(04-05-2018 12:33 PM)stever20 Wrote: (04-05-2018 11:58 AM)arkstfan Wrote: (04-05-2018 10:53 AM)billybobby777 Wrote: (04-05-2018 04:36 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote: To compare the two, you'd think this was going from A-Sun to Big South. But, stink up the joint in basketball for a few years now, and we are led to believe everything's better in WCC. Sadly, that comparison fits every other western conference out there if PAC isn't an option.
It is what it is. I don't think Gonzaga handled this well, though. For MWC to play its hand to force Gonzaga to stop the bull****; don't think too highly of yourself, you're not that special to do that to another, better conference. That is the kind of stuff that might burn a bridge in the future. If the concessions were the chaser, dragging it out like Gonzaga did to both conferences was poor form. Heck, it was poor form for Gonzaga to let its wandering eyes be a public thing. They'll be lucky if other conferences don't air their dirty laundry and dish on their experiences with the school.
...and I'll continue to wait to see how these concessions really play out for them in the WCC. Because they aren't sustainable changes.
There’s a measurable thing to watch: the 2 extra OOC games. Will the WCC get some great extra OOC games with the PAC, Big 12, AAC, MWC now? Maybe Gonzaga will. I bet the other WCC members don’t though.
Those two extra games may actually hurt the WCC RPI even more if schools are plugging those two extra spots with Division II and sub 250 RPI opponents.
actually no. 2 things. 1- d2 teams don't count towards RPI at all. 2- if schools are replacing losses to Gonzaga with wins vs low ranked teams- that's going to help Gonzaga some.. What gets counted in 50% of Gonzaga's RPI is opponents record. Maybe conference RPI gets hurt- but Gonzaga's RPI won't be hurt at all.
Yeah, but it assumes either a good loss or a bad win. A bad loss hurts everyone. An extra game against a D2 team is just one less game to record for metrics. That actually hurts if it's already a bad team who books it. Kinda like the Ivy League, it's a smaller schedule, and the quality (or lack thereof) becomes more pronounced metrically. It's something their new tournament fixes a bit, adding two more games for the champ.
What could go either way, too, is a smaller tournament. Sure, you lose the game against the 8 and beef up the 3-6 seeds, it's still a lost game. That doesn't hurt Gonzaga specifically, given their history and practice, but it could hurt BYU or St. Mary's if they're in need of a bump.
That's why I question the sustainability of it. You're demanding a lot on the really bad teams to go out and spend money to participate in MTE's and to grab more non-conference content, with the emphasis that it be something done at home (and not take the easy and obvious body-bagger, though that actually helps metrically in its way). You're punishing them with more. They have to spend more, bring more home, win more (to get a better cut of the share), and play more games in the tournament. I mean, who are we kidding here...that's not a good cut for a program having an off year. It's punishment for making Gonzaga angry, and there's no guarantee it keeps them in the league anyway. We're high if we believe this will be the new reality in the WCC. No way.
And let's be real about what happens if teams don't make these changes. Right, we're to believe the conference will expel Portland, LMU, Santa Clara, or Pacific if they don't abide? Like, there will be forced accountability if some schools tell the conference, or just Gonzaga, that they can shove it?