Football Home Game
Sat, August 31, 2024
Sat, August 31, 2024
Basketball Home Game
Fri, November 1, 2024
Fri, November 1, 2024
At-large watch
Re: At-large watch
I hate to say it, but objectively, if Boise St loses to SDSU and we lose to SDSU after, I think the committee will still take Boise St. I don’t like it, but I think that’s how it would shake out. I don’t think 3 MWC teams get in, they would rather see 7 crappy ACC teams play because that gets more eyes (read: money)
-
- Posts: 8367
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 992 times
- Been thanked: 870 times
Re: At-large watch
A key difference will be that we will have needed to beat a higher ranked team (CSU) to get to the finals than BSU would need to beat (Nevada) to get to the semi-finals. The optics of us losing to BSU twice is not good. But I think we still would get the nod over BSU under the circumstance you presented. The scoring differential could also play into it. But then again, I thought we’d get into the NCAA tourney even after a loss to Cal State Northridge back in the Bog West days.MalAgua wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 9:16 amI hate to say it, but objectively, if Boise St loses to SDSU and we lose to SDSU after, I think the committee will still take Boise St. I don’t like it, but I think that’s how it would shake out. I don’t think 3 MWC teams get in, they would rather see 7 crappy ACC teams play because that gets more eyes (read: money)
Let’s win our next three games and we won’t need to worry about what the committee may do.
Re: At-large watch
Yeah, I recognize that argument, and agree that it is a good one. But I still just don’t think that the committee cares. Boise St got more national coverage this season and we lost to them twice, I really think that’s all they’ll look at.utaggies wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 9:57 amA key difference will be that we will have needed to beat a higher ranked team (CSU) to get to the finals than BSU would need to beat (Nevada) to get to the semi-finals. The optics of us losing to BSU twice is not good. But I think we still would get the nod over BSU under the circumstance you presented. The scoring differential could also play into it. But then again, I thought we’d get into the NCAA tourney even after a loss to Cal State Northridge back in the Bog West days.MalAgua wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 9:16 amI hate to say it, but objectively, if Boise St loses to SDSU and we lose to SDSU after, I think the committee will still take Boise St. I don’t like it, but I think that’s how it would shake out. I don’t think 3 MWC teams get in, they would rather see 7 crappy ACC teams play because that gets more eyes (read: money)
Let’s win our next three games and we won’t need to worry about what the committee may do.
Agrees though, hope we can just win out.
- scotlandog
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: February 16th, 2011, 7:18 pm
- Has thanked: 103 times
- Been thanked: 794 times
Re: At-large watch
In the past, since the start of the NET, the NET ranking has been a pretty good indicator for what the committee will do. With that said, there are quite a few teams being considered that are behind us in the NET. I take some comfort in that. Based on NET, there should be 3 MWC teams in with CSU being the one left out.
My gut feel is if we beat CSU and play SDSU in the final, we are in. In that case, I think SDSU and USU are in. Boise is on the fringe, could be 50/50. If we lose not in the final, we are out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My gut feel is if we beat CSU and play SDSU in the final, we are in. In that case, I think SDSU and USU are in. Boise is on the fringe, could be 50/50. If we lose not in the final, we are out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- These users thanked the author scotlandog for the post:
- MrBiggle
- SweepDance
- Posts: 539
- Joined: February 7th, 2011, 12:18 pm
- Location: Sandy, UT
- Has thanked: 205 times
- Been thanked: 236 times
Re: At-large watch
Assuming USU and CSU both make the semis it looks to be an elimination game. The winner remains on the bubble and gets a quality win while the loser can only hope for the NIT.
-
- Posts: 10492
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 350 times
- Been thanked: 3056 times
Re: At-large watch
Has there ever been a year where you can remember that USU was an absolute lock for an at large bid? I don't ever remember feeling like "we're in" after not having won the auto- bid.
It's just part of being an Aggie fan.
It's just part of being an Aggie fan.
Eutaw St. Aggie
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: November 13th, 2010, 6:53 pm
- Has thanked: 113 times
- Been thanked: 245 times
Re: At-large watch
I agree here the only other option I see would be Trucker U winning it all. In that case USU/CSU are both out and that semi game doesn't matter.SweepDance wrote:Assuming USU and CSU both make the semis it looks to be an elimination game. The winner remains on the bubble and gets a quality win while the loser can only hope for the NIT.
I will continue to contend that no MWC gets an NIT invite.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
This post is likely straight up poor sarcasm and cannot be taken seriously.
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: November 13th, 2010, 6:53 pm
- Has thanked: 113 times
- Been thanked: 245 times
Re: At-large watch
The year we were ranked in the BW I felt like we were a lock...Yossarian wrote:Has there ever been a year where you can remember that USU was an absolute lock for an at large bid? I don't ever remember feeling like "we're in" after not having won the auto- bid.
It's just part of being an Aggie fan.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
This post is likely straight up poor sarcasm and cannot be taken seriously.
-
- Posts: 10492
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 350 times
- Been thanked: 3056 times
Re: At-large watch
The year we didn't get an invite?pilotaggie wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 12:26 pmThe year we were ranked in the BW I felt like we were a lock...Yossarian wrote:Has there ever been a year where you can remember that USU was an absolute lock for an at large bid? I don't ever remember feeling like "we're in" after not having won the auto- bid.
It's just part of being an Aggie fan.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
Eutaw St. Aggie
-
- Posts: 7960
- Joined: October 22nd, 2016, 1:06 am
- Has thanked: 2212 times
- Been thanked: 2529 times
Re: At-large watch
Two years ago we obviously got the auto-bid, but we were safely in even had we lost to SDSU, but otherwise no. The years we got at-large bids we were 12 seeds and barely in and of course 2004 we didn't get in.
-
- Posts: 10492
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 350 times
- Been thanked: 3056 times
Re: At-large watch
I didn't ever feel like we were safely in. I would have been nervous in selection sunday two years ago. Fortunately we got the auto bid.Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 12:31 pmTwo years ago we obviously got the auto-bid, but we were safely in even had we lost to SDSU, but otherwise no. The years we got at-large bids we were 12 seeds and barely in and of course 2004 we didn't get in.
- These users thanked the author Yossarian for the post:
- Aggie formerly in Hawaii
Eutaw St. Aggie
- El Sapo
- Posts: 3051
- Joined: November 27th, 2017, 1:32 pm
- Has thanked: 605 times
- Been thanked: 692 times
Re: At-large watch
Seems like there is always early hype about the MWC seeds. Kind of like, SURPRISE! There are good teams in the MWC! Then the numbers set in on the other conferences, who isn't getting in if we do, and we're right back to 1 or 2 seeds coming out of the MW.
-
- Posts: 7646
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:07 pm
- Has thanked: 396 times
- Been thanked: 4610 times
Re: At-large watch
There’s not really been a year in the NET ranking era where more than two MW teams were worthy. This is the first year, so it’s hard to know how this’ll shake out.
And Houston beat Memphis.
And Houston beat Memphis.
-
- Posts: 899
- Joined: September 17th, 2019, 10:04 pm
- Has thanked: 267 times
- Been thanked: 479 times
Re: At-large watch
Final prediction before the tourney..
SDSU - 7 seed
USU - 10 seed (autobid)
CSU - 11 seed play-in game (last 4 in)
BSU - First four out.
SDSU - 7 seed
USU - 10 seed (autobid)
CSU - 11 seed play-in game (last 4 in)
BSU - First four out.
-
- Posts: 698
- Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 4:28 am
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 331 times
-
- Posts: 14098
- Joined: December 15th, 2010, 6:29 pm
- Has thanked: 4383 times
- Been thanked: 4018 times
- QuackAttackAggie
- Pick'em Champ - '12, '22 Bowl; '15, '17 Weekly; '18 BB Predict the Score; '22 Kickoff
- Posts: 18150
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:08 pm
- Location: Sonora, MX
- Has thanked: 308 times
- Been thanked: 2840 times
At-large watch
I'm curious what they'll do with Colgate. I assume they don't get a bid despite being 8 in net. They'll probably win their tournament anyway against all the other teams who played 9 games all year against 2 other teams.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 698
- Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 4:28 am
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 331 times
Re: At-large watch
We can forget Michigan State being a bubble team that we could potentially pass. They just upset Michigan. They're solidly in the tournament.
-
- Posts: 8367
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 992 times
- Been thanked: 870 times
Re: At-large watch
Would you like to put an Aggie hat on your confidence? I believe at least one MWC team will be invited to the NIT.pilotaggie wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 12:25 pmI agree here the only other option I see would be Trucker U winning it all. In that case USU/CSU are both out and that semi game doesn't matter.SweepDance wrote:Assuming USU and CSU both make the semis it looks to be an elimination game. The winner remains on the bubble and gets a quality win while the loser can only hope for the NIT.
I will continue to contend that no MWC gets an NIT invite.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 8367
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 992 times
- Been thanked: 870 times
Re: At-large watch
MSU was #72 in the NET. Jumping into the #45 range, even with a win over Michigan won’t be possible unless the Spartans collect a couple of other impressive wins in the Big-10 tournament. But they are now certainly in the discussion.Aggiealum13 wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 4:54 pmWe can forget Michigan State being a bubble team that we could potentially pass. They just upset Michigan. They're solidly in the tournament.
-
- Posts: 9007
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:10 am
- Has thanked: 292 times
- Been thanked: 2734 times
Re: At-large watch
In 2004, the experts weren't calling us a bubble team, they were calling us a lock. After we lost to Cal State Northridge in the semi-finals, the experts weren't saying it would keep us out, they were saying it was bad news for the bubble teams cause we were a lock.
- scotlandog
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: February 16th, 2011, 7:18 pm
- Has thanked: 103 times
- Been thanked: 794 times
Re: At-large watch
They were already considered among the “last 4 in”. With this win they are now solidly in. A loss may have dropped them behind us, maybe. This win makes it so we can’t jump them without some equivalent win, i.e. SDSU in the championship, which makes it all moot anyways.utaggies wrote:MSU was #72 in the NET. Jumping into the #45 range, even with a win over Michigan won’t be possible unless the Spartans collect a couple of other impressive wins in the Big-10 tournament. But they are now certainly in the discussion.Aggiealum13 wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 4:54 pmWe can forget Michigan State being a bubble team that we could potentially pass. They just upset Michigan. They're solidly in the tournament.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 7960
- Joined: October 22nd, 2016, 1:06 am
- Has thanked: 2212 times
- Been thanked: 2529 times
Re: At-large watch
But at least Memphis lost to remain on the wrong side of the bubble.Aggiealum13 wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 4:54 pmWe can forget Michigan State being a bubble team that we could potentially pass. They just upset Michigan. They're solidly in the tournament.
-
- Posts: 8367
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 992 times
- Been thanked: 870 times
Re: At-large watch
Having played Houston close on Houston’s home court (Houston hit a 3-pointer as the game ended) I’ll bet Memphis’ NET actually increases from their current ranking of #53.Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 7:52 pmBut at least Memphis lost to remain on the wrong side of the bubble.Aggiealum13 wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 4:54 pmWe can forget Michigan State being a bubble team that we could potentially pass. They just upset Michigan. They're solidly in the tournament.
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: November 13th, 2010, 6:53 pm
- Has thanked: 113 times
- Been thanked: 245 times
Re: At-large watch
Sureutaggies wrote:Would you like to put an Aggie hat on your confidence? I believe at least one MWC team will be invited to the NIT.pilotaggie wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 12:25 pmI agree here the only other option I see would be Trucker U winning it all. In that case USU/CSU are both out and that semi game doesn't matter.SweepDance wrote:Assuming USU and CSU both make the semis it looks to be an elimination game. The winner remains on the bubble and gets a quality win while the loser can only hope for the NIT.
I will continue to contend that no MWC gets an NIT invite.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
This post is likely straight up poor sarcasm and cannot be taken seriously.
-
- Posts: 8367
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 992 times
- Been thanked: 870 times
Re: At-large watch
my people will be in touch with your people.pilotaggie wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 9:39 pmSureutaggies wrote:Would you like to put an Aggie hat on your confidence? I believe at least one MWC team will be invited to the NIT.pilotaggie wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 12:25 pmI agree here the only other option I see would be Trucker U winning it all. In that case USU/CSU are both out and that semi game doesn't matter.SweepDance wrote:Assuming USU and CSU both make the semis it looks to be an elimination game. The winner remains on the bubble and gets a quality win while the loser can only hope for the NIT.
I will continue to contend that no MWC gets an NIT invite.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
- tysteve20
- Posts: 948
- Joined: August 28th, 2014, 3:21 pm
- Has thanked: 272 times
- Been thanked: 854 times
Re: At-large watch
I believe if Msu wins their first round game they will face Michigan nextutaggies wrote:MSU was #72 in the NET. Jumping into the #45 range, even with a win over Michigan won’t be possible unless the Spartans collect a couple of other impressive wins in the Big-10 tournament. But they are now certainly in the discussion.Aggiealum13 wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 4:54 pmWe can forget Michigan State being a bubble team that we could potentially pass. They just upset Michigan. They're solidly in the tournament.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 10492
- Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
- Has thanked: 350 times
- Been thanked: 3056 times
Re: At-large watch
I think everyone is pretty much in agreement that the entire Big 10 conference should be in the NCAA tournament.
Eutaw St. Aggie
-
- Posts: 8367
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 992 times
- Been thanked: 870 times
Re: At-large watch
With their losses yesterday, here’s how their NET rankings were affected:utaggies wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 8:34 pmHaving played Houston close on Houston’s home court (Houston hit a 3-pointer as the game ended) I’ll bet Memphis’ NET actually increases from their current ranking of #53.Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 7:52 pmBut at least Memphis lost to remain on the wrong side of the bubble.Aggiealum13 wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 4:54 pmWe can forget Michigan State being a bubble team that we could potentially pass. They just upset Michigan. They're solidly in the tournament.
- Memphis went from #53 to #52
- Drake went from #40 to #47
- Michigan remained at #3
- Florida went from #28 to #29
- Texas Tech went from #10 to #17
- Wisconsin went from #25 to #26
The big winners were:
- Michigan State going from #72 to #67
- Penn St. (10-13) going from #48 to #40
- Loyola going from #16 to #10
By virtue of Penn St. beating Maryland (15-12) on the road, both BSU and USU dropped one place in the ranking to, respectively, #43 and #48. CSU remained at #50.
Last edited by utaggies on March 8th, 2021, 7:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
- NowhereLandAggie
- Posts: 4301
- Joined: November 8th, 2010, 4:25 pm
- Has thanked: 494 times
- Been thanked: 570 times
-
- Posts: 49
- Joined: October 20th, 2018, 1:37 pm
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 29 times
Re: At-large watch
I just wish they would put a cap on the number of teams from a conference. I get that the #7 team in the ACC or #8 team in the Big10 is probably better than winner of the Northeast conference or the winner of the Southland conference, but I have felt like if you are finishing somewhere near the middle of your conference you shouldn't be rewarded with a chance to to play for the national championship. I feel like capping it at like 6 teams max per conference would be more than fair. It just seems ridiculous even if the Big-10 is really good to be giving bids to teams that finished in the bottom half of their conference.
- These users thanked the author Stormblessed for the post (total 2):
- GUS • ProvoAggie
- frankiesaysrelax
- Posts: 639
- Joined: August 15th, 2014, 8:15 pm
- Has thanked: 125 times
- Been thanked: 194 times
Re: At-large watch
At least do it like bowl games and make it so you can’t be under .500 and make it. 10-13 is not a tournament team. I don’t care what conference you are in.Stormblessed wrote: ↑March 8th, 2021, 9:40 amI just wish they would put a cap on the number of teams from a conference. I get that the #7 team in the ACC or #8 team in the Big10 is probably better than winner of the Northeast conference or the winner of the Southland conference, but I have felt like if you are finishing somewhere near the middle of your conference you shouldn't be rewarded with a chance to to play for the national championship. I feel like capping it at like 6 teams max per conference would be more than fair. It just seems ridiculous even if the Big-10 is really good to be giving bids to teams that finished in the bottom half of their conference.
-
- Posts: 9301
- Joined: September 12th, 2018, 2:01 pm
- Has thanked: 2748 times
- Been thanked: 4260 times
Re: At-large watch
I know the BIG 10 is a great conference, but if a team is 3 games under .500 they do not deserve an at large bid in my opinion.utaggies wrote: ↑March 8th, 2021, 7:25 amWith their losses yesterday, here’s how their NET rankings were affected:utaggies wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 8:34 pmHaving played Houston close on Houston’s home court (Houston hit a 3-pointer as the game ended) I’ll bet Memphis’ NET actually increases from their current ranking of #53.Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 7:52 pmBut at least Memphis lost to remain on the wrong side of the bubble.Aggiealum13 wrote: ↑March 7th, 2021, 4:54 pmWe can forget Michigan State being a bubble team that we could potentially pass. They just upset Michigan. They're solidly in the tournament.
- Memphis went from #53 to #52
- Drake went from #40 to #47
- Michigan remained at #3
- Florida went from #28 to #29
- Texas Tech went from #10 to #17
- Wisconsin went from #25 to #26
The big winners were:
- Michigan State going from #72 to #67
- Penn St. (10-13) going from #48 to #40
- Loyola going from #16 to #10
By virtue of Penn St. beating Maryland (15-12) on the road, both BSU and USU dropped one place in the ranking to, respectively, #43 and #48. CSU remained at #50.