Should we have stayed in the Valley?

[60Shock]

How can a true WSU (or any school) BB fan not appreciate being in a much stronger league competing against higher skilled athletes? Of course the danger in this is that we should expect losing more conference games each year than we have in the Valley during our last 8 years or so.

We can certainly dream, but I do not anticipate we are going to DOMINATE this league, however, hopefully we should most years range from #1 to #4, which very likely will result in a decent birth in the NCAA tournament.

Along with that, we should be prepared for some infrequent "reloading years" in which we will may, or may not qualify for selection.

For those of you whose glass is always full, more power to you, and please let me know what you are drinking, as I would enjoy trying some of it.

[ShockerFever]

I just see WSU, more years than not long term, slightly above the pool that would include schools like Tulsa, SMU, UCF, and Temple. Top tier would be Cincinnati the current 800 pound gorilla followed by schools like Memphis, Houston, and Connecticut who are better situated for recruiting...an outcome a bit like what has happened to Creighton in the Big East. They can challenge but will rarely win the whole thing.
Admittedly we have more upside than Creighton and the mid tier AAC teams I mentioned so there is that. Perhaps under Marshall we can be a challenger but I'm also thinking post Marshall.

You've mentioned Creighton in 3 of your last 5 posts.

[Dave Stalwart]

on another note, why isn’t there a Big East/American challenge every year? That seems so obvious. Technically both conference ARE the old big east. Makes no sense. Would be super fun. Other power conferences do it all the time.

must be bad blood or something. Hopefully somebody finds a way to make it happen.

it would be really nice if right now in the season we could just hit pause and play Creighton.

speaking of the big east, did anyone else notice that after the St. John’s-Duke debacle, the big east has now passed the big 12 in conference RPI?

[Dan]

For everyone with artificially high expectations, just wait till next year when we have a roster full of freshmen. I for one am expecting to finish around 3-4, maybe even 5. It will be a big jump in competition and learning for our talented class, Landry, Markis and Austin will fill in some of the gaps, but we all know what heppens when you put too much pressure in these shoulders

[pinstripers]

The Valley shouldn't have gone to ****. We had to leave.

[bleed yellow]

It could be worse, at least we arent bottom feeding like Creighton was for awhile there after they left the Valley. We arent even catching that much flack it doesn't seem. People look at WSU's situation and realize we are merely adjusting. The most negative things I've heard all year was from a couple Kstate fans. Which is laughable being that they got demolished by Tulsa at Intrust. I think we'll be alright.

[AndShock]

For everyone with artificially high expectations, just wait till next year when we have a roster full of freshmen. I for one am expecting to finish around 3-4, maybe even 5. It will be a big jump in competition and learning for our talented class, Landry, Markis and Austin will fill in some of the gaps, but we all know what heppens when you put too much pressure in these shoulders

I probably had artificially high expectations this season but I would be perfectly fine with 5th next year. Returning 0 big men scares me.

[pinstripers]

5th would be a resounding success next year.

[GreatWhiteBuffalo]

They had to make the move. They were too big and too talented for the Valley. Problem is, they still weren't quite at the athletic level of the AAC. That said, they had to get into the AAC to get through some recruiting doors to get the next-level athletes they are going to need. Just a natural progression. Losing sucks. Seeing this squad not be able to lock down opposing offenses is more infuriating. Watching this team not value the ball is the most infuriating.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Were they able to keep up with the athletes from Gonzaga, Ohio State, Louisville, Kentucky, Indiana, KU, Vandy, and Arizona?

[Shockm]

Not at the level of the AAC? Do you think about what you say? You just can't have thought, or you are trolling

[shocker43]

What a stupid thread.

[proshox]

The lack of Athleticism argument is weak sauce.

[ShockerPhi]

Man, if people are already starting to jump off the wagon after just 3 losses, next year might be extra rough. Luckily most people here on this board are level headed and know that this conference is miles better than the MVC. But next year our growing pains are going to be much worse with losing 6 seniors and losing every single one of our contributing big men. However we have a ton of talent coming in, so I think we'll only have one down year and then be back near the top.

I say good riddance to the people bailing now. And they're not allowed to come back in 2019. Hell, there's still time to turn it around this year. Losing @ Temple is not the end of the world.

[proshox]

LS, MM, AR, CK, RB, SHJ, AM, a typical WSU "MVC" recruiting class and HCGM... The NCAA tournament would be our 2018/2019 expectation in the MVC.. I still think it is our expectation in the American.

[WstateU]

They had to make the move. They were too big and too talented for the Valley. Problem is, they still weren't quite at the athletic level of the AAC. That said, they had to get into the AAC to get through some recruiting doors to get the next-level athletes they are going to need. Just a natural progression. Losing sucks. Seeing this squad not be able to lock down opposing offenses is more infuriating. Watching this team not value the ball is the most infuriating.

TheyTheytheytheythey...

[GreatWhiteBuffalo]

What's with the slam of the word "they" and why is it "bullshit?"

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I am for the move, but it pretty much eliminated the chance of making the NCAA every year to cement our rep as Gonzaga of the Midwest.

In the MVC a trough year gets you in. Not any more.

All other aspects are better.

Disagree x 1 million

Most Gregg Marshall teams will be good enough to earn an at-large. Playing in the American reduces the chances of a couple November injuries threatening a deserving team from getting a bid (ala 2016 where a top 15, and maybe even top 10, caliber squad received a play-in invite). Despite the injuries and early season losses, Ron and Fred's final year would have probably been a 7 or 8 seed had they faced a decent SOS in January and February. I wrote an entire novel here on Shockernet right before that selection sunday about how the Shox were killing people by 30 per night and not getting nearly enough credit for it. The committee almost screwed up big time, and the 11 seed they gave out was still a joke.

What about last year's 10 seed (to a borderline top 10, easily top 15 level team) despite winning Arch Madness? You realize that an upset loss in St. Louis could have sent the Shox to the NIT?

Occasionally, and I mean once in a rare while, a Marshall team might benefit from having a bad year but playing well in 3 winnable games and grabbing an auto-bid coming out of the MVC as a 13-14 seed. But tell me this... how often do you think the following would happen?:
A) Resume after 30+ games isn't good enough for a bid.
B) Wins Arch Madness

Now subtract all the times that WSU might lack a quality resume, but manage to win the AAC Tourney. That minute occurrence that you are left with is the only real upside of playing in the MVC.

AAC = more bids, period.

[proshox]

First, I am personally strongly for playing in the American. I was very tired of foregone conclusions and only worrying about what Jerry Palm may say. This year my tickets are actually worth the SASO donation.

Second, the basic premise of this argument has been discussed amongst my friends for more than ten years (hell I originally thought it was crazy when my friend thought we would be better off in a one-bid league). The idea that WSU losing 3 of 5 games has lead me here is just wrong. When overall exposure for College Basketball is so greatly tied to one event (The NCAA tournament) and the exposure leads to better donors, facilities, coaches and ultimately players it would be reasonable to make the number one strategic goal be “Get in the tournament.” IMO, being a big fish a small pond doesn’t necessarily bring a great seed (it can), but it should make NCAA entry a virtual guarantee for a team with the resource advantages of WSU.

Third, this specific limitation of metric analysis is the one subject JH4P and I will never agree on this but I will offer a few thoughts just to keep it fun. It is about the only situation where I have found the popular metrics to be a little suspect.

This year's shocker team would be drilling MVC teams by 30 points. Just like it did in the first few AAC games. If you agree, where would the shockers currently be ranked and what the expected seed be?

IMO, sites such as KenPom can't adequately address a heavily unbalanced schedule (that is their whole goal, but I believe there are limitations). Last year, the MVC had one team which could potentially expose a shocker deficiency. The rest of the MVC teams could not expose deficiencies and certainly couldn't mimic strategies shown to work against the Shockers. I would go as far as saying a number of the MVC teams didn’t really think they were competing to win.

In difficult leagues, teams begin to find ways to expose a team’s weaknesses. Other teams copy the formula if they have the quality coaching and players to do so. This year, OSU developed a defensive strategy to disrupt the shockers and other teams with similar capabilities are capitalizing on their work. Multiple non-conference teams were able to identify a weakness in the WSU defense which teams in the American have the ability to execute. Better leagues have more teams that can execute specific strategies to hurt a good team. In the long term, the great teams will adjust and overcome.

Look what is happening in the B12. West Virginia was super scary until teams figured it out.. the list of similar teams that got “figured out” goes on and on.

The only thing surprising to me about this discussion is that I am on a complete island (it is surely reasonable to take JH4P’s side though). As someone that has played and coached sports, I have found competition matters (I have played on poor teams that thought they were world beaters only to get destroyed with a small step up in competition). You don’t know what you have in a team until you move up to tougher competition on game by game basis.

There is a reason Gonzaga is Gonzaga… At most, one team on a yearly basis can capitalize on the Zag’s weaknesses during league play. They then get into the tournament every single year and that is enough exposure for them to keep building the brand for recruiting.

I hope to be 100% wrong with everything I wrote above and that there isn’t a single downside to playing in a tougher league.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

The available poll answers should look something like this:

- No
- Hell No
- No Hell No
- Yes, because I'm east of the Turnpike