MVC Tie-Breaker

[Rick LeHew]

When SIU beat MSU in the final game - It created a 3-way tie for 7/8/9. The current MVC tie-breaking system calls for results from the 3 teams in a "Round-robin" format:
7 - MSU = 3-1
8 - BU = 2-2
9 - DU = 1-3

If MSU beats SIU in the final game, the tie-breaker goes head to head play (tie @ 1-1), then the Non-Conference SOS's - (BU last in the conference):
8 - Drake
9 - Bradley

Since MSU beat Drake twice -Bradley wins the tie-breaker over Drake. Why should Bradley win a tie-breaker based on how MSU/Drake played each other? I understand it's for the 8/9 seed... but if it were the 5/6/7 seed, the losing team is in the play-in game.

I propose the tie-breaker system goes directly to the 3 Non-Conference SOS's. Doug Elgin wants all MVC teams playing a tougher schedule, this would encourage that even more.

Either way... 8/9 or 9/8 - GO BEAT DRAKE !!

[tornado]

also - remember that bank-in 3-pointer that Walt threw in to win the Missouri State game?
That's what kept us from being 10th seed - yes - we were rescued by Walt's amazing game winner from a 3rd straight 10th place seed

[Da Coach]

Here is the official MVC rule regarding tiebreakers to determine seeding position-

http://www.mvc-sports.com/mbasketball/tiebreaker/

For 2-way ties, the MVC uses the non-conference strength of schedule as the second tiebreaker. The first tiebreaker is the same as it always has been- head-to-head record.

The primary tiebreaker for ties with 3 or more teams involved is also the same one it's been for many years- the "round robin" records of the teams. But the secondary tiebreaker has been changed to the non-conference strength of schedule.

[alczervik75]

also - remember that bank-in 3-pointer that Walt threw in to win the Missouri State game?
That's what kept us from being 10th seed - yes - we were rescued by Walt's amazing game winner from a 3rd straight 10th place seed

Also remember if Drake hadn't had a statistically unconscious FT shooting night and we inbound the ball to the right player, we're a 6 seed. Bottom line, 6 or 10 doesn't matter much this year, the play on the court was huge improvement, need to be able to say the same next year.

[Da Coach]

Also remember if Drake hadn't had a statistically unconscious FT shooting night and we inbound the ball to the right player, we're a 6 seed. Bottom line, 6 or 10 doesn't matter much this year, the play on the court was huge improvement, need to be able to say the same next year.

I don't see how that could make us a 6 seed. Am I missing something? Even if we beat Drake and end up 8-10 in a tie with Illinois State for 6th, we lose the tiebreaker to them and would be the 7th seed. 7th is better than 9th, I guess, but we'd still be playing Thursday.

I also suspect Missouri State might be thinking "if Walt Lemon hadn't hit that miracle shot at the buzzer", maybe they could have won that game and they would be tied for 6th.

[real fan]

I don't see how that could make us a 6 seed. Am I missing something? Even if we beat Drake and end up 8-10 in a tie with Illinois State for 6th, we lose the tiebreaker to them and would be the 7th seed. 7th is better than 9th, I guess, but we'd still be playing Thursday.

I also suspect Missouri State might be thinking "if Walt Lemon hadn't hit that miracle shot at the buzzer", maybe they could have won that game and they would be tied for 6th.

A tie at 6 just sounds better, we basically tied for 7th this season even though we ended up with the 8 seed, no doubt team showed good improvement from the last 2 seasons, personally I was not happy with the way we finished the season as in my opinion we should have beaten UNI at home and Drake on the road, next year will be season 3 under Geno and with most the teams in the Valley losing key personnel I fully expect Bradley to make their move to the top 4 , who we sign this spring will be the key in determining this factor as we appear to have better outside shooters on next seasons roster but we still need 2 6-7 or bigger inside players .

[alczervik75]

I don't see how that could make us a 6 seed. Am I missing something? Even if we beat Drake and end up 8-10 in a tie with Illinois State for 6th, we lose the tiebreaker to them and would be the 7th seed. 7th is better than 9th, I guess, but we'd still be playing Thursday.

I also suspect Missouri State might be thinking "if Walt Lemon hadn't hit that miracle shot at the buzzer", maybe they could have won that game and they would be tied for 6th.

You are right, 7 seed, tied for 6th. That was my mistake.

My point was in response to T's point about Walt Lemon. Big picture, 7 seed or 10 seed doesn't really change much this year. We improved drastically either way and need to continue that. Small picture, we had two games this year in conference that were decided in the last 30 seconds.

In one game, had we not made a last second three we go to overtime against a team that is close to our equal at home. Even though they had the momentum, statistics would say the home team wins those games 65% of the time.

In the other game, we held a 5 point lead with under 30 seconds. Statistics put the odds of winning that game at 97% (after the three, and still near 85% after they made their 3 point play). So in total, we were unfortunate to have 7 wins, because if you go back and play and replay the final 15 seconds of both those games, you would go 2-0 about 50% of the time, 1-1 about 45% and lose both about 5%.

T's post both omitted that we don't know what the outcome would have been with Missouri State had the basket not been made (maybe and oversight), and could be misleading, imo, regarding the impression it gives about our overall season. That is why I brought Drake into it, to offset the implication that we were one fortunate shot away from being unimproved. That said, if we don't show improvement next year, the near future starts to get a little ominous.

[Old Coach]

If my aunt were a man she'd be my uncle.

[OrangeandBlack74]

also - remember that bank-in 3-pointer that Walt threw in to win the Missouri State game?
That's what kept us from being 10th seed - yes - we were rescued by Walt's amazing game winner from a 3rd straight 10th place seed

Don't let the facts get in the way of making your argument, but...

1. If Walt doesn't make the 3 pt shot, we go to overtime. No way to know what would have happened in that situation.

2. If we had finished tied with SIU at 6-12, because of the head-to-head record, we would have been slotted as the 9th seed, not the 10th.

As it stands, we tied for 7th and have the 8th seed in the tournament. Those are the facts.

[tornado]

yeah - that shot was a lock so we were a lock to stay solidly out of 10th and we all know that no 10th seed has ever advanced past Friday...

[OrangeandBlack74]

yeah - that shot was a lock so we were a lock to stay solidly out of 10th and we all know that no 10th seed has ever advanced past Friday...

So what's your point? Just get the facts straight...don't spin them for whatever argument you are dreaming up.

[LittleBrave]

Talk about a topic going absolutely nowhere!
Why aren't we talking about the Drake game coming up instead of trying to change what's already been done?
Carry on, carry on...if you must.

[Tulsa Brave]

We would have had to lose to SIU to be the 10th seed.

But had Eastman hit the 3 in the final 30 seconds against WSU, and had we not melted down at Drake late, and had we forced our normal number of turnovers at MSU, then we'd be in the 2:30 Friday game that some here were very happy with being our ceiling. I expect us to break through that ceiling within the next 2-3 years, and set a new higher bar for the program, above that which a few here were perfectly content with.

[amckillip]

We would have had to lose to SIU to be the 10th seed.

But had Eastman hit the 3 in the final 30 seconds against WSU, and had we not melted down at Drake late, and had we forced our normal number of turnovers at MSU, then we'd be in the 2:30 Friday game that some here were very happy with being our ceiling. I expect us to break through that ceiling within the next 2-3 years, and set a new higher bar for the program, above that which a few here were perfectly content with.

For me, breaking through that in 3 years may not be enough... I don't want to play on Thursday for 2 more years... I can stomach one more year, but after 4 it may be time to evaluate. I don't think it should be hard and fast, if we have good recruits coming, we're trending the right direction, no academic/major-off-court issues, then maybe Geno gets a little more lee-way, but if we don't look after 4 years, to be considerably better in year 5, then re-evaluation is necessary. I think that we'll be top 3 in year 4 however, so hopefully it's a moot point.

[alczervik75]

For me, breaking through that in 3 years may not be enough... I don't want to play on Thursday for 2 more years... I can stomach one more year, but after 4 it may be time to evaluate. I don't think it should be hard and fast, if we have good recruits coming, we're trending the right direction, no academic/major-off-court issues, then maybe Geno gets a little more lee-way, but if we don't look after 4 years, to be considerably better in year 5, then re-evaluation is necessary. I think that we'll be top 3 in year 4 however, so hopefully it's a moot point.

Honestly, next year needs to be off Thursday. Depending on who we add, next year's success may be more secure than 2015. While we would all like more inside presence, we do have Lemon and Pickett next year, along with a 5th year post who can score.

With the two transfers, along with Shayok, Bell and Tucker, that needs to be enough to move us to at least .500 in conference, because if we aren't getting enough from the non-seniors next year to boost those three to .500, it's going to be hard to get there the next (I may reconsider if Mike Shaw and Tommie Hamilton are here and the underclassmen carry the load next year).