Page 13 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... LastLast
Results 145 to 156 of 210

Thread: So, which is it?

  1. #145

    Default Re: So, which is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Turbine View Post
    Since the NCAA took over the NIT they have invited exactly 1 "at large" team from the Sun Belt. Western Kentucky the very first year the NCAA took over. None since.
    You have to go back to the '80s for the belt to have consistent at-large bids in the NIT. The '90s & '00s were much like it is today automatic qualifiers only so the NCAA taking over has little to do with us being held out the NIT as an At-large.

  2. #146

    Default Re: So, which is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by cajun_lannister View Post
    You have to go back to the '80s for the belt to have consistent at-large bids in the NIT. The '90s & '00s were much like it is today automatic qualifiers only so the NCAA taking over has little to do with us being held out the NIT as an At-large.
    It does not matter anyway the team needs to have the mindset If I want to play in a postseason game, I either have to win the regular season or the tournament. Any other outcome I'm sitting at home watching games from my couch.

  3. #147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cajun_lannister View Post
    You have to go back to the '80s for the belt to have consistent at-large bids in the NIT. The '90s & '00s were much like it is today automatic qualifiers only so the NCAA taking over has little to do with us being held out the NIT as an At-large.
    Everything bid was “at large” for the NIT before 2006 when the NCAA took over. That is when the “automatic qualifier” of regular season conference champs who didn’t win the tournament was established.

  4. #148

    Default Re: So, which is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatch View Post
    Everything bid was “at large” for the NIT before 2006 when the NCAA took over. That is when the “automatic qualifier” of regular season conference champs who didn’t win the tournament was established.
    I should have said 1 bid into the NIT

  5. Default Re: So, which is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by cajun_lannister View Post
    You have to go back to the '80s for the belt to have consistent at-large bids in the NIT. The '90s & '00s were much like it is today automatic qualifiers only so the NCAA taking over has little to do with us being held out the NIT as an At-large.
    In the online spreadsheet I saw the Sun Belt at large bids of teams that left conference are being attributed to their current conference.

  6. Default Re: So, which is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Turbine View Post
    Good morning.

    Some of my best memories were hanging out with you and Hammer at the Eauk.

    It bothers me to this day that I irked him.
    ....Where is Hammer? His cousins grand son was pretty good this last year....LSU think so!

  7. #151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zephyr View Post
    I keep hearing you guys say this but how are you coming to that conclusion? Attendance? Because attendance is down in football across the country as well including ole mighty Alabama. Does that mean there is less interest in football in a football rich part of the country? I don't think so. I think you have streamed games as the main reason for that. We are a little void of top talent in the state right now but that comes and goes. I just don't necessarily believe there is a disinterest in basketball in general. We just fail to put a program out there that people typically want to see.
    The streamed games are a factor in all sports. Perhaps there are still people watching but in a different manner. As far as our team this year, the injury to Marquetti has magnified their limitations. Just appreciate every victory they can attain.

  8. #152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cajunsmike View Post
    As far as our team this year, the injury to Marquetti has magnified their limitations. Just appreciate every victory they can attain.
    There’s no doubt I’m always enjoying a nice Cajuns win. But this is where I have a problem with our basketball program’s mindset. All I’ve heard was hype when we brought in the likes of Gant, Miller, Stroman, Russell, etc.. So now that Marquetti is hurt, we should just cash it in?

    I know you’ve mentioned it before, but the injury to Marquetti and the dialogue that has gone with it tells me that either our coaching staff has underachieved in either recruiting or coaching up what we already have. There’s no way that one player should affect our season that much especially if our recruiting was hyped.

  9. #153

    Default Re: So, which is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by ULvictory View Post
    But cost has to match the quality of what we are paying for. If we voluntarily pay for a product that has not complimented us with the results that we are paying for, then there's a problem. That's why there's people who didn't like Marlin's contract extension.

    On the other hand, we have gotten an ROI in football with a product that overachieved last year. That's all I'm saying.
    Are we getting an ROI based on our basketball standards??...we've beaten the strength of the basketball schedule horse to shreds, let's do the same for football... we finished Massey rankings at 93...we beat 124, 125, 70, 119, 121 & 97...we also lost to 105...so we beat 1 team ranked higher than us, but lost to a team worse than us (a wash there) and got throttled by P5 competition...IMO, seems identical to basketball results

  10. #154

    Default Re: So, which is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by CajunJeaux View Post
    Are we getting an ROI based on our basketball standards??...we've beaten the strength of the basketball schedule horse to shreds, let's do the same for football... we finished Massey rankings at 93...we beat 124, 125, 70, 119, 121 & 97...we also lost to 105...so we beat 1 team ranked higher than us, but lost to a team worse than us (a wash there) and got throttled by P5 competition...IMO, seems identical to basketball results
    Football was in year one of a new regime with a program that is getting over probation and a depleted roster. And they still won the Sun Belt Western Division title and made a bowl game. The Basketball coaching staff is on year 9.

    It's safe to say that football has gotten a higher ROI so far than basketball.

  11. #155

    Default Re: So, which is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by CajunJeaux View Post
    Are we getting an ROI based on our basketball standards??...we've beaten the strength of the basketball schedule horse to shreds, let's do the same for football... we finished Massey rankings at 93...we beat 124, 125, 70, 119, 121 & 97...we also lost to 105...so we beat 1 team ranked higher than us, but lost to a team worse than us (a wash there) and got throttled by P5 competition...IMO, seems identical to basketball results
    See above and below

  12. #156

    Default Re: So, which is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by CajunJeaux View Post
    Are we getting an ROI based on our basketball standards??...we've beaten the strength of the basketball schedule horse to shreds, let's do the same for football... we finished Massey rankings at 93...we beat 124, 125, 70, 119, 121 & 97...we also lost to 105...so we beat 1 team ranked higher than us, but lost to a team worse than us (a wash there) and got throttled by P5 competition...IMO, seems identical to basketball results
    Football had a new staff in it's first year. Coach Marlin is in his 9th season, so are your expectations the same for both staff's at this time? For the record, my expectations rise with the football staff for the 2019 season in year two.

Page 13 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

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