Bars 77 v. Blue Birds 65

[1972Shocker]

Black neon.

I like that. Let's just hope he does not become Coldasfreon.

[Kung Wu]

I have to take the opposite view. I think top-50 wins are exponentially more significant than top-100 wins. With InSU losing, they dropped out of the top-50. Another poorly timed loss (especially at home) could drop CU out of the top-50, as well. I'm also not expecting UNI to maintain their lofty RPI very long. It's entirely possible that by the time we get to BracketBusters weekend WSU could be the only top-50 RPI team in the Valley.

A conclusion you could draw, if that becomes the case, is that InSU, UNI and, though less likely CU, will have played their way out of at-large consideration. Terrible for the Valley and only marginally good for WSU.

We really needed 2-4 teams to separate themselves. Last night made that goal much more difficult.

As regards Creighton, I'll argue in @ABC:'s favor. I think people that are worried about RPI at this time are stuck in the past few years where RPI was more significant. I think the valley is top heavy in CU and WSU this year and RPI is only an issue of seeding, not getting in the tournament. When you are a bubble team then you need everything, including RPI, to be absolutely in alignment. When you are better than a bubble team then I believe outright conference championship and conference tournament championship counts for a lot more than whether you are #30 RPI or #40 RPI.

That game last night could very possibly be the difference between WSU winning an outright conference title, which is much more important given our current circumstance than a few RPI positions, IMHO. Also I believe we get the best of both worlds in their loss: easier path to conference title _and_ a top-50 win if we beat them on Sat.

I have no argument with the Drake/Ind.St. outcome though. That was not a loss that favors us, if you assume that Ind. St. won't be a contender for the conference title. Ind. St. only helps us by being a top-50 team as you said, so in that regard that specific game was probably not ideal.

[Kung Wu]

I like that. Let's just hope he does not bocome Coldasfreon.

LMAO

[Slalomshocker]

ISUb was over rated to begin with, imo. They were getting a lot of "respect" for what they did last year. I watched them play a couple times and they are less than inspiring. However, it would have been better for the MVC if they would have won, they still could be a solid 3rd/4th place team, which is what the conference needs. CU, I thought was better, but when you rely on one guy as much as they do, bad things can happen. Neither ISU or CU played much for noncon to get the love they were getting, and UNI didn't play much either. Not trying to say WSU played a Long Beach like schedule, but CU was getting a lot of props for beating....well...chicago state and tulsa and UNI lost to Ohio (good squad, not great). MSU showed the valley what they have to do to beat CU and that is do your best to make life misearble for McDermott, lets see how CU responds. WSU has the chance to take the bull by the horns with winnable games coming up for the next 4 after Saturday. 6-0 start to league play with the favorite 2 games back would be nice.

[shox1989]

As regards Creighton, I'll argue in @ABC:'s favor. I think people that are worried about RPI at this time are stuck in the past few years where RPI was more significant. I think the valley is top heavy in CU and WSU this year and RPI is only an issue of seeding, not getting in the tournament. When you are a bubble team then you need everything, including RPI, to be absolutely in alignment. When you are better than a bubble team then I believe outright conference championship and conference tournament championship counts for a lot more than whether you are #30 RPI or #40 RPI.

That game last night could very possibly be the difference between WSU winning an outright conference title, which is much more important given our current circumstance than a few RPI positions, IMHO. Also I believe we get the best of both worlds in their loss: easier path to conference title _and_ a top-50 win if we beat them on Sat.

I have no argument with the Drake/Ind.St. outcome though. That was not a loss that favors us, if you assume that Ind. St. won't be a contender for the conference title. Ind. St. only helps us by being a top-50 team as you said, so in that regard that specific game was probably not ideal.

RPI is still significant in keeping teams outside of the big 6 and quasi-majors out of the dance. Teams that aren't from the so-called power basketball conferences (BCS6 plus MWC, A-10, C-USA) don't get in the dance if their rpi is over 50. They rarely get in if their rpi is in the 40s anymore (they used to, but not the last few years) and as we have seen over the last 6 years or so, sometimes teams with rpis in the 30s even get left out (if they are not from one of the power conferences).

So any Valley team to have a realistic chance of an at large bid has to have an rpi in the 30s or better.

Having top 50 wins is also huge. If you have plenty of top 50 wins it is possible to get in with a rpi int he low 40s and it will also improve your seed. So even if Indy State would get left out with an rpi of 47, they still help the Valley get 3 bids by giving the other 3 teams more chances at top 50 wins.
The best thing for this conference is if there is separation between the top teams and the bottom teams. Last night I believe may have hurt some, but not nearly as badly as it would have if BU, SIU, Illinois St.or UE beats one of the top 4 or 5 teams. As ABC pointed out Drake and MO state solidified their status in the top 100, so that isn't all bad.

Having 6 teams stay in the top 100 and if possible 4 teams in the top 50 is the best possible situation for the Valley. It makes 3 bids very, very doable and keeps the possibility of 4 bids in the picture.

It will also help improve the seeding of the 2 or 3 (or under the best possible circumstances 4) teams that actually make the dance. More top 50 and top 100 wins definitely help the seeding.

[shocker22]

I would just like to add how much I hate Weems! He is always talking trash, did anyone notice him after the game last night? Act like you've been there before.

[BOBB]

I would just like to add how much I hate Weems! He is always talking trash, did anyone notice him after the game last night? Act like you've been there before.

He is a douchewank. A talented douchewank that walks the talk.

[ABC]

He is a douchewank. A talented douchewank that walks the talk.

I like that word, douchewank. You need to make a wikipedia entry pronto, register the trademark, and start making some t-shirts!

[shock]

Link to funny pics to put on said tshirt
I like the first one on pg 5. @WstateU: could use it many times.

[ABC]

I think he will play at least a few games in the NBA.

I wish we had him.

[SubGod22]

I'm glad that douche isn't on this team. I don't care how talented you are, I don't need constant behavior like he displays being a part of this program. It'll be a sad day in Shocker Nation if we end up with somebody like that. Playing with emotion is one thing. Acting like Weems does all the frickin time is another. I'm glad we never offered the guy a chance to play here.

[newshock1234]

I think he will play at least a few games in the NBA.

I wish we had him.

No thanks, the crack heads can keep him

[WstateU]

No comment!

[SubGod22]

If any of you go over to MVCFans, don't say anything the least bit negative about Weems. It doesn't fly over there. They already deleted a number of posts that were negative towards his antics and locked a thread.

I was always hopeful that place would be alright. But I was wrong. Are there any other Valley boards or am I just going to have to bounce around to a few team sites from here on out? I know there was another one a while back that was trying to get going but don't know if that worked out or not. I could never remember the address to it.

[newshock1234]

this one?

http://ncaabbs.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=610