney, suffered the loss surrounded by VCU fans. No one thought we might get a bid - we were several steps away from the maybe category. What I posted in the other thread holds here - no one thought we were close and the NIT #1 seed was a true surprise.

So again, a season with a terrible OOC, no signature OOC wins and several awful losses to lower level teams.

To crack the actual bubble talk, would have needed at least 1-2 wins in A10 tourney which did not happen and were not part of any in/out discussions the final 72 hours.

Then the committee snubs the 3 non power teams above while including power teams that were suspect like UCLA, and includes UR as part of its smokescreen. Yeah, sure we were first 4 out, right. Guess who else got #1 NIT seeds? ODU, Temple and Colorado State ("see guys! We do consider non power teams for bids! Look at these NIT seeds to see how fair it all is. We consider everyone!")

The only reason the RPI was in the 50s was because all those lower level teams that beat UR in the OOC won a decent amount of games. UR beat none of them though.

It does not fit my criteria as a bubble year. Sorry. At least 1-2 victories away. All the other non power teams listed here were ahead of UR, with RPIs mostly 20 spots better. Davidson and Dayton as 1-2 in A10 got at larges. VCU won the tournament. URI in 3rd played in the NIT. UR in 4th place tie in A10 with no good wins was not leapfrogging any of these teams, no matter how they spun it.
 
I think it was pretty obvious after seeing us in the first 4 out, if we beat VCU in the tourney in 2015, we get in the dance and they don't. Loser of that game was in the first 4 out. That means we were 100% on the bubble. You even said we needed 1 or 2 wins ( I think 1) in the A-10 tourney. So, if you get to your tourney needing wins to get to the dance, or even to be in consideration, of course you are on the bubble. You talk about the bubble as if you want bubble teams to be locks. Bubble teams are on the bubble for a reason..they aren't locks. And, I think we had a shot in 2017 as well. We were 13-5 A-10, tied for 3rd, and lost to VCU in OT in the semis. Beating 14-4 A-10 VCU and losing a close one in the finals gets us in IMO. Again, that is the definition of being on the bubble. Maybe you get in, maybe you don't.
 
sman said:
agreed that I didn't think we deserved a bid, but a #1 seed in the NIT is the definition of being on the bubble.
Click to expand...
I think the definition is being on one or more bubble watch reports, that feels more legit than ending up in the NIT as a one seed when no one really expected it.
 
Lunardi had us in his next four out heading into the A-10 tourney. I assume the loss to VCU probably bumped us out of that by Selection Sunday.

www.gulflive.com

Lunardi's NCAA basketball tournament projections 2015: bracketology says Texas A&M out, Texas in, and more

The NCAA men's basketball regular season is coming to a close, and the latest NCAA basketball tournament projections have just been released from ESPN bracketology expert Joe Lunardi, giving a good idea of what teams will be dancing for 2015...
www.gulflive.com www.gulflive.com
 
I have my own thoughts on it - overly wordily expressed above - but I haven't watched a selection show in 15 years expecting to see if UR was in or out. We were out except for when we won the A10 tournament in 2022. 2020 would have been different but no tournament and no show that year.

My definition of the bubble is much more attuned to when it was narrower in scope. If you're in the next 4 out as championship week is ongoing, you're almost never making it as upsets happen and leagues (like the current A10) steal bids away. That's not a real bubble team, that's a TV talking point bc they have to talk about stuff and more teams equals more stuff to discuss. You basically need to win your tournament as the bubble shrinks. All these teams I mentioned had better resumes than UR.

Being 54th in the RPI does nothing for me. Look at that 7-6 OOC with no good wins. Look at being 13-12 after 25 games. So we played ourselves near and immediately crapped the bed, thereby never really being in contention?

The point I'm really trying to make with the overall statement about the bubble, is that we lost a lot of games to some good teams OOC, and scuttled a good schedule, thus making an at large bid vitually inaccessible after the OOC, which happens quite frequently. Go 10-3 in that OOC and UR may well make it.

Hell, I'll hypothetically agree with you - beat VCU in A10 tourney and get in while knocking them out.

Just do something, any of these types of things, regularly. Moon barely ever does though. It's enough.

We don't really compete for at large bids over the last 15 years. Period.

(btw - VCU's ooc that year? Beat Tennessee, Oregon, Cincinnati, 31 win N. Iowa and 22 win Illinois St. to go 10-3 with signature wins. Losses were to Villanova, UVa and 27 win ODU. Compare and contrast results as you will. The only reason they were not already a lock was bc they were 0-2 in regular season vs UR that year, which seems unfathomable now.)
 
I will repeat what I said in the original post: I violently agree with the sentiment originally expressed. It's not nearly good enough, and whether it is 3, 2, or 1 years on the bubble during tenure, it's damning and should be a fireable offense for any program serious about succeeding in basketball. Among many others litigated ad nauseum on here.

But whether or not you and friends in a room in Pittsburgh felt like it or not at the time, the fact is that we were the #1 seed in the NIT, which means the people who make the decision on who is in the tournament or not felt that we were 100%, absolutely on the bubble. So I guess I'm just saying we don't need to inflate the numbers to make the point that Mooney hasn't been good enough. And when the numbers get artificially inflated (or deflated, as the case may be), in my opinion it undercuts the argument. Just my opinion.
 
Agree! We're talking about whether we've never been on the bubble or whether it is a miniscule amount of times we've been on the bubble.

It's all unacceptable.

Me and my friends in a room in Pittsburgh, lol.
 
brooklyn brownstone said:
Agree! We're talking about whether we've never been on the bubble or whether it is a miniscule amount of times we've been on the bubble.

It's all unacceptable.

Me and my friends in a room in Pittsburgh, lol.
Click to expand...
You shouldn’t even be on the bubble. Win some games that matter. Actually test yourself and win some important. If you’re on the tournament bubble you should figure out how to win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Section9_RowD
Game Thread - Makeup game @GMU Monday 2/15 ESPN+
Replies
19
Views
384
PhillySpider
P
Section9_RowD
Game Thread - @ SLU 4pm Sat 1/17 CBS Sports Network
7 8 9
Replies
166
Views
3K
97spiderfan
9
Section9_RowD
Game Thread - Bonnie at RC - Sat 2/21 6pm ESPN+
3 4 5
Replies
91
Views
2K
*23*
*23*
Section9_RowD
Game thread - Bethune Cookman @ RC Tuesday, Dec 16 - 11am (ESPN+)
Replies
12
Views
275
Sections 204and5
Sections 204and5
*23*
25-26 Roster Expectations
8 9 10
Replies
184
Views
8K
URFan1
U
Back
Top