SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Hope you're right but it is really, really hard to get better than a 13 seed out of the Summit. We'll need a 28-2 season, or something similar to pull it off.

You mean win the games, I hope we've learned that much from this year at least. The mid-majors that got good seeds ,they had a very good W/L record, and got rewarded for it come time to draw seeds. They controlled their own destiney, by putting the proper importance to winning. On to next year hoping , things will be different.

[goon]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Losing to Denver and NDSU didnt help. win those maybe we are atleast not playing on the 10 best team in the country. What sort of bugs me is there are probably teams we are better then in the tourny that got a better match up or not as high as a rated team as we had.

[Southeast]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

We did get a 7-seed in our first Tournament, so bumping up to a 12 is definitely not something that is out of reach. Would this year's team have been a 13 if Waytashek did not miss those two mid-season games (our last two losses)?

Miller seems to have what it takes to lead the charge for something better. She broke a scoring record that stood since Megan Vogel was here and probably learned a lot along the way. That's a player you can build around for three more years. It would definitely help if she had a 6'4 center to work with at some point in her career but we did it without one of those during that first dominant season.

[rabidrabbit]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

In a 14 vs 3 match-up, under the revised 1st/2nd round hosting that 1 to 4 seeds host a pod, Jacks will be playing on the home court either 1st or 2nd round. NCAA made that change due to bad attendence when a host arena didn't have a team in, ala when SDSU won in 2009, Texas Tech didn't qualify, and attendence was poor. Looking at UNDEFEATED Princeton, who is an 8 seed, UNTIL SUMMIT LEAGUE reaches a WCC or A-10 quality top to bottom, Jacks will NOT host.

OSU was a winnable game. But it required an outstanding performance by the Jacks, and a sub-par performance by OSU. OSU was average in 1st half, adjusted well at half, and had a 50%+ shooting in the 2nd half. OSU did well not fouling. In general, OSU was a taller, just as quick, and just as 3's deadly as the Jacks. Likewise, the Beavers prefer a strong defensive game. Jacks had NO WAY to stop those easy put-back buckets by Hamblin, not after appropriately challenging the initial runner.

We played the right OOC. Our bad losses were in the Summit. However, we can lose that conference road games, but only if those teams are in the top 120. The loss at USD didn't hurt much. The NDSU, Denver, and IUPUI losses tho.... The IUPUI, especially as a game less than 24 hours after IPFW and difficult travel is a surprise. We had good wins. Other than DePaul and Marist, there were no blow-out losses.

Believe this was the 2nd best of the NCAA D-I eligible teams to date. I'm pumped about the future teams. And a large THANK YOU to the senior leaders and players this year.

[rabidrabbit]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

On the S-curve, Jacks should have been a 13. Got moved a line, which put Jacks in the most vulnerable to upset region. The rest of the Summit has quite a way to go to exceed likely higher seed potential than SDSU.

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Number 13 seed Albany gave #4 Duke all they wanted, losing by 2. It's not all about athleticism, Duke should have the more athletic players by far. American University (#14 seed) gave Iowa a much closer game than the final score would indicate. Athleticism should be a constant, that is, it should show up in both halves, not just one. We need a killer instinct, I think, when we were up by 7, we should of not been content until we were up by at least double digits. We should have known they would make 1/2 time adjustments, like getting their ace three point shooter more involved the second half, yet we let it happen anyway. We are one of the best three point shooting conferences in the nation, but also one of the worst three point defending conferences also. Maybe the two go hand in hand. We don't shoot the three nearly as well in NCAA Tournament play, against teams who defend the perimeter much better than our Conference peers, as we shoot 3's in Summit play .We need tougher competition,but that might cost us NCAA appearances,that affects recruiting,that affects win production, seeding, etc. We don't want to bounce up and down in the standings every year, we want to consistently grow the program.That means getting more and better wins, which will bring greater respect for seeding, better seeds, more NCAA Tournament wins, more respect and allow us to get better recruits......building the program.Getting knocked out the first round is just spinning our wheels.We have to break that cycle.Let's start doing that next year.

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

In a 14 vs 3 match-up, under the revised 1st/2nd round hosting that 1 to 4 seeds host a pod, Jacks will be playing on the home court either 1st or 2nd round. NCAA made that change due to bad attendence when a host arena didn't have a team in, ala when SDSU won in 2009, Texas Tech didn't qualify, and attendence was poor. Looking at UNDEFEATED Princeton, who is an 8 seed, UNTIL SUMMIT LEAGUE reaches a WCC or A-10 quality top to bottom, Jacks will NOT host.

OSU was a winnable game. But it required an outstanding performance by the Jacks, and a sub-par performance by OSU. OSU was average in 1st half, adjusted well at half, and had a 50%+ shooting in the 2nd half. OSU did well not fouling. In general, OSU was a taller, just as quick, and just as 3's deadly as the Jacks. Likewise, the Beavers prefer a strong defensive game. Jacks had NO WAY to stop those easy put-back buckets by Hamblin, not after appropriately challenging the initial runner.

We played the right OOC. Our bad losses were in the Summit. However, we can lose that conference road games, but only if those teams are in the top 120. The loss at USD didn't hurt much. The NDSU, Denver, and IUPUI losses tho.... The IUPUI, especially as a game less than 24 hours after IPFW and difficult travel is a surprise. We had good wins. Other than DePaul and Marist, there were no blow-out losses.

Believe this was the 2nd best of the NCAA D-I eligible teams to date. I'm pumped about the future teams. And a large THANK YOU to the senior leaders and players this year.

So how many Wcc or A-10 quality teams did host this year,ah 0,just like the Summit and Ivy League. So why the mention of how great these conferences are in, apparently, hosting NCAA Tournament games? You have to be a ranked team period to host. Seeds for teams are based on individual team accomplishments. That's why our 2008-2009 team was considered an at large shoe-in should we not of won the Conference auto bid. That said, yes, a stronger conference is better, but it's not the end all do all thing people make it out to be, unless your in a Power five Conference. The A-10 and WCC get multiple bids because individual teams in those conferences earn those invites, the rest of the teams don't, no matter that they are in the mighty A-10 or WCC or not,simple.

My bad, Princeton was ranked #13 in the country, they got snubbed, but I think it's just the mid-major snub, not so much a conference affiliation snub, you may have a point,.... however, don't see the correlation between conference affiliation and hosting you referenced in implying that had the Tigers belonged to the A-10 or WCC conferences, they probably would have hosted, don't see that as happening any more than with their current conference affiliation.

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

We are 1-6 in NCAA Tournament games, but, we played the 6th ranked team in the nation, Baylor, and lost by two points for a sweet 16, lost to 3rd ranked team in the nation, Oklahoma, lost to the 4th ranked team in the nation, Xavier, lost to 13 th ranked team in the nation, Purdue, lost to 14th ranked team in the nation ,SC, and finally lost this last game to the 10th ranked team in the nation Oregon State. Our win was against TCU, unranked. In our entire post season play, we've never played lower than the 14th ranked team in the nation, except for TCU. Contrast this with teams who always start out the NCAA Tournament with easy victims. No wonder Tournament wins are much harder to come by for the typical mid-major program. We need to start getting higher seeds, we need more quality wins and no (few)bad losses.

[filbert]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

It would be tough to schedule more aggressively than SDSU already does in the non-conference. Given the treatment of Princeton, going undefeated in an non-Power-5 conference doesn't buy a lot of respect from the selection committee. The only way forward to get better seeding is for the rest of the Summit League to get better . . . or (I really hate to say this) for SDSU to find a better conference. (And there are no better conferences on the immediate horizon, definitely no pun intended.)

Maybe talk Green Bay into joining the Summit . . . that would be fun.

[zooropa]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

The only way forward to get better seeding

Not going to happen. SDSU is on the outside looking in, and frankly, I have absolutely no problem with that at all. College athletics is so corrupt once you get past a certain level that I want nothing to do with it.

But, back to my point, SDSU is on the outside looking in. Everyone outside the P5 is, to a greater or lesser degree. The cachet isn't there, the name recognition, the countless reinforcements provided by ESPN regarding the hierarchy of athletic programs, all of that weighs against SDSU and will continue to do so.

More infuriating, however, is the knack that both selection committees have at marshaling "No True Scotsman" lines of defense for their appalling choices.

"We were concerned about Team X's strength of schedule"
"We were concerned about Team Y's conference record"
"We felt that Team Z's RPI was somewhat inflated."
"We felt that Team A's RPI wasn't high enough."
"We felt that Team B lacked signature wins."
"We felt that Team C's overall resume was weak."

That this process is incredibly biased is one thing, it is quite another for the committee to annually pretend that arguably unfair seeds are the fault of the teams that receive them and not an inherent part of a thoroughly jacked up tournament structure.

===

It is noxious, to me, to see the NCAA selection committee telling 30-0 Princeton, effectively, 'well, you should have tried harder.'

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Until we can get a 12 or better seed, we will be playing against a team on their home floor. And its always going to be tough to win. If we could get closer to home, like iowa city, we could make some noise. Disappointed but excited about next year

In 2016,Sioux Falls hosts a regional. If we can make it that far (past 1st and 2nd RD's) ,we can make some noise. Next year, we want a good seed, and avoid the #1,#2, and # 3 seed for a chance in the second round. We probably want a 13 or 12 seed.To make the sweet 16,you have to play against and go through one of the the top 4 seeds,that's playing a nationaly 1-16 ranked team, it's better to draw a 4 seed obviously,the way the NCAA Tournaments set up, it's incredibly hard to make the sweet 16 for the low seeds. Have to have that special year, that special team, and it starts the very first game until the very last game of the season. It's a grind for sure. This would be a dream scenario, SDSU playing in the Sioux Falls regional. Hope it can happen.

[filbert]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Well, there is one way I can think of, and that's to pull a Gonzaga. Schedule out-of-your-mind OOC games, win more than your fair share, get into the tournament, make a few runs to the Sweet Sixteen and maybe poke your nose into the Final Four a time or two over the course of a decade. At some point, even the dolts and good ol' boys/girls on the committee will admit that, oh, yeah, I guess they're probably almost as good as we (the P5) are.

This is a hard row to hoe. From memory, the Gonzaga, Butler, Creighton, and maybe VCU men (although VCU is kind of hanging by a thread in terms of respect, IMHO) have done it. Butler and Creighton got rewarded with conference upgrades. Wichita State and Northern Iowa's men in the MVC are maybe breakthrough candidates, too . . . WSU may have already broken through--we'll see what happens against Kansas.

But in thinking about it, the closest analogue on the women's side is probably Green Bay. They get "rewarded" for years of superior performance by playing Princeton in an 8/9 game.

University presidents (especially at mid-majors) need to pressure the NCAA on the question of why it's actually easier (i.e. only nearly impossible) for a mid-major to "break through" on the men's basketball side than it is on the women's side, where it appears to actually be impossible for a mid-major to break through.

Yeah, that'll happen. And if it does, the NCAA's response will be something other than "go away, little kids, you bother us."

/should have attached cynicism alert

Not going to happen. SDSU is on the outside looking in, and frankly, I have absolutely no problem with that at all. College athletics is so corrupt once you get past a certain level that I want nothing to do with it.

But, back to my point, SDSU is on the outside looking in. Everyone outside the P5 is, to a greater or lesser degree. The cachet isn't there, the name recognition, the countless reinforcements provided by ESPN regarding the hierarchy of athletic programs, all of that weighs against SDSU and will continue to do so.

More infuriating, however, is the knack that both selection committees have at marshaling "No True Scotsman" lines of defense for their appalling choices.

"We were concerned about Team X's strength of schedule"
"We were concerned about Team Y's conference record"
"We felt that Team Z's RPI was somewhat inflated."
"We felt that Team A's RPI wasn't high enough."
"We felt that Team B lacked signature wins."
"We felt that Team C's overall resume was weak."

That this process is incredibly biased is one thing, it is quite another for the committee to annually pretend that arguably unfair seeds are the fault of the teams that receive them and not an inherent part of a thoroughly jacked up tournament structure.

===

It is noxious, to me, to see the NCAA selection committee telling 30-0 Princeton, effectively, 'well, you should have tried harder.'

[filbert]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

In 2016,Sioux Falls hosts a regional. If we can make it that far (past 1st and 2nd RD's) ,we can make some noise. Next year, we want a good seed, and avoid the #1,#2, and # 3 seed for a chance in the second round. We probably want a 13 or 12 seed.To make the sweet 16,you have to play against and go through one of the the top 4 seeds,that's playing a nationaly 1-16 ranked team, it's better to draw a 4 seed obviously,the way the NCAA Tournaments set up, it's incredibly hard to make the sweet 16 for the low seeds. Have to have that special year, that special team, and it starts the very first game until the very last game of the season. It's a grind for sure. This would be a dream scenario, SDSU playing in the Sioux Falls regional. Hope it can happen.

I would put money on this scenario:

SDSU, if awarded a 2016 NCAA bid, will:

1) Be given a seed of 14 or lower and placed in the Sioux Falls Region, or
2) Be given a seed of 13 or higher and placed in a region other than the Sioux Falls Region.

I have a hard time, given the committee's biased history, believing that they will make it easy in any way for SDSU to play a Sweet Sixteen game in Sioux Falls. The screams from the power 5 conference teams would be deafening.

Best case scenario is SDSU runs the table, goes undefeated, has an RPI under 20, and gets an 8 seed like Princeton did this year.

Yes, I am particularly cynical this morning.

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

I would put money on this scenario:

SDSU, if awarded a 2016 NCAA bid, will:

1) Be given a seed of 14 or lower and placed in the Sioux Falls Region, or
2) Be given a seed of 13 or higher and placed in a region other than the Sioux Falls Region.

I have a hard time, given the committee's biased history, believing that they will make it easy in any way for SDSU to play a Sweet Sixteen game in Sioux Falls. The screams from the power 5 conference teams would be deafening.

Best case scenario is SDSU runs the table, goes undefeated, has an RPI under 20, and gets an 8 seed like Princeton did this year.

Yes, I am particularly cynical this morning.

Cinderella's dead, the NCAA killed her. Sorry, guess I'm a little cynical today too. All we're left with are the three ugly step sister's this year.

[rabidrabbit]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

I'd think that the Summit League tourney champ will get into the Sioux Falls region. May not make it to sweet 16 to play, but will be in ala Delaware or Gonzaga. Mid-major, i.e. one bid conferences cannot get to a Sos/rpi high enough to be a top 4 seed. The only way to possibly change that is for the whole conference to be below 200 both SOS & RPI. Without P5 home/homes, SdSu won't go for that. And Jacks are the most aggressive schedulers. USD took good steps this season to upgrade their ooc. Iupui did to, but failed to get the w's. Princeton only had 8 home games, 1 which was ooc. SDSU wouldn't put up with such bull feathers.