ESPN.com's Power Rankings: Week 4

[shaunguth]

ISU won't do 2 for 1's or 1 for zero's.

Right or wrong they just won't do em.

For the record.....the answer is "wrong".

 

[cpacmel]

I have no idea where UMKC comes into the discussion?

UM-KC is from the Summit League. Right? You brought up the Summit League fishy. BTW, take a look at the Summit League vs. the Big West and tell me which do you think is more impressive to date.

The only at-large team I see in the Valley could be ISU. They should be pretty good. It's a shame their schedule sucks, but if they go 16-2 or 15-3 or something in the MVC, then they'll should be fine without getting the autobid. I'm not sure if ISU is a home or road team in the Bracket Buster, also, because either way it could be a defining moment for them.

So if ISU is the only one you see as a possible AT-Large, what does it say about the rest of the teams in the MVC right now? Or more importantly what does it say about their schedules that here we are the first week of Dec. and for all practically purposes the MVC is a 1 bid league.

ISU is a road team for the BB. But IMO, that makes no difference. The only defining moments for anyone in the MVC are going to happen in St. louis. Well unless you could jockeying for NIT vs. CBI's invites. :-o

 

[MacabreMob]

ISUred will be a contender and tough to beat I think...top 3 finish easy

I agree. Sorta... Top 3 finish very likely, but nothing's easy in the Big Valley.

 

[cpacmel]

For the record.....the answer is "wrong".

That's your right to think that way. I think we might have to wait til the end of the year before we can really grade what the Final results of ISU's schedule or anyone else's schedule is though.

I don't have a problem not giving in to the Big Boys (BCS). I am not a fan of our schedule, but I am okay not getting "pimped" out for 2 for 1's or 1 for 0's either.

 

[MacabreMob]

Let's be honest..... do you see anyone in the MVC worthy of at-large?

C'mon.... this is an MVC team's board and we get pickled on the kool-aide over here!

Ok, I'll be honest now... the MVC Champ (whoever that becomes) is worthy of an at-large if they don't win the auto-bid in St Louis.

 

[cpacmel]

That was my point in saying those rankings don't mean anything. Where was Drake ranked last preseason? It's pointless to rank teams before any of them have even stepped on the court yet. Also, I didn't think Butler would be very good this year based on what they lost, but they seem to be doing alright in their games.

Yes, there are always going to be surprises. No doubt about that. But when teams go to schedule they base a team's strength on who is returning and who they have coming in.

Before the season started if one were to schedule Wright State, they probably figured they would be getting a veteran team with many players back from a team that won 21 games the season before. I don't think before the season anyone who label them as a "cupcake" or even an average team.

 

[cpacmel]

C'mon.... this is an MVC team's board and we get pickled on the kool-aide over here!

Ok, I'll be honest now... the MVC Champ (whoever that becomes) is worthy of an at-large if they don't win the auto-bid in St Louis.

I like the MVC kool-aide too. I drink a ton of it.

This is the year the team that wins the tourney in the MVC might not even get an auto bid.

 

[MacabreMob]

CPac - didn't ISU agree to a 1-for-0 with Cincy a few years ago. Like in the late 90's - I recall them getting a midnight tip-off at Cincy on ESPN or something. It was a late deal and ISU jumped at the chance for exposure.

What about Kansas in 2001 or UIUC in 2002?

 

[thefish7]

UM-KC is from the Summit League. Right? You brought up the Summit League fishy. BTW, take a look at the Summit League vs. the Big West and tell me which do you think is more impressive to date.


So if ISU is the only one you see as a possible AT-Large, what does it say about the rest of the teams in the MVC right now? Or more importantly what does it say about their schedules that here we are the first week of Dec. and for all practically purposes the MVC is a 1 bid league.

ISU is a road team for the BB. But IMO, that makes no difference. The only defining moments for anyone in the MVC are going to happen in St. louis. Well unless you could jockeying for NIT vs. CBI's invites. :-o

I did bring up the Summit League because I consider them to be a pretty similar conference to the Big West. For what it's worth, UMKC, I don't think, was picked to finish 2nd in the Summit, and the point is moot, since Bradley didn't actually schedule UMKC, they were part of a tournament package.

A big road win for ISU in the midst of a good conference season performance after stomping on the cupcakes in the non-con could be pretty important for an at-large bit for ISU.

Regarding seeing ISU as the only at-largeable school right now is related to performance. The Valley is having a rough time with the non-con, though I'm not sure how any of that is related to what you and I are actually discussing. What we were talking about, was strength of non-con schedules and there are a couple of schools in the Valley who have very tough schedules. ISU isn't one of them. That's all I've ever been debating... The only game that looked like a decent game was the Wright State game.

The 1-bid status of the MVC has more to do with wins and losses than with strength of schedule. Bradley's schedule is just sort of so-so, but it's still much stronger than ISU's. SIU has a very tough schedule, they just aren't converting. On the other side of the spectrum you have ISU-- completely weak schedule but a good record.

 

[dogsrus]

I'll let Elgin continue MY part in this discussion. I KNEW he read bradleyfans as now even HE has spoken about his displeasure with the ISU schedule and how the newbies (coaches) need to get on board with what he wants and what works for the valley.

 

[shaunguth]

That's your right to think that way. I think we might have to wait til the end of the year before we can really grade what the Final results of ISU's schedule or anyone else's schedule is though.

I don't have a problem not giving in to the Big Boys (BCS). I am not a fan of our schedule, but I am okay not getting "pimped" out for 2 for 1's or 1 for 0's either.

I don't think any team in the Valley should make a habit of it, but for a school to "refuse" such offers outright is a little absurd if you ask me. I'm glad it doesn't happen often, but I'm also glad to have a team like Michigan State come to town and be taken down to the wire.

 

[cpacmel]

CPac - didn't ISU agree to a 1-for-0 with Cincy a few years ago. Like in the late 90's - I recall them getting a midnight tip-off at Cincy on ESPN or something. It was a late deal and ISU jumped at the chance for exposure.

What about Kansas in 2001 or UIUC in 2002?

It's Zenger's policy.

We've had 1 for 1's with Cincy and St. John's somewhat recently. All of our other BCS foes have come in tourneys.

 

[shaunguth]

I'm just glad Les has the following stance on such "deals".....

'We'd love to continue these types of series against Michigan State or schools like Michigan State,' Les said. 'But it always centers on those schools coming back to Peoria at least once.'

 

[amckillip]

UM-KC is from the Summit League. Right? You brought up the Summit League fishy. BTW, take a look at the Summit League vs. the Big West and tell me which do you think is more impressive to date.

Why would we compare the two. Your touting a Big West #2 as one of your best non-con. We've got Florida and MSU, then Butler, and Richmond to boot. You're taking one of our worst non-con opponents and picking at them... (probably because we lost), while comparing them to the top of your non-con. It just doesn't make sense. Our top 4 are easily better than your top one, maybe top 5 (ETSU), one of your top 2 we played already and beat. ILSU is looking good, but you trying to compare our opponents is just laughable.

 

[cpacmel]

Regarding seeing ISU as the only at-largeable school right now is related to performance. The Valley is having a rough time with the non-con, though I'm not sure how any of that is related to what you and I are actually discussing. What we were talking about, was strength of non-con schedules and there are a couple of schools in the Valley who have very tough schedules. ISU isn't one of them. That's all I've ever been debating... The only game that looked like a decent game was the Wright State game.

We've been all over the place in this thread. From non-conference games, to the BB, to At-Large bids, etc.

The 1-bid status of the MVC has more to do with wins and losses than with strength of schedule. Bradley's schedule is just sort of so-so, but it's still much stronger than ISU's. SIU has a very tough schedule, they just aren't converting. On the other side of the spectrum you have ISU-- completely weak schedule but a good record.

But here we are in Dec. And who's to say which schedule was better for which team.

Take a good hard look at Drake's schedule from last year. They had a good win against St. Mary's ( a top 40 school) and then they got a great BB foe in Butler ( a top 20 school). After those 2 teams, who are their good or even great wins against? And please don't tell me Iowa or Iowa State or as Kirk Wessler would say "I am going to vomit"!

 

[cpacmel]

Why would we compare the two. Your touting a Big West #2 as one of your best non-con. We've got Florida and MSU, then Butler, and Richmond to boot. You're taking one of our worst non-con opponents and picking at them... (probably because we lost), while comparing them to the top of your non-con. It just doesn't make sense. Our top 4 are easily better than your top one, maybe top 5 (ETSU), one of your top 2 we played already and beat. ILSU is looking good, but you trying to compare our opponents is just laughable.

He brought the Summit league up, not me. And he made the comparison between the Summit League and the Big West.

I don't think I have even brought up Bradley's schedule once in this entire thread. (well I did mention UM-KC being from the Summit League, but that is.)

 

[dogsrus]

Regarding seeing ISU as the only at-largeable school right now is related to performance. The Valley is having a rough time with the non-con, though I'm not sure how any of that is related to what you and I are actually discussing. What we were talking about, was strength of non-con schedules and there are a couple of schools in the Valley who have very tough schedules. ISU isn't one of them. That's all I've ever been debating... The only game that looked like a decent game was the Wright State game.

We've been all over the place in this thread. From non-conference games, to the BB, to At-Large bids, etc.


But here we are in Dec. And who's to say which schedule was better for which team.

Take a good hard look at Drake's schedule from last year. They had a good win against St. Mary's ( a top 40 school) and then they got a great BB foe in Butler ( a top 20 school). After those 2 teams, who are their good or even great wins against? And please don't tell me Iowa or Iowa State or as Kirk Wessler would say "I am going to vomit"!

Vomit becuase of Iowa or Iowa State yet continue to try and put lipstick on the pig of a schedule for ISU.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm........

 

[cpacmel]

Vomit becuase of Iowa or Iowa State yet continue to try and put lipstick on the pig of a schedule for ISU.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm........

You guys love the RPI. Give me last year's RPI's and Win-losses for both.

Better yet, I will do it for ya:

Iowa 13-18 RPI 180

Iowa State 13-19 RPI 192

Last year that was the equivalent to beating Wichita State (11-21 RPI 199)

 

[shaunguth]

You guys love the RPI.

Really???

 

[cpacmel]

I don't think any team in the Valley should make a habit of it, but for a school to "refuse" such offers outright is a little absurd if you ask me. I'm glad it doesn't happen often, but I'm also glad to have a team like Michigan State come to town and be taken down to the wire.

Creighton doesn't do it either.