Dayton (Eeek!)

[Benny B]

The biggest issue playing in Dayton is flying in and having to a rent a car. All Enterprise has is second generation Cavalier Coupes.

Must be pretty high demand for them next week.  $800, damn.

[brewcity77]

I see your point Brew but they could still be the 11 seed, not in Dayton and have the same 6-3 matchups. That would be the much prefered option, no?

Obviously the fewer games you have to win to progress, the easier that progression is. But I don't think being sent to Dayton is something to panic over.

And again, I don't think we will end up in Dayton. I think we're an 8/9 seed playing in either Tulsa or Greenville. But if we do go to Dayton, it might be a better path to the Sweet 16 than if we're in an 8/9 game.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

I would have been fine with Dayton had we finished 9-9.  At 10-8, and considering all things bubble, we don't deserve to be in Dayton.

My chief concern as it relates to Dayton is I feel the committee may want to put 1 BE team there.  They shouldn't - it shouldn't have any barring on it whatsoever - but I do have this somewhat irrational fear that they will want 1 of the 7 BE teams there.  Xavier's win over Butler yesterday scares me a bit in that regard. 

Having said that, I really cannot see a scenario in which we fall into the bottom four.  I've dug into it so many times, I don't feel like repeating myself again, but its just so farfetched.

I also generally think it will be much tougher for MU to win 3 games in six days, versus 2 games in four days.  But maybe with this team having a game to get their gitters under control will help with shooting.  It was pretty obvious yesterday that the moment got to us early on.

[Benny B]

My chief concern as it relates to Dayton is I feel the committee may want to put 1 BE team there.  They shouldn't - it shouldn't have any barring on it whatsoever - but I do have this somewhat irrational fear that they will want 1 of the 7 BE teams there.  Xavier's win over Butler yesterday scares me a bit in that regard. 

I could see a situation where the committee doesn't believe any BE team should be in Dayton but wants to appear unbiased and so is deeply divided on the matter... in that event, if it came down to X and MU, I would think that they would send X to Dayton primarily because MU swept X; however, if the committee was still on the fence, I still think they would put X in Dayton.  My logic is that if they feel like they have to be unfair by putting a team in Dayton that shouldn't be there (just to appease the masses), then at least try to give that team some sort of advantage to balance it out (e.g. give X a de facto home game).  It's the same logic the committee has used on numerous occasions where they'll bump a team down a seedline or two to keep them close to home or bump them up a seed and ship them across the country.

[GoldenDieners32]

I really hope we are not in dayton as an 11 seed

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I do agree that Marquette is a difficult scout. I think just about every Big East team played us better in the second game than the first. Without the benefit of seeing us before, I think we could catch a lot of teams off guard with our offense. You legitimately have have a game plan for every player because any one has the potential to go off for 15+.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

I could see a situation where the committee doesn't believe any BE team should be in Dayton but wants to appear unbiased and so is deeply divided on the matter... in that event, if it came down to X and MU, I would think that they would send X to Dayton primarily because MU swept X; however, if the committee was still on the fence, I still think they would put X in Dayton.  My logic is that if they feel like they have to be unfair by putting a team in Dayton that shouldn't be there (just to appease the masses), then at least try to give that team some sort of advantage to balance it out (e.g. give X a de facto home game).  It's the same logic the committee has used on numerous occasions where they'll bump a team down a seedline or two to keep them close to home or bump them up a seed and ship them across the country.

Good point.  I hope that is the case.  I think we have a better overall resume than PC as well, but the fact that they swept us kind of makes me think they'll be ahead of us in the pecking order, even if it is just 1 spot ahead of us.  Hopefully their bad losses outweigh them beating us by 1 possession twice. Honestly, the floor situation in that game at the Dunk should be brought into consideration as well.

[GoldenDieners32]

I do agree that Marquette is a difficult scout. I think just about every Big East team played us better in the second game than the first. Without the benefit of seeing us before, I think we could catch a lot of teams off guard with our offense. You legitimately have have a game plan for every player because any one has the potential to go off for 15+.

Completely agree

[Nukem2]

I do agree that Marquette is a difficult scout. I think just about every Big East team played us better in the second game than the first. Without the benefit of seeing us before, I think we could catch a lot of teams off guard with our offense. You legitimately have have a game plan for every player because any one has the potential to go off for 15+.

A quick review says otherwise.  Hmmm.  Nova?...No   SHU?...No  Creighton?... Same  Xavier...Same  DePaul...No  SJU...No  Butler?...No  Providence?...Yes  Georgetown?...Yes  Mostly, MU did better except for the latter two and the 3rd time with SHU.

[BM1090]

A quick review says otherwise.  Hmmm.  Nova?...No   SHU?...No  Creighton?... Same  Xavier...Same  DePaul...No  SJU...No  Butler?...No  Providence?...Yes  Georgetown?...Yes  Mostly, MU did better except for the latter two and the 3rd time with SHU.

Nova? No. SHU? Same. Two toss ups. Creighton? Same. Xavier? Same. DePaul? Yes. SJU? No. Providence? Same. Butler? Same. I'd say they were better the 2nd time. Beat us on our court. Dictated style of play. Georgetown? Yes.

The only games I'd say we played better in the 2nd matchup were against SJU and Nova.

Creighton, X, SHU, PC the same. Could make an argument PC and Creighton played us better the second time. Same with SHU. But I could also see an argument the other way.

Butler, Georgetown, DePaul played us better the 2nd game.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

A quick review says otherwise.  Hmmm.  Nova?...No   SHU?...No  Creighton?... Same  Xavier...Same  DePaul...No  SJU...No  Butler?...No  Providence?...Yes  Georgetown?...Yes  Mostly, MU did better except for the latter two and the 3rd time with SHU.

Nova and St. John's I agree.

Hall played better against us in the 2nd and 3rd games than they did in the first game. We just played a lot better in the 2nd game.

Providence, Butler, Georgetown, Depaul, Creighton and Xavier played us a lot tougher the 2nd time around. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about margin of victory here. I'm talking about how well they played.

[Nukem2]

Nova and St. John's I agree.

Hall played better against us in the 2nd and 3rd games than they did in the first game. We just played a lot better in the 2nd game.

Providence, Butler, Georgetown, Depaul, Creighton and Xavier played us a lot tougher the 2nd time around. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about margin of victory here. I'm talking about how well they played.

Butler hammered MU the first time.  Not sure how they played better the second time.

[GGGG]

Seriously...if we play in Dayton, which I do not think we will, is it really so bad?

At the beginning of the year, we would have been thrilled with it.  I have zero expectations for this team beyond making the tournament.  They stink defensively and can be inconsistent offensively.

If we are one and done in Dayton, I consider the year a success.

[geps]

At the beginning of the year, we would have been thrilled with it.  I have zero expectations for this team beyond making the tournament.  They stink defensively and can be inconsistent offensively.

If we are one and done in Dayton, I consider the year a success.

Agree Dayton is way better than where we have been the last 3 years and better than NIT.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Butler hammered MU the first time.  Not sure how they played better the second time.

We had a 16 point lead on them at one point. They lead pretty much from coast to coast in the second game.

[wadesworld]

I do agree that Marquette is a difficult scout. I think just about every Big East team played us better in the second game than the first. Without the benefit of seeing us before, I think we could catch a lot of teams off guard with our offense. You legitimately have have a game plan for every player because any one has the potential to go off for 15+.

I don't think there's much truth to this at all.

• Nova: Got blown out in the first meeting, won the second meeting. Better the second time around.
• Butler: Lost by 8 on the road in the first meeting, lost by 3 at home in the second meeting.  Roughly a push.
• Creighton: Won by 8 in the first meeting, won by 8 in the second meeting.  First meeting was on the road but also the first game with no Watson for Creighton.  Push
• Seton Hall: Lost by 3 on the road in the first meeting, won by 3 at home in the second meeting.  Push.
• Providence: Lost by 1 at home in the first meeting, lost by 4 on the road in the second meeting.  Push.
• Xavier: won by 22 at home in the first meeting, won by 11 on the road in the second meeting.  Would argue this has much more to do with not having Blueitt in the first meeting than anything else, so not sure you can conclude one way or the other.
• St. John's: blown out on the road in the first meeting, blow out win at home in the second meeting.  Better the second time around.
• Georgetown: 10 point win at home in the first meeting, blow out loss in the second meeting.  Worse the second time around.
• DePaul: two blowout wins.  Push.

Pretty much an overall push.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I don't think there's much truth to this at all.

• Nova: Got blown out in the first meeting, won the second meeting. Better the second time around.
• Butler: Lost by 8 on the road in the first meeting, lost by 3 at home in the second meeting.  Roughly a push.
• Creighton: Won by 8 in the first meeting, won by 8 in the second meeting.  First meeting was on the road but also the first game with no Watson for Creighton.  Push
• Seton Hall: Lost by 3 on the road in the first meeting, won by 3 at home in the second meeting.  Push.
• Providence: Lost by 1 at home in the first meeting, lost by 4 on the road in the second meeting.  Push.
• Xavier: won by 22 at home in the first meeting, won by 11 on the road in the second meeting.  Would argue this has much more to do with not having Blueitt in the first meeting than anything else, so not sure you can conclude one way or the other.
• St. John's: blown out on the road in the first meeting, blow out win at home in the second meeting.  Better the second time around.
• Georgetown: 10 point win at home in the first meeting, blow out loss in the second meeting.  Worse the second time around.
• DePaul: two blowout wins.  Push.

Pretty much an overall push.

I would argue a lot of your pushes were actually not. But again, not talking about margin of victory. I was talking about how well they played against us. Margin of victory is one way to measure but that doesn't take into account how we would have scouted them and adjusted.

Honestly, I'm just giving my opinion, facts. From what I saw in most of those games, teams played us better the second time around.

[wadesworld]

I would argue a lot of your pushes were actually not. But again, not talking about margin of victory. I was talking about how well they played against us. Margin of victory is one way to measure but that doesn't take into account how we would have scouted them and adjusted.

Honestly, I'm just giving my opinion, facts. From what I saw in most of those games, teams played us better the second time around.

Just genuinely curious why you think some of these teams played better the second time around.  Georgetown obviously did.  St. John's and Nova obviously did not.  Butler's second time around, quite frankly, they played pretty awful, we just did not take advantage.  Xavier, sure they played better the second time, but that'll happen when your best player is available as opposed to the first time when he wasn't.  The first two SH games were basically identical games, both Creighton games basically identical games, Providence I suppose played worse as they made a comeback in the second half of the 2nd game while the first game they led the whole way.  DePaul, don't think scouting or anything mattered, those were two easy blowout wins.

[burger]

Just genuinely curious why you think some of these teams played better the second time around.  Georgetown obviously did.  St. John's and Nova obviously did not.  Butler's second time around, quite frankly, they played pretty awful, we just did not take advantage.  Xavier, sure they played better the second time, but that'll happen when your best player is available as opposed to the first time when he wasn't.  The first two SH games were basically identical games, both Creighton games basically identical games, Providence I suppose played worse as they made a comeback in the second half of the 2nd game while the first game they led the whole way.  DePaul, don't think scouting or anything mattered, those were two easy blowout wins.

Quite frankly .....the whole discussion would be moot.....if.....we had finished the games against Butler, Seton Hall, and Providence.....

Learning to win until we got rid of that "senior leadership" was most of the issue.....

The doesn't even count WOJO's faux pas in some of these and other games.....

This team could easily have a +5 winning record.....

I hope we get a 10 or 11 seed.....But I expect us to get "screwed" as usual with either an 8/9...LOL.....or a play-in.....

Why would you want to "place" a Catholic school truly in the "seating" that they belong.....

The most laughable scenario would be playing in Dayton.....against Dayton.....of course.....

[BM1090]

Just genuinely curious why you think some of these teams played better the second time around.  Georgetown obviously did.  St. John's and Nova obviously did not.  Butler's second time around, quite frankly, they played pretty awful, we just did not take advantage.  Xavier, sure they played better the second time, but that'll happen when your best player is available as opposed to the first time when he wasn't.  The first two SH games were basically identical games, both Creighton games basically identical games, Providence I suppose played worse as they made a comeback in the second half of the 2nd game while the first game they led the whole way.  DePaul, don't think scouting or anything mattered, those were two easy blowout wins.

I can agree with all these arguments except DePaul. We were up nearly 30 in game 1. We were only up 5 with 3 minutes left in game 2.

[CTWarrior]

I can agree with all these arguments except DePaul. We were up nearly 30 in game 1. We were only up 5 with 3 minutes left in game 2.

The order in which we played them is less significant than who was the home the second time around.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Just genuinely curious why you think some of these teams played better the second time around.  Georgetown obviously did.  St. John's and Nova obviously did not.  Butler's second time around, quite frankly, they played pretty awful, we just did not take advantage.  Xavier, sure they played better the second time, but that'll happen when your best player is available as opposed to the first time when he wasn't.  The first two SH games were basically identical games, both Creighton games basically identical games, Providence I suppose played worse as they made a comeback in the second half of the 2nd game while the first game they led the whole way.  DePaul, don't think scouting or anything mattered, those were two easy blowout wins.

What I remember about the 2nd Butler game is that they played stellar defense and ran us off the three point line. Their offense wasn't great but it was more their defense stopping their offense than us just not taking advantage. The first Seton Hall game I remember us being the better team all game but then imploding in the final minute. The second game I thought they played us more evenly. I remember being comfortably in control of the first Creighton game and then letting them back in at the end. I remember feeling a lot more nervous during the 2nd game. Depaul actually gave us a scare for a moment late in the 2nd half before we clamped down.

Honestly, its a matter of opinion. Not hard facts. I felt like we were consistently defended better in the 2nd games but our defense also performed better. I could definitely be wrong, haven't actually looked at the numbers.