Win one and we're in

[Marquette4life]

Hopefully... let's just say the next 8 days will be filled with fun!

What do u guys think

[Newsdreams]

Hopefully... let's just say the next 8 days will be filled with fun!

What do u guys think

One is no lock. Two should be a lock barring  a lot of wild conf championship upsets and / or committe goes psycho on us....

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Hopefully... let's just say the next 8 days will be filled with fun!

What do u guys think

1 is pretty damn close to a lock. I can't imagine a situation where 2 wins doesn't get us in.

[brewcity77]

One and we're in. Two and we definitely avoid Dayton.

[GB Warrior]

One and we're in. Two and we definitely avoid Dayton.

Agree, but with 1, we need to avoid a bad loss in Round 1 of the BET.

[brewcity77]

I still think conference tournament results are vastly overrated. Lose to DePaul, lose to Villanova in the final (after beating DePaul, Butler, and Creighton), I don't think it would make any real difference. Seeding wouldn't notably change regardless.

[MUBigDance]

Win at X and we are in...I'm convinced 6 from Big East unless 7 is 10-8. So Barring BET surprises, I think the committee will follow the BET seeds this year...not as a rule but as happenstance.

* I'm just not going to think about losing 2. We are out.

* Win Both and not only are we in but BET 3 seed possible.

* Beating Xavier and losing to CR:
we are a BET 6+ seed...7 not possible. tiebreaker over X no matter who finishes 9-9 in minconf tie.

* lose to X and beat CR...that's interesting.
X will beat DePaul (will just assume that) and above us at 10-8
PR doesn't matter with STJ ...they will have the tiebreaker no matter who is tied at 9-9.
So it will be SH and us and we have the tiebreaker...SH beats Butler we are 7 seed. Loses to Butler, they are 7 seed.

All this to say: BEAT X and we are in!

[amen426]

One and we're in. Two and we definitely avoid Dayton.

Oh how quickly our opinions change in a span of 3 weeks.

I agree. Soft bubble or not, we need to get to 10-8. And I really don't think the BET matters unless we win it. If we go 20-13 (9-9) and lose in the final, I still think we go to the NIT.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

I still think conference tournament results are vastly overrated. Lose to DePaul, lose to Villanova in the final (after beating DePaul, Butler, and Creighton), I don't think it would make any real difference. Seeding wouldn't notably change regardless.

Gotta disagree there.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Gotta disagree there.

In my experience Brew is right. I really think the committee goes into conference tournaments with a pretty set idea of who is in and who is out. Conference tournament results are more about seeding than who is in the dance. I think the exception is extraordinary results like losing to Depaul or beating Villanova....and of course bid stealers winning the whole damn thing.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

In my experience Brew is right. I really think the committee goes into conference tournaments with a pretty set idea of who is in and who is out. Conference tournament results are more about seeding than who is in the dance. I think the exception is extraordinary results like losing to Depaul or beating Villanova....and of course bid stealers winning the whole damn thing.

There is no way that they will look at us the same if we lose our first BET game to DePaul, or beat Depaul, then beat Providence, three beat Butler and lose to Noba in the final.   That is the example Brew used. Adding two big wins over teams we haven't beat all year versus losing to a sub 150 RPI team in the BET opener is a big difference. 

I would agree that if we were the 4-6 seed and lose it's not going to make much of a difference one way or the other. But if we go 9-9 and somehow end up the 7, not sure how you can make the comment Brew made and feel that's accurate.

[brewcity77]

Oh how quickly our opinions change in a span of 3 weeks.

Without a doubt. I was set on 10-8, but my opinion changed as everyone on the bubble just kept losing. With it looking like a 15-loss team may very well get in after the past three weeks of bubble calamity, we will be safe at 9-9.

[MuMark]

Doesn't a lot depend on how many bid stealers there are? I would think at 9-9 we would be sweating it out if you get 2-4 bids stolen.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

Doesn't a lot depend on how many bid stealers there are? I would think at 9-9 we would be sweating it out if you get 2-4 bids stolen.

While 4 is theoretically possible, that's a lot of stolen bids. Pretty unlikely it's more than 2. Most likely is definitely AAC and A10.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

There is no way that they will look at us the same if we lose our first BET game to DePaul, or beat Depaul, then beat Providence, three beat Butler and lose to Noba in the final.   That is the example Brew used. Adding two big wins over teams we haven't beat all year versus losing to a sub 150 RPI team in the BET opener is a big difference. 

I would agree that if we were the 4-6 seed and lose it's not going to make much of a difference one way or the other. But if we go 9-9 and somehow end up the 7, not sure how you can make the comment Brew made and feel that's accurate.

Like I said, extraordinary results (like losing to Depaul) do have an effect. But not nearly as much as they do during the regular season. If losing to Depaul during the regular season is worth -10 spots on the bracket (made up number), then losing to Depaul during the BET is only worth -5.

For whatever reason, the committee doesn't value games in the conference tournaments as much as they do games in the regular season. Remember Coach Cal complaining last season that TAMU was a 3 seed while they were a 4 seed right after they beat TAMU in the SEC tournament? Committee mostly makes up their mind at the end of the regular season.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Doesn't a lot depend on how many bid stealers there are? I would think at 9-9 we would be sweating it out if you get 2-4 bids stolen.

Honestly if we go 1-1, I think we would need 6-8 bids to be stolen us to miss out. Remember, we are currently in the last 4 byes per most bracketologists (including Lunardi the Bracket King). That means there are at least 4 teams between us and the NIT. Going 1-1 with the games being @X and vs. CREI would likely push us further from the bubble instead of closer to it.

The other factor is that there doesn't seem to be many potential bid-stealers this season. AAC, A10, MVC, and CUSA are the most likely candidates though Middle Tennessee State might not be good enough to earn an at large.

[amen426]

Honestly if we go 1-1, I think we would need 6-8 bids to be stolen us to miss out. Remember, we are currently in the last 4 byes per most bracketologists (including Lunardi the Bracket King). That means there are at least 4 teams between us and the NIT. Going 1-1 with the games being @X and vs. CREI would likely push us further from the bubble instead of closer to it.

The other factor is that there doesn't seem to be many potential bid-stealers this season. AAC, A10, MVC, and CUSA are the most likely candidates though Middle Tennessee State might not be good enough to earn an at large.

Lunardi has us in the last four in (not the last 4 byes).

There never seems like there are bid "stealers". Thats why they are unexpected.

The Big 10 is a league where they are projected for 7 bids. But Purdue is the only one slated to be a 4 seed or better.. Very weak at the top. It wouldn't surprise me to see someone like Ohio State, Illinois, or someone else go on a run. Would say Indiana, but it seems like they've quit. But that would be a total Crean move to run the table in the conference tournament.

SEC has 14 teams, but only 2 of them are good. And Kentucky is not 30-1 good this year. So  if Vandy / Ole Miss / Alabama can sneak there way into the title game- who knows. Ole Miss has done that before in the Marshall Henderson years.

BYU just beat Gonzaga. They are 3rd in the WCC. Wouldn't shock me to see them take down the WCC tournament. That would be brutal, since the WCC is generally a 1 bid league, but they are already guaranteed 2 with Gonzaga & St Mary's.

Point is- you never really know. No one expects non-tournament teams to win conference tournaments. But it happens every year.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

Lunardi has us in the last four in (not the last 4 byes).

There never seems like there are bid "stealers". Thats why they are unexpected.

The Big 10 is a league where they are projected for 7 bids. But Purdue is the only one slated to be a 4 seed or better.. Very weak at the top. It wouldn't surprise me to see someone like Ohio State, Illinois, or someone else go on a run. Would say Indiana, but it seems like they've quit. But that would be a total Crean move to run the table in the conference tournament.

SEC has 14 teams, but only 2 of them are good. And Kentucky is not 30-1 good this year. So  if Vandy / Ole Miss / Alabama can sneak there way into the title game- who knows. Ole Miss has done that before in the Marshall Henderson years.

BYU just beat Gonzaga. They are 3rd in the WCC. Wouldn't shock me to see them take down the WCC tournament. That would be brutal, since the WCC is generally a 1 bid league, but they are already guaranteed 2 with Gonzaga & St Mary's.

Point is- you never really know. No one expects non-tournament teams to win conference tournaments. But it happens every year.

Regarding your last comment, our point is there just simply aren't very many teams that will receive at larges. Much fewer than usual.  Outside of MTSU, and if someone like UCONN wins the AAC (I am totally expecting that, by the way) and a non top 3 A10 team, no other mid major is getting bids.  Chances of someone not named Gonzaga or St. Mary's winning the WCC is so slim. Someone not named Witchita or Illinois State isn't going to win the MVC, and if they do, doubt ISU gets in. Maybe 1 P6 that wouldn't get an at large is going to win their tournament, and even that may be friendly.  I just can't see a scenario where there are four bid stealers, but I guess we shall see.