Gonzaga likely facing seeding ceiling

[ChicosBailBonds]

I hope this is accurate

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/westcoast/2013/02/27/west-coast-conference-mens-basketball-gonzaga-university-bulldogs-ncaa-tournament-seeding/1944127/

[bkooncy]

I don't think it matters if they are a 1 or 2 seed they will start their tourney out west where they will be very hard to beat. 

[nathanziarek]

Count me in with the folks that are in the 90%-sure range that there's no place for Gonzaga in the new league, but ... did we just find the reason it would be worth the extra outlay to upgrade conference membership?

[Benny B]

Count me in with the folks that are in the 90%-sure range that there's no place for Gonzaga in the new league, but ... did we just find the reason it would be worth the extra outlay to upgrade conference membership?

Easy --- The C7 should sign a 10, 20, 30-year or perpetual deal with Gonzaga that effectively makes them a "little brother" of the C7.  Officially, they stay in the WCC, and every year, the C7 schedules Gonzaga for three games during the non-con season and two games late in the conference season.

While it doesn't "upgrade" the C7, per se... it does give C7 teams the ability to schedule an additional "quality" non-con opponent late in the season, it gives Gonzaga a chance to strengthen their schedule in February and early March, it helps Gonzaga avoid having to play teams like Lewis-Clark State and Southern Utah, it does not materially increase the travel cost burden for the C7, it adds value to the C7's TV marketability, and if you only do five games per year on a home/home rotation, that means that any C7 team would only have to travel to Spokane once every four years in a 10-team C7 and once every five years (roughly) in a 12-team C7.

[The Equalizer]

Easy --- The C7 should sign a 10, 20, 30-year or perpetual deal with Gonzaga that effectively makes them a "little brother" of the C7.  Officially, they stay in the WCC, and every year, the C7 schedules Gonzaga for three games during the non-con season and two games late in the conference season.

While it doesn't "upgrade" the C7, per se... it does give C7 teams the ability to schedule an additional "quality" non-con opponent late in the season, it gives Gonzaga a chance to strengthen their schedule in February and early March, it helps Gonzaga avoid having to play teams like Lewis-Clark State and Southern Utah, it does not materially increase the travel cost burden for the C7, it adds value to the C7's TV marketability, and if you only do five games per year on a home/home rotation, that means that any C7 team would only have to travel to Spokane once every four years in a 10-team C7 and once every five years (roughly) in a 12-team C7.

You mean like a bracket buster?  Sounds Mid-Major to me.

I understand why Gonzaga might want this--Let's say such a policy were in place this year, right now. 

If Gonzaga's upcoming game was ths week against Georgetown, and they won, they'd have a late season high-quality win to justify their #1 rank/seed.

Meanwhile, Georgetown is already in the running for a #1 seed--without a late season game against Gonzaga.  Do they need another win over Gonzaga to get it?  Nope. 

I'm struggling to see what benefit to the C7 this arrangement with Gonzaga would bring.  If the C7 needs more high-quality non-conference opponents, just schedule them--much as Georgetown played Indiana this year, MU played Wisconsin, etc.

[Montana Warrior]

Count me in with the folks that are in the 90%-sure range that there's no place for Gonzaga in the new league, but ... did we just find the reason it would be worth the extra outlay to upgrade conference membership?

No way do the Zags belong with the C-7.  We need to keep it a northeast region focus.  I'm a proponent of adding Butler and possibly Xavier and sign up UC and UConn as all but football members and running with that relationship as long as it lasts.  That's an instant upgrade that's doable right now.  When they leave, only then add teams like Creighton, St. Louis, Dayton, VCU etc.

[Silkk the Shaka]

No way do the Zags belong with the C-7.  We need to keep it a northeast region focus.  I'm a proponent of adding Butler and possibly Xavier and sign up UC and UConn as all but football members and running with that relationship as long as it lasts.  That's an instant upgrade that's doable right now.  When they leave, only then add teams like Creighton, St. Louis, Dayton, VCU etc.

You ain't from around these here parts, is ya?  Ain't even in the discussion.

[mu03eng]

No way do the Zags belong with the C-7.  We need to keep it a northeast region focus.  I'm a proponent of adding Butler and possibly Xavier and sign up UC and UConn as all but football members and running with that relationship as long as it lasts.  That's an instant upgrade that's doable right now.  When they leave, only then add teams like Creighton, St. Louis, Dayton, VCU etc.

Why Northeast region focus, that puts MU, Depaul, Cinncy, Butler, and Xavier out of it.  In fact, in your proposed conference MU would be the furthest west and so not messing with the mission.

Additionally, why would we want to put together a brand new conference that is by its very nature unstable and inviting turn over?

We have to strike now,C7+ Creighton, Xavier, Butler, the two others out of Gonzaga, SLU, Dayton, VCU, and Richmond.  That is a conference that is competing for multiple bids(4-5 a year, 6 in a good year) and will be stable for 20 years.

[Montana Warrior]

That is a conference that is competing for multiple bids(4-5 a year, 6 in a good year) and will be stable for 20 years.

Nothing is going to be stable for 20 years, or ten or even five.

[mu03eng]

Nothing is going to be stable for 20 years, or ten or even five.

If we are not a football conference or have members who have football, we absolutely will be.  Football is driving everything.  If we can make basketball our thing we have a very strong niche where we can get a good revenue stream without being subject to all the uncertainty.

[chapman]

Meanwhile, Georgetown is already in the running for a #1 seed--without a late season game against Gonzaga.  Do they need another win over Gonzaga to get it?  Nope.  

But would they be if they were in the C7+?  Unknown, but point taken: if the C7 is good, non-conference matchups late in the year probably hurt more than help.

I'm struggling to see what benefit to the C7 this arrangement with Gonzaga would bring.  If the C7 needs more high-quality non-conference opponents, just schedule them--much as Georgetown played Indiana this year, MU played Wisconsin, etc.

Agree.  If anything it's better for the collective resumes of the C7 league to have schedule diversity outside of the league.  If Gonzaga plays five C7 teams and beats them all it makes the C7 look bad, even if Gonzaga is really good...only the Zags benefit since they can now say they "own" the WCC and the C7.  If Gonzaga's having a down year, all of a sudden a number of the five teams that had Gonzaga roll onto their schedule for the year and scheduled one less quality matchup elsewhere are now left with a lackluster win, and the RPI magnifies it since four of their league-mates also have the same team.

[Benny B]

But would they be if they were in the C7+?  Unknown, but point taken: if the C7 is good, non-conference matchups late in the year probably hurt more than help.

Agree.  If anything it's better for the collective resumes of the C7 league to have schedule diversity outside of the league.  If Gonzaga plays five C7 teams and beats them all it makes the C7 look bad, even if Gonzaga is really good...only the Zags benefit since they can now say they "own" the WCC and the C7.  If Gonzaga's having a down year, all of a sudden a number of the five teams that had Gonzaga roll onto their schedule for the year and scheduled one less quality matchup elsewhere are now left with a lackluster win, and the RPI magnifies it since four of their league-mates also have the same team.

If you're going to advocate against based on "what if Gonzaga rolls over us / isn't good," then MU should just abandon the C7 right now and go independent.  If Nova, GTown, Butler, etc. all go into a decade-long funk, why be in a conference with those guys dragging our RPI down and not giving us a chance for marquee wins late in the season.  If those teams get really good, we can't afford to have them rolling over us every year.

Gonzaga has been a tournament team for how many years straight?  Do you think that's just a coincidence??  I struggle to see how anyone - let alone fans of Team Bubble Watch - who's fighting for an at-large bid in late-Feb can look at the last ten years and say that they'd be rather be playing their last three games against DePaul, Seton Hall and Providence rather than one against Gonzaga.  Sure, losing against Gonzaga might burst your bubble, but if a win means you're in, wouldn't you rather have a shot to be in control of your own destiny rather than hoping for a dozen other teams to fall on their face over the next 10 days?

If you're good, you aren't nervous about playing Gonzaga in late-Feb.  If you're nervous, you aren't that good to begin with.  If you're bad, you don't care and Gonzaga still benefits from the C7's conference RPI (which should be better than the WCC's virtually every year).  If both teams are on the bubble, both teams are afforded a last chance to get off the bubble.

But let me circle back to the bolded part of your post.... Which would you rather have on your resume: a) a win against a Gonzaga team having a down year or b) a win against Maryland-Eastern Shore?  Gonzaga doesn't replace a conference game, it replaces a non-conference opponent.

[MuMark]

Why do you hope it's accurate?

I'd love it if Gonzaga ended up with a 1 seed....

I hope this is accurate

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/westcoast/2013/02/27/west-coast-conference-mens-basketball-gonzaga-university-bulldogs-ncaa-tournament-seeding/1944127/

[Benny B]

I'm struggling to see what benefit to the C7 this arrangement with Gonzaga would bring.  If the C7 needs more high-quality non-conference opponents, just schedule them--much as Georgetown played Indiana this year, MU played Wisconsin, etc.

I nominate the above for contradictory statement of the month given that Gonzaga is a high-quality non-conference opponent.  They have been for over a decade.

Further, over the past ten years, Gonzaga would have generally been a higher-quality opponent than both Indiana or Wisconsin (based on AP appearances).  In fact, there are only ten teams who have made more AP appearances (i.e. top 25) than Gonzaga over the past ten years... neither Georgetown, Ohio State, Florida, nor Arizona is one of them.  (MU is 17th, by the way.)

[The Equalizer]

I nominate the above for contradictory statement of the month given that Gonzaga is a high-quality non-conference opponent.  They have been for over a decade.

Then why are they facing a "seeding ceiling"? 

[MuMark]

Did you read the article?

Then why are they facing a "seeding ceiling"? 

[keefe]

Why do you hope it's accurate?

I'd love it if Gonzaga ended up with a 1 seed....

Chicos is a hater. The Zags are a high quality adversary deserving of our deepest respect. Mark Few musta shat in Chicos' breakfast burrito

[Benny B]

Then why are they facing a "seeding ceiling"? 

Because only four teams can not have a seeding ceiling.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Why do you hope it's accurate?

I'd love it if Gonzaga ended up with a 1 seed....

Because they aren't deserving of a number 1 seed.  You are rewarding teams that don't play tough competition.

I just hope we get into their bracket.  I know Keefe likes to say I'm a hater, hardly.  I like Gonzaga a lot, respect their program, enjoy Spokane, etc.  I just think you are giving teams in their bracket an unfair advantage in comparison to the other teams with the other #1 seeds.  This year may not make as much difference because there are so many teams knocking each other off.  They have very marginal victories against some terrible teams, they lost at home to the 6th place Big Ten team and lost to the 4th place A-10 team on the road.  Their "big wins" aren't really all that big, they just chalk up a lot of wins because of who they play. 

Just my opinion, but clearly the author of this article in USA Today is thinking along the same lines.  I guess that makes him a hater.

[The Equalizer]

Did you read the article?

Yes. 

Did you read the post I replied to? 

[The Equalizer]

Because only four teams can not have a seeding ceiling.

Hardly.

Uconn, Villanova, Pitt, Louisville, and Syracuse have proven they don't face such a cieling.  That's five teams in one conference alone.

[Benny B]

Hardly.

Uconn, Villanova, Pitt, Louisville, and Syracuse have proven they don't face such a cieling.  That's five teams in one conference alone.

When there are only four #1 seeds the committee can award, that means 343 other teams are going to have some sort of a ceiling.

[Lennys Tap]

This year may not make as much difference because there are so many teams knocking each other off. 

While I generally agree with you that Gonzaga has a very thin resume for a #1 seed the problem is that other than Indiana so does everybody else. Lots of warts on most of the teams at the top this year.

[Montana Warrior]

While I generally agree with you that Gonzaga has a very thin resume for a #1 seed the problem is that other than Indiana so does everybody else. Lots of warts on most of the teams at the top this year.

I hope Gonzaga gets the #1 seed and is destroyed in the sweet 16 by a 4 seed or lower, (maybe our boys).  Then we can end this Spokane lovefest.

[wardle2wade]

With Arizona losing to USC (and Michigan at PSU), Gonzaga is looking more credible to get a 1 by the committee.  Not saying I think they are a 1, but will be tough to not give them the last one.

Even if given SJ and LA, I still don't think they're going final four... While they have been smoking everyone, they havent faced high caliber competition in a while.  I can see them getting shellshocked in the sw16.