Page 1 of 20 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 384

Thread: Would be a joke

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    8,146
    Contribute to D2
    Rep Power
    160884

    Default Would be a joke

    If either Harding or ATU gets in to the playoffs over GVSU.

    All teams 8-3.

    Harding - 3 losses to 3 unranked regional teams by an average margin of 7 points, 2 of those losses at home. Didn't face a team higher than 5th in the region.

    ATU - 3 losses to 1 unranked regional team and 2 ranked (#5 and #8) teams by an average margin of 4 points, 2 of those losses at home. Didn't face a team higher than 5th in the region.

    GVSU - 3 losses to the #2, #3 and #4 ranked teams by an average margin of 3 points, all losses on the road.

    The only thing the three ranked GAC teams have working for them is that they each beat each other, so they have regionally-ranked wins. But all three of the GAC teams in the regional rankings are average, that's why they haven't had anyone ranked in the top half of the region. Let GV go head-to-head with any of those GAC teams and see what happens. I think the selection committee knows this, but when you have the AD of one of the schools in question on the committee...I have a feeling I know how it will go.

    In the end GV has nobody to blame but themselves for blowing 2 of their 3 losses. But you put them in the field at #7 and you're gonna have 5 teams in the regional tournament with a chance to win the entire thing. Put Harding or ATU in and you're only gonna have 4.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    13,779
    Rep Power
    8767

    Default Re: Would be a joke

    i watched the Ouachita v Henderson game - the second half and it was a joke - these teams lines would not stand up at all against most GLIAC teams - and Ouachita is the conference champ - terrible - but that is what we have in D2 - the NCAA does not care about getting the best in the PO's - its nothing but an after-thought and PC crap - everybody gets a team in - just play nice kids and have fun - we want fairness - everyone gets a ribbon - but as you said and we all understand - win and you don't have to worry about the PC police

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    20,835
    Rep Power
    244188

    Default Re: Would be a joke

    nobody actually believes these gac schools can compete nationally...they're the leftover scraps from the gsc And lsc...it's a conference formed from the teams who couldn't compete in the gsc or LSC so they took their ball and went home...ease up on them and cut em a little slack

  4. #4

    Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by BillyGV View Post
    i watched the Ouachita v Henderson game - the second half and it was a joke - these teams lines would not stand up at all against most GLIAC teams - and Ouachita is the conference champ - terrible - but that is what we have in D2 - the NCAA does not care about getting the best in the PO's - its nothing but an after-thought and PC crap - everybody gets a team in - just play nice kids and have fun - we want fairness - everyone gets a ribbon - but as you said and we all understand - win and you don't have to worry about the PC police
    You cry a lot don't you? Just glance over here from time to time, and you always seem to be throwing yourself a pity party.

    No one knows what will happen when the conferences meet up, that's why the game is played.

  5. Default Re: Would be a joke

    Agree completely GVSU is one of the top 7, just like Ashland was last year. The current formula rewards playing in a sh!t conference unfortunately.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Would be a joke

    Your conference reps need to push legislation requiring non-conference games

  7. Default Re: Would be a joke

    It's a bad message by the committee if playing a tough non conference schedule isn't worth anything. While some conference never leave their conference, teams like Ashland and GVSU schedule tough opponents, and sometimes tough opponents on the road. AU loses to the top team in the East IUP on the road on a last second field goal. They also beat a solid Ohio Dominican team handily that beat up on Findlay on Saturday, a team that was 9-1.

    GVSU goes on the road and loses a close one to Indy who goes 11-0. If scheduling those types of games means nothing to the committee what's the point of playing them? GLIAC teams can find a patsy GMAC or GLVC team to smack around thus making sure they don't lose a game playing a non conference team. GVSU should be rewarded to playing Indy no penalized.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,920
    Blog Entries
    42
    Rep Power
    102525

    Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
    Your conference reps need to push legislation requiring non-conference games
    +1000000

    If GV gets left out (which, based on last week's rankings, seems pretty likely), perhaps it will spark the change needed to scrap what SR3 has done the past 3 years, a la the change in the EA rules when Carson Newman got hosed in 2007.

    While I don't subscribe to the opinion that GV should be in because "the GLIAC is a better conference than the GAC," I most definitely agree they have the best resume of the three loss teams....and there shouldn't be much argument from the other three teams on that.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Omaha, NE Area
    Posts
    43,136
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    12500

    Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Carlson View Post
    +1000000

    If GV gets left out
    (which, based on last week's rankings, seems pretty likely), perhaps it will spark the change needed to scrap what SR3 has done the past 3 years, a la the change in the EA rules when Carson Newman got hosed in 2007.

    While I don't subscribe to the opinion that GV should be in because "the GLIAC is a better conference than the GAC," I most definitely agree they have the best resume of the three loss teams....and there shouldn't be much argument from the other three teams on that.
    As I said in another topic. If you already lost to 3 of the teams in the region why do you think you deserve a playoff spot? It's not like a team that lost to one and trying to get revenge on the team. Half the teams in the playoffs (taking yourself out of equation) you'd have lost to. Maybe they are looking and thinking give another team a chance to see how they match up. That may be the approach the committee is taking. Honestly don't see much room for complaining when you've lost to 3 of the teams in the region in the playoffs. Not going to be a popular opinion but it's honest. From GV fans it sound like the team has underachieved, why do you reward that? If you win just one of the games you lost you are in and not a factor.

    It's not a crime if GV gets left out, it's a crime that GV lost some of the games it did with the talent they have. Getting left out is just a side effect.

    Also do I think GV is better than HU? Likely yes, but the issue is GV is leaving it up to the NCAA regional ranking gods. That is squarely on them. They never should of lost to Indy or Ashland. Had a chance to beat Ferris.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,920
    Blog Entries
    42
    Rep Power
    102525

    Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by JR Chaney View Post
    As I said in another topic. If you already lost to 3 of the teams in the region why do you think you deserve a playoff spot? It's not like a team that lost to one and trying to get revenge on the team. Half the teams in the playoffs (taking yourself out of equation) you'd have lost to. Maybe they are looking and thinking give another team a chance to see how they match up. That may be the approach the committee is taking. Honestly don't see much room for complaining when you've lost to 3 of the teams in the region in the playoffs. Not going to be a popular opinion but it's honest. From GV fans it sound like the team has underachieved, why do you reward that? If you win just one of the games you lost you are in and not a factor.
    It's a good point (and definitely one I hadn't considered), but my point is a three loss team has to be in. Of the three loss teams, GV has the best resume when looking at SOS. Their three losses are to teams that have just two losses between them, and all are in the RRs. UCM lost to two teams in the rankings, and their other loss was to a good UCO team, but UCO lost four times. Harding's losses all came against teams that weren't good enough to be in the top 10, though they did beat ATU and OBU. ATU lost to Harding and OBU and another team outside the top 10.

    Having said all of that, perhaps the committee isn't looking at who the teams lost to at all, but rather who they beat. Looking at it that way, Harding has the best resume, with two wins against Top 10 teams. None of the other three teams has even one win.

  11. Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by JR Chaney View Post
    As I said in another topic. If you already lost to 3 of the teams in the region why do you think you deserve a playoff spot? It's not like a team that lost to one and trying to get revenge on the team. Half the teams in the playoffs (taking yourself out of equation) you'd have lost to. Maybe they are looking and thinking give another team a chance to see how they match up. That may be the approach the committee is taking. Honestly don't see much room for complaining when you've lost to 3 of the teams in the region in the playoffs. Not going to be a popular opinion but it's honest. From GV fans it sound like the team has underachieved, why do you reward that? If you win just one of the games you lost you are in and not a factor.

    It's not a crime if GV gets left out, it's a crime that GV lost some of the games it did with the talent they have. Getting left out is just a side effect.

    Also do I think GV is better than HU? Likely yes, but the issue is GV is leaving it up to the NCAA regional ranking gods. That is squarely on them. They never should of lost to Indy or Ashland. Had a chance to beat Ferris.
    You can't be serious. We lost narrowly ON THE ROAD to three TOP 10 teams. Yes, we did lose those games, but they were very close. We lost them by a combined 8 points. That has to be taken into account. The committee should consider whether Harding would even have come close to winning any of those 3, let alone making them close. I highly doubt it. GVSU is almost certainly a better team than Harding and they have the same number of losses. This isn't charity. If one team is better than the other, all things considered, then that team should be in. Period. I don't see any basis at all for Harding getting in over GVSU.

    Also, you're saying GVSU underachieved? Yeah, maybe somewhat, but I'd hardly call losing 3 very close games on the road to top 10 teams a case of significantly underachieving. If we played those same teams at home there's a good chance we would have won. Do you know how many teams won at Indy, Ashland, and Ferris combined this year? None. So, apparently, it's very difficult to beat those teams at their places (let alone anywhere else). That has to be taken into consideration. I know it mainly comes down to wins and losses, but quality of performance overall has to be taken into account. And when you consider the quality of competition, GVSU played reasonably well against those teams, but just came up a little short. Would Harding have fared any better against those teams? Almost certainly not. Does that not mean anything?

  12. Default Re: Would be a joke

    When do the pairings come out?

  13. Default Re: Would be a joke

    While I think GVSU is a better (maybe much better) than Harding. They would still be the 7th seed on the road to Indianapolis. Well, we've already seen that this year and GVSU lost. I think the committee should consider that and make it a different pairing by putting Harding in as a different matchup that hasn't already occurred. Can't deny that Harding is also on an 8 game winning streak and won their 'playoff' matchups @Ouachita and @Arky Tech. The schedule makers did GVSU no favors but they essentially already lost 3 'playoff' matchups @Indy @Ferris @Ashland....they don't need a fourth attempt.

  14. Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Carlson View Post
    It's a good point (and definitely one I hadn't considered), but my point is a three loss team has to be in. Of the three loss teams, GV has the best resume when looking at SOS. Their three losses are to teams that have just two losses between them, and all are in the RRs. UCM lost to two teams in the rankings, and their other loss was to a good UCO team, but UCO lost four times. Harding's losses all came against teams that weren't good enough to be in the top 10, though they did beat ATU and OBU. ATU lost to Harding and OBU and another team outside the top 10.

    Having said all of that, perhaps the committee isn't looking at who the teams lost to at all, but rather who they beat. Looking at it that way, Harding has the best resume, with two wins against Top 10 teams. None of the other three teams has even one win.
    That wouldn't make any sense for them to not look at who Harding lost to. You have to take everything into account. They lost to 2 average teams and one bad team (Southern Nazarene). That should count significantly against them. Especially compared to the fact that GVSU lost narrowly to three Top 10 teams. Everyone knows that GVSU would very likely have beaten all 3 teams that Harding lost to. I don't think Harding's wins over Arkansas Tech and OBU outweigh their 3 unimpressive losses to teams that GVSU probably would've beaten by 20 to 30 points each.

  15. Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by GVSU Fan View Post
    Do you know how many teams won at Indy, Ashland, and Ferris combined this year? None. So, apparently, it's very difficult to beat those teams at their places (let alone anywhere else). That has to be taken into consideration.
    Why do you want some other team doing your work. Those three teams all would have had a home loss if GVSU took care of business.

    Everything you keep blowing up about being considered...well it IS being considered. Just because the committee may/likely rule in favor of a different team than GVSU doesn't automatically mean nothing was considered. So does it mean anything? as you put it, sure...but does it mean everything? well, that's a big fat no

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,920
    Blog Entries
    42
    Rep Power
    102525

    Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by GVSU Fan View Post
    That wouldn't make any sense for them to not look at who Harding lost to. You have to take everything into account. They lost to 2 average teams and one bad team (Southern Nazarene). That should count significantly against them. Especially compared to the fact that GVSU lost narrowly to three Top 10 teams. Everyone knows that GVSU would very likely have beaten all 3 teams that Harding lost to. I don't think Harding's wins over Arkansas Tech and OBU outweigh their 3 unimpressive losses to teams that GVSU probably would've beaten by 20 to 30 points each.
    I totally understand. But results against teams below .500 is not a criteria, so that point is moot. Results against teams above .500 is one of the criteria, and Harding has the edge there. The Bisons also have the edge in results on the road.

    Basically, the ONLY advantage GV has when comparing GV vs. HU is SOS. SOS is something that I personally think should matter....like it used to. But over the past 3 years, SOS has been thrown out the window because the committee thinks it is a meaningless number since there are so few non con games. I don't agree with it, but that's the way it's been since 2014 in SR3. As I said to another GV fan in another thread, welcome to SR3.

  17. Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by EveryCatAWildman View Post
    While I think GVSU is a better (maybe much better) than Harding. They would still be the 7th seed on the road to Indianapolis. Well, we've already seen that this year and GVSU lost. I think the committee should consider that and make it a different pairing by putting Harding in as a different matchup that hasn't already occurred. Can't deny that Harding is also on an 8 game winning streak and won their 'playoff' matchups @Ouachita and @Arky Tech. The schedule makers did GVSU no favors but they essentially already lost 3 'playoff' matchups @Indy @Ferris @Ashland....they don't need a fourth attempt.
    Sorry, but that is such a bad way of looking at this. No matter what you try to say, those previous matchups were not playoff games. They were important games, but not do or die games like in the playoffs. You can say that GVSU already had their shot against Indy, but that was the first game of the year. No one saw it as being a playoff type game at the time since I don't think many people expected Indy to be a playoff-caliber team, let alone a top 10 team in the nation. So, let's see how things go when both teams know it's a win or you're done situation.

    Beyond all that (and everything else I've said in this thread), the bottom line is that the best 7 teams from each region should be in the playoffs. Does anyone in their right mind truly believe that Harding is better than GVSU? No. So, what basis is there for putting Harding in over GVSU? None that I can see. Like I said in another post, this isn't charity.

  18. Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by EveryCatAWildman View Post
    Why do you want some other team doing your work. Those three teams all would have had a home loss if GVSU took care of business.

    Everything you keep blowing up about being considered...well it IS being considered. Just because the committee may/likely rule in favor of a different team than GVSU doesn't automatically mean nothing was considered. So does it mean anything? as you put it, sure...but does it mean everything? well, that's a big fat no
    I didn't say it should mean everything. But I don't think any of us know how exactly the committee comes up with its rankings. Not that I'm aware of, anyway. Do they release information for how they determine their rankings? If so, can someone provide a link for that?

  19. Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Carlson View Post
    I totally understand. But results against teams below .500 is not a criteria, so that point is moot.
    Why is that not a criteria? It should be. Losing to a bad 4-7 team should not count the same as losing to the #3 team in the nation. Can you tell me what are all of the criteria the committee uses? That should be public info and maybe it is. I haven't really looked that up.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,920
    Blog Entries
    42
    Rep Power
    102525

    Default Re: Would be a joke

    Quote Originally Posted by GVSU Fan View Post
    I didn't say it should mean everything. But I don't think any of us know how exactly the committee comes up with its rankings. Not that I'm aware of, anyway. Do they release information for how they determine their rankings? If so, can someone provide a link for that?
    The criteria are published, and you can see the numbers the committee looks at on the ncaa.com page that shows the rankings (underneath the rankings are four links, one for each region).

    As an example, here was last week's:

    http://web1.ncaa.org/champsel_new/ex.../staticpdfrank

Page 1 of 20 1234511 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •