|
|
Post by mactec on Feb 10, 2016 22:38:43 GMT -8
So much negativity around here. Just relax. Stop acting like Lobo fans and throwing everyone who had a bad game under the bus. That s***'s embarrassing. This team just won 11 straight in conference.
|
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Feb 10, 2016 22:42:19 GMT -8
SDSU wasn't going to go undefeated in conference play anyway. Just have to win the MWC tourney to get in the NCAA's. They can do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mfaulkhof2011 on Feb 10, 2016 22:45:18 GMT -8
Winning the tournament will be tough when our offense can just go away and the zones they are a comin'!
|
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Feb 10, 2016 22:49:10 GMT -8
So much negativity around here. Just relax. Stop acting like Lobo fans and throwing everyone who had a bad game under the bus. That s***'s embarrassing. This team just won 11 straight in conference. I was wondering when the "I'm proud of our boys tonight, now on to the next game" post would be. Took a little longer than expected though  . |
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Feb 10, 2016 22:54:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecfred on Feb 10, 2016 22:56:03 GMT -8
Was a team effort!
|
|
|
|
Post by mactec on Feb 11, 2016 8:19:45 GMT -8
So much negativity around here. Just relax. Stop acting like Lobo fans and throwing everyone who had a bad game under the bus. That s***'s embarrassing. This team just won 11 straight in conference. I was wondering when the "I'm proud of our boys tonight, now on to the next game" post would be. Took a little longer than expected though . More accurately "I'm embarrassed by our fans" |
|
|
|
Post by moctezumaii on Feb 11, 2016 8:27:29 GMT -8
So much negativity around here. Just relax. Stop acting like Lobo fans and throwing everyone who had a bad game under the bus. That s***'s embarrassing. This team just won 11 straight in conference. Just won 11 straight in a conference I think few can really argue is the worst it's ever been. |
|
|
|
Post by legkick on Feb 11, 2016 8:28:15 GMT -8
More accurately "I'm embarrassed by our fans" You noticed that too? We lose a game and five plus new threads are created ripping the team's performance and/or players. We win a game and . . . maybe one new thread if we're lucky, otherwise <crickets>. Same thing with game day threads - lose one and it is fifteen plus pages; win one and it may be six or seven. Make no mistake about it, these are not "fans"; they are narcissistic critics. |
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Feb 11, 2016 16:12:02 GMT -8
So much negativity around here. Just relax. Stop acting like Lobo fans and throwing everyone who had a bad game under the bus. That s***'s embarrassing. This team just won 11 straight in conference. Just won 11 straight in a conference I think few can really argue is the worst it's ever been. Despite that, the MW is still better than most conferences. Only 7 maybe 8 conferences right now are assured of getting more than 1 bid.
What we accomplished is impressive, no matter how you look at it.
|
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Feb 11, 2016 16:21:52 GMT -8
Just won 11 straight in a conference I think few can really argue is the worst it's ever been. Despite that, the MW is still better than most conferences. Only 7 maybe 8 conferences right now are assured of getting more than 1 bid.
What we accomplished is impressive, no matter how you look at it.
Respectfully disagree on the point that this is what makes the MWC "better" than most conferences. I think we're making excuses again. And that, to me, is almost unacceptable. In that regard, our conference is essentially the same as the Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference, Southland Conference, Ohio Valley Conference, and others that are only going to have 1 team make it into the tourney. Can anyone name two, ok, one team from each of those leagues I just mentioned without looking it up? Exactly. We should never compare ourselves to conferences like these but it's unfortunate that we do just to make ourselves feel better. Sure, I suppose we can "only play the competition we're given." However, we're a big fish in a small pond and while I know it feels good to be at the top of the mountain, let's be honest, this league just hasn't been what it should be in recent years. Sure, what we have accomplished has been impressive, but they way you say it sounds like you're softening the blow and preparing for a letdown that you know is coming. |
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Feb 11, 2016 17:36:48 GMT -8
Despite that, the MW is still better than most conferences. Only 7 maybe 8 conferences right now are assured of getting more than 1 bid.
What we accomplished is impressive, no matter how you look at it.
Respectfully disagree on the point that this is what makes the MWC "better" than most conferences. I think we're making excuses again. And that, to me, is almost unacceptable. In that regard, our conference is essentially the same as the Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference, Southland Conference, Ohio Valley Conference, and others that are only going to have 1 team make it into the tourney. Can anyone name two, ok, one team from each of those leagues I just mentioned without looking it up? Exactly. We should never compare ourselves to conferences like these but it's unfortunate that we do just to make ourselves feel better. Sure, I suppose we can "only play the competition we're given." However, we're a big fish in a small pond and while I know it feels good to be at the top of the mountain, let's be honest, this league just hasn't been what it should be in recent years. Sure, what we have accomplished has been impressive, but they way you say it sounds like you're softening the blow and preparing for a letdown that you know is coming. Overreact much?
Who said that? From an RPI perspective the MW is the 11th best conference in the country, better than 21 other conferences and significantly better than all you mentioned. From a computer modeling perspective, we're the 10th or 11th best, depending on which you use. Both of those are BETTER than last year when we were a 3-bid conference.
The conferences you mentioned are ranked closer to 23rd-30th. Last I check 10-11 doesn't = 23 or 30. If you read my post you'd realize I said "better than most conferences" (not some), which is true, and referenced that only 7-8 are assured of being 2-bid conferences, which is also true. I never said we were on par with the majority of conferences. There's the Big 6 + the A10, and then maybe 4-5 conferences right on that next level. Some up some years, some down. There's nothing wrong with being on that tier, especially given the financial gap between the Big 6 & the rest. If you think otherwise then you're fooling yourself.
The problem with the MWC this year isn't we're bad top to bottom. We're not where we were 3-4 years ago, but we're right among the 2nd or 3rd tier and far from any of the lower tiers. We're much like the MVC and Wichita St where they are a "big fish", or Gonzaga & the WCC. The problem with the MW this year is parity, much like most conferences. Thus far only 1 team has separated themselves from the rest. Again, just like many conferences, including Wichita St & the MVC. And again, that IS an accomplishment.
If you believe the MWC should be back in the top 3-4 conferences you're not living in reality. That all changed in 2010-2012 with the new TV mega contracts. It just needed to filter down from football to hoops, which it now has. There will always be SOME teams that squeeze into the upper ranks, but from an overall conference perspective the Big 6 will rule. The biggest problem with the MWC are the Oregon St's, Oregon's, Colorado's & ASU's, programs which have invested $MILLIONS, whereas the Nevada's, SJSU's, FSU's & Wyoming's of the world can't.
Not "softening the blow"; just living in the real world, and understanding the MWC isn't as bad as some people make it out to be. Being in a top 10-12 conference isn't the end of the world. Being the best in a top 10-12 conference is a very good accomplishment.
And yes, you can only play those are your schedule. That is also reality. Separating yourself within that schedule and from your competition is also a good thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Feb 11, 2016 18:44:52 GMT -8
Respectfully disagree on the point that this is what makes the MWC "better" than most conferences. I think we're making excuses again. And that, to me, is almost unacceptable. In that regard, our conference is essentially the same as the Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference, Southland Conference, Ohio Valley Conference, and others that are only going to have 1 team make it into the tourney. Can anyone name two, ok, one team from each of those leagues I just mentioned without looking it up? Exactly. We should never compare ourselves to conferences like these but it's unfortunate that we do just to make ourselves feel better. Sure, I suppose we can "only play the competition we're given." However, we're a big fish in a small pond and while I know it feels good to be at the top of the mountain, let's be honest, this league just hasn't been what it should be in recent years. Sure, what we have accomplished has been impressive, but they way you say it sounds like you're softening the blow and preparing for a letdown that you know is coming. Overreact much?
Who said that? From an RPI perspective the MW is the 11th best conference in the country, better than 21 other conferences and significantly better than all you mentioned. From a computer modeling perspective, we're the 10th or 11th best, depending on which you use. Both of those are BETTER than last year when we were a 3-bid conference.
The conferences you mentioned are ranked closer to 23rd-30th. Last I check 10-11 doesn't = 23 or 30. If you read my post you'd realize I said "better than most conferences" (not some), which is true, and referenced that only 7-8 are assured of being 2-bid conferences, which is also true. I never said we were on par with the majority of conferences. There's the Big 6 + the A10, and then maybe 4-5 conferences right on that next level. Some up some years, some down. There's nothing wrong with being on that tier, especially given the financial gap between the Big 6 & the rest. If you think otherwise then you're fooling yourself.
The problem with the MWC this year isn't we're bad top to bottom. We're not where we were 3-4 years ago, but we're right among the 2nd or 3rd tier and far from any of the lower tiers. We're much like the MVC and Wichita St where they are a "big fish", or Gonzaga & the WCC. The problem with the MW this year is parity, much like most conferences. Thus far only 1 team has separated themselves from the rest. Again, just like many conferences, including Wichita St & the MVC. And again, that IS an accomplishment.
If you believe the MWC should be back in the top 3-4 conferences you're not living in reality. That all changed in 2010-2012 with the new TV mega contracts. It just needed to filter down from football to hoops, which it now has. There will always be SOME teams that squeeze into the upper ranks, but from an overall conference perspective the Big 6 will rule. The biggest problem with the MWC are the Oregon St's, Oregon's, Colorado's & ASU's, programs which have invested $MILLIONS, whereas the Nevada's, SJSU's, FSU's & Wyoming's of the world can't.
Not "softening the blow"; just living in the real world, and understanding the MWC isn't as bad as some people make it out to be. Being in a top 10-12 conference isn't the end of the world. Being the best in a top 10-12 conference is a very good accomplishment.
And yes, you can only play those are your schedule. That is also reality. Separating yourself within that schedule and from your competition is also a good thing.
I'm talking about teams getting into the tournament. Rankings, schmankings...it doesn't matter what our conference "rank" is, the fact is that if only 7 or 8 conferences are getting multiple at-large bids like you said, everyone else is getting 1. That's 20-something conferences including us, that are getting only 1 bid. From the conference standpoint, to me, yes, that's ludicrous. So 3 teams from the MWC last year made the tourney yet the conference had a worse RPI as you stated? This year, we're looking at getting a single bid. So why all the fuss about this year's conference RPI and ranking then? The conference's RPI is so much better now than last year and we're only getting one bid, so no need to tell us basically anything about the conference. For some reason, I get the feeling that if our team wasn't leading the conference right now, you'd be lobbying and pushing for us to get an at-large, claiming it was unfair that the top "7 or 8" conferences were getting multiple bids. At some point, we have to move past the identity of being in the MWC. North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, UCLA, and a few others could play in any conference and they'd still get respect as a team. |
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Feb 11, 2016 19:47:55 GMT -8
Overreact much?
Who said that? From an RPI perspective the MW is the 11th best conference in the country, better than 21 other conferences and significantly better than all you mentioned. From a computer modeling perspective, we're the 10th or 11th best, depending on which you use. Both of those are BETTER than last year when we were a 3-bid conference.
The conferences you mentioned are ranked closer to 23rd-30th. Last I check 10-11 doesn't = 23 or 30. If you read my post you'd realize I said "better than most conferences" (not some), which is true, and referenced that only 7-8 are assured of being 2-bid conferences, which is also true. I never said we were on par with the majority of conferences. There's the Big 6 + the A10, and then maybe 4-5 conferences right on that next level. Some up some years, some down. There's nothing wrong with being on that tier, especially given the financial gap between the Big 6 & the rest. If you think otherwise then you're fooling yourself.
The problem with the MWC this year isn't we're bad top to bottom. We're not where we were 3-4 years ago, but we're right among the 2nd or 3rd tier and far from any of the lower tiers. We're much like the MVC and Wichita St where they are a "big fish", or Gonzaga & the WCC. The problem with the MW this year is parity, much like most conferences. Thus far only 1 team has separated themselves from the rest. Again, just like many conferences, including Wichita St & the MVC. And again, that IS an accomplishment.
If you believe the MWC should be back in the top 3-4 conferences you're not living in reality. That all changed in 2010-2012 with the new TV mega contracts. It just needed to filter down from football to hoops, which it now has. There will always be SOME teams that squeeze into the upper ranks, but from an overall conference perspective the Big 6 will rule. The biggest problem with the MWC are the Oregon St's, Oregon's, Colorado's & ASU's, programs which have invested $MILLIONS, whereas the Nevada's, SJSU's, FSU's & Wyoming's of the world can't.
Not "softening the blow"; just living in the real world, and understanding the MWC isn't as bad as some people make it out to be. Being in a top 10-12 conference isn't the end of the world. Being the best in a top 10-12 conference is a very good accomplishment.
And yes, you can only play those are your schedule. That is also reality. Separating yourself within that schedule and from your competition is also a good thing.
I'm talking about teams getting into the tournament. Rankings, schmankings...it doesn't matter what our conference "rank" is, the fact is that if only 7 or 8 conferences are getting multiple at-large bids like you said, everyone else is getting 1. That's 20-something conferences including us, that are getting only 1 bid. From the conference standpoint, to me, yes, that's ludicrous. So 3 teams from the MWC last year made the tourney yet the conference had a worse RPI as you stated? This year, we're looking at getting a single bid. So why all the fuss about this year's conference RPI and ranking then? The conference's RPI is so much better now than last year and we're only getting one bid, so no need to tell us basically anything about the conference. For some reason, I get the feeling that if our team wasn't leading the conference right now, you'd be lobbying and pushing for us to get an at-large, claiming it was unfair that the top "7 or 8" conferences were getting multiple bids.
At some point, we have to move past the identity of being in the MWC. North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, UCLA, and a few others could play in any conference and they'd still get respect as a team. You have a habit of assuming things that aren't said. You do it often. Never said or implied any of the bolded part above. I'll keep it simple - if I was a BSU or NM fan I wouldn't think them worthy of an at-large bid. Given the fact SDSU is running away with this conference, has a solid RPI, and played a tough NC schedule leads me to believe we ARE deserving.
The conference RPI is HIGHER which means top to bottom the conference is better relative to all the other conferences out there. We're only a potential 1 bid conference because there aren't more teams separating themselves at the top, like last year. There's more parity. That's the norm this year college basketball. What "fuss" are you talking about?
You also assumed a bunch of crap about how the Mountain west = Southland, which was never said. We're a significantly better conference than all of those.
Your last paragraph makes absolutely ZERO sense. For one, all those programs are iconic, and have been for decades. In addition, those teams aren't in our conference; those teams have never been in our conference; those will never be in the MWC; those teams are getting MILLIONS in TV revenue. They dwarf our program in every aspect. They are what THEY are; we are what WE are. When you're in the MWC you're going to always have the identity of being in the MWC, just like Gonzaga is always going to have the identity of being in the WCC, and Wichita St will always have the identity of being in the MVC. We're no different. We've risen to the cream of the crop within our conference. That is a good thing.
If you want to ignore reality, ignore stats, etc., that's your choice. Just know many will disagree with you.
|
|
|
|
Post by heuschele on Feb 11, 2016 21:25:00 GMT -8
I never thought we would go undefeated in conference but I did not expect to lose to a Fresno team that has as its strength its rebounding but was missing its 2 best rebounders.
If we lost to a hot shooting Colorado state that was shooting way above its norm, fine.
If we lost to N.M. because they did not choke at the end, fine.
This loss was a result of real poor play but also poor hustle. Not fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by missiontrails on Feb 11, 2016 21:51:17 GMT -8
Everybody that thinks our teams should go undefeated every year (we have a few, quite obviously) will go home disappointed........every.......single......year. Sucks to be you.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Feb 11, 2016 21:58:14 GMT -8
So much negativity around here. Just relax. Stop acting like Lobo fans and throwing everyone who had a bad game under the bus. That s***'s embarrassing. This team just won 11 straight in conference. I was wondering when the "I'm proud of our boys tonight, now on to the next game" post would be. Took a little longer than expected though . That's what good athletes do. They have short memories. You can reflect all you want after the season's over. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Feb 11, 2016 22:02:46 GMT -8
I'm talking about teams getting into the tournament. Rankings, schmankings...it doesn't matter what our conference "rank" is, the fact is that if only 7 or 8 conferences are getting multiple at-large bids like you said, everyone else is getting 1. That's 20-something conferences including us, that are getting only 1 bid. From the conference standpoint, to me, yes, that's ludicrous. So 3 teams from the MWC last year made the tourney yet the conference had a worse RPI as you stated? This year, we're looking at getting a single bid. So why all the fuss about this year's conference RPI and ranking then? The conference's RPI is so much better now than last year and we're only getting one bid, so no need to tell us basically anything about the conference. For some reason, I get the feeling that if our team wasn't leading the conference right now, you'd be lobbying and pushing for us to get an at-large, claiming it was unfair that the top "7 or 8" conferences were getting multiple bids.
At some point, we have to move past the identity of being in the MWC. North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, UCLA, and a few others could play in any conference and they'd still get respect as a team. You have a habit of assuming things that aren't said. You do it often. Never said or implied any of the bolded part above. I'll keep it simple - if I was a BSU or NM fan I wouldn't think them worthy of an at-large bid. Given the fact SDSU is running away with this conference, has a solid RPI, and played a tough NC schedule leads me to believe we ARE deserving.
The conference RPI is HIGHER which means top to bottom the conference is better relative to all the other conferences out there. We're only a potential 1 bid conference because there aren't more teams separating themselves at the top, like last year. There's more parity. That's the norm this year college basketball. What "fuss" are you talking about?
You also assumed a bunch of crap about how the Mountain west = Southland, which was never said. We're a significantly better conference than all of those.
Your last paragraph makes absolutely ZERO sense. For one, all those programs are iconic, and have been for decades. In addition, those teams aren't in our conference; those teams have never been in our conference; those will never be in the MWC; those teams are getting MILLIONS in TV revenue. They dwarf our program in every aspect. They are what THEY are; we are what WE are. When you're in the MWC you're going to always have the identity of being in the MWC, just like Gonzaga is always going to have the identity of being in the WCC, and Wichita St will always have the identity of being in the MVC. We're no different. We've risen to the cream of the crop within our conference. That is a good thing.
If you want to ignore reality, ignore stats, etc., that's your choice. Just know many will disagree with you.
Yes, he assumes a lot. You know what they say about assuming...... |
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Feb 11, 2016 22:21:46 GMT -8
11-1? I'll take that. We had a very down year OOC but have rebounded nicely to put up some good numbers in MWC play.
It is fun to realize that our "down year" looks a lot like our "peak year" of a decade past. We had a pretty good team that made the tournament back in 2005-2006. That team ended 22-8 and won the MWC title with a 13-3 record. That team won the MWC Tournament. That team ended the season with a #56 RPI. That team was an 11 seed ousted in the first round. Interestingly enough that was the last Aztec team to lose to USD. This current team during a "down year" could finish pretty close to that team. We were so thrilled with that team. When the level of your peak seasons becomes your valley you are doing a lot of good things.
Note: there are 10 other MWC teams wishing they had the Aztecs record - just like football.
|
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Feb 12, 2016 0:22:56 GMT -8
I'm talking about teams getting into the tournament. Rankings, schmankings...it doesn't matter what our conference "rank" is, the fact is that if only 7 or 8 conferences are getting multiple at-large bids like you said, everyone else is getting 1. That's 20-something conferences including us, that are getting only 1 bid. From the conference standpoint, to me, yes, that's ludicrous. So 3 teams from the MWC last year made the tourney yet the conference had a worse RPI as you stated? This year, we're looking at getting a single bid. So why all the fuss about this year's conference RPI and ranking then? The conference's RPI is so much better now than last year and we're only getting one bid, so no need to tell us basically anything about the conference. For some reason, I get the feeling that if our team wasn't leading the conference right now, you'd be lobbying and pushing for us to get an at-large, claiming it was unfair that the top "7 or 8" conferences were getting multiple bids.
At some point, we have to move past the identity of being in the MWC. North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, UCLA, and a few others could play in any conference and they'd still get respect as a team. You have a habit of assuming things that aren't said. You do it often. Never said or implied any of the bolded part above. I'll keep it simple - if I was a BSU or NM fan I wouldn't think them worthy of an at-large bid. Given the fact SDSU is running away with this conference, has a solid RPI, and played a tough NC schedule leads me to believe we ARE deserving.
The conference RPI is HIGHER which means top to bottom the conference is better relative to all the other conferences out there. We're only a potential 1 bid conference because there aren't more teams separating themselves at the top, like last year. There's more parity. That's the norm this year college basketball. What "fuss" are you talking about?
You also assumed a bunch of crap about how the Mountain west = Southland, which was never said. We're a significantly better conference than all of those.
Your last paragraph makes absolutely ZERO sense. For one, all those programs are iconic, and have been for decades. In addition, those teams aren't in our conference; those teams have never been in our conference; those will never be in the MWC; those teams are getting MILLIONS in TV revenue. They dwarf our program in every aspect. They are what THEY are; we are what WE are. When you're in the MWC you're going to always have the identity of being in the MWC, just like Gonzaga is always going to have the identity of being in the WCC, and Wichita St will always have the identity of being in the MVC. We're no different. We've risen to the cream of the crop within our conference. That is a good thing.
If you want to ignore reality, ignore stats, etc., that's your choice. Just know many will disagree with you.
Haha, I know you didn't actually say it and you may have not implied that. But, that's why I said, " I get the feeling" which you even bolded, so thank you for reiterating what my thoughts were. So there's my opinion right there. Is it reality? Who knows, but at least I can admit when an opinion is an opinion. But why the "fuss" about conference talk? Because you were the first person in this thread to bring it up. I disagreed with you and you "implied" that my opinion was wrong. The MWC is not any better than the Southland or any of the other conferences that I previously mentioned, in a sense because, at the end of the day, we might end up being a one-bid conference, just like them and that's what matters most. Yes, it matters a lot more than being ranked as the #11 conference in RPI or whatever we are now. And that's essentially the same as being one of those low-level conferences. The rest of the country doesn't give a rat's @$$ about conference RPI, and it's not going to get us into the dance, so why even bring it up? Don't start with the "reality" and "ignoring stats" crap again; this has nothing to do with that. You pass things off as fact all the time when it's not simply so and then you defend your position by proclaiming that a few of us ignore reality. Here's reality: we're one (or maybe 2) losses away from being eliminated from the NCAA tournament...this team struggles with outside shooting, inside shooting, and at times, free throw shooting. Your RPI conference "stats" won't help us advance in any tournament. I'm not ignoring reality, in my opinion, you are. |
|
.
