KeaneyBlue - The URI Basketball Forum

adam914 wrote: ↑2 months ago

RF1 wrote: ↑2 months ago

ramster wrote: ↑2 months ago 9 A10 Teams with NET between 68 and 108

The power conferences and their allies that run the NCAA must be very pleased that their secretive NET ranking system is working exactly as they intended. It means that only one A-10 team (#21 Dayton) is at this time guaranteed an NCAA bid. Rankings in the range of 68-108 are just outside the NCAA Tournament as they desire. Would think the A-10 may have several NIT teams but that may now even be impacted by the guaranteed minimum number of bids to power conferences + BE regardless of their records.

Which A-10 teams do you believe deserve to be in the NCAA Tournament but are being held out solely because of their NET ranking?

Yeah once again, look at the OOC for the top of the A10 and tell me who any of our teams beat?

Richmond - 1-2 in Q1. They had 2 OOC opportunities against Colorado and Florida, and didn't win either. They beat Dayton. They have 2 Q3 losses. RPI 56.
Loyola - 1-4 in Q1. They had 3 OOC opportunities against FAU basically at home, Creighton, and South Florida. They have a Q3 and Q4 loss. RPI 49.
Dayton - 3-3 Q1, no bad losses. They're in the field because of that. RPI 5.
VCU - 1-4 Q1, 2 OOC chances against Iowa St and Boise State, 1 Q3, 2 Q4 losses. RPI 72.

The only resume that looks remotely close to an at large is Dayton. Whether you use RPI or NET, no one outside of Dayton is anywhere close to the bubble.

32 AQ spots means there are 36 up for grabs. You need to be low 40s metric wise to even think you have a chance, especially if you haven't beaten anybody.

This isn't some grand conspiracy. There were opportunities that Richmond, Loyola, and VCU had and they did nothing with them. 3 to 6 Q1 games in a season gives you plenty of chances. Only Dayton took advantage.

And still, you can even get by without those Q1 opportunities if you just don't lose to shitty teams. But Richmond, Loyola, and VCU didn't take advantage of their big opportunities, and couldn't win games against bad teams like UIC, Tulsa, Norfolk State, George Washington, and Wichita State.

It really isn't hard. Just once again no one stepped up except Dayton.

It is very difficult to have great OOC wins when you have so few opportunities and rarely host any games against such opponents. This then carries over into conference play as the NET rankings of all your league opponents is such that you cannot rise. Just the way the power conferences and NCAA admins want it.

Yeah, how did the A-10 get multiple bids back in the day?

Winning marquee games in the non-conference and not losing to low majors. Even high majors need marquee OOC wins.

Look at Ole Miss right now. They went undefeated in the OOC, 13-0.

Best wins? UCF and Memphis who are NIT teams right now. Every other win was a Q3 or Q4.

They sit at 20-11 in a really strong SEC....yet they are 8th out right now.

Grand conspiracy? Or do you need to just go beat tournament level teams and not lose to shitty ones to be invited to a tournament full of good teams that have beaten good teams?

9 NETS between 68-108 shows the conference is improving but need to take another jump where we can get 2 NETS in the top 50 and another 2 in the top 75

PeterRamTime wrote: ↑2 months ago Yeah, how did the A-10 get multiple bids back in the day?

Winning marquee games in the non-conference and not losing to low majors. Even high majors need marquee OOC wins.

Look at Ole Miss right now. They went undefeated in the OOC, 13-0.

Best wins? UCF and Memphis who are NIT teams right now. Every other win was a Q3 or Q4.

They sit at 20-11 in a really strong SEC....yet they are 8th out right now.

Grand conspiracy? Or do you need to just go beat tournament level teams and not lose to shitty ones to be invited to a tournament full of good teams that have beaten good teams?

There were more good OOC opportunities for A-10 schools back in the day. The league was therefore able to register a few more quality wins. Very few power teams want to play A-10 opponents. Any games are typically few and at neutral site or on the road. The A-10 does not have multiple challenge series like several of the top leagues which guarantee them good OOC opponent games (against themselves).

RF1 wrote: ↑2 months ago

PeterRamTime wrote: ↑2 months ago Yeah, how did the A-10 get multiple bids back in the day?

Winning marquee games in the non-conference and not losing to low majors. Even high majors need marquee OOC wins.

Look at Ole Miss right now. They went undefeated in the OOC, 13-0.

Best wins? UCF and Memphis who are NIT teams right now. Every other win was a Q3 or Q4.

They sit at 20-11 in a really strong SEC....yet they are 8th out right now.

Grand conspiracy? Or do you need to just go beat tournament level teams and not lose to shitty ones to be invited to a tournament full of good teams that have beaten good teams?

There were more good OOC opportunities for A-10 schools back in the day. The league was therefore able to register a few more quality wins. Very few power teams want to play A-10 opponents. Any games are typically few and at neutral site or on the road. The A-10 does not have multiple challenge series like several of the top leagues which guarantee them good OOC opponent games (against themselves).

That’s true and conferences going to 20 game schedules leaves less room for OOC games , it is what it is if we have a team that can get an NCAA bid it’s important to try and schedule as many Top 100 NET teams as possible

RF1 wrote: ↑2 months ago

PeterRamTime wrote: ↑2 months ago Yeah, how did the A-10 get multiple bids back in the day?

Winning marquee games in the non-conference and not losing to low majors. Even high majors need marquee OOC wins.

Look at Ole Miss right now. They went undefeated in the OOC, 13-0.

Best wins? UCF and Memphis who are NIT teams right now. Every other win was a Q3 or Q4.

They sit at 20-11 in a really strong SEC....yet they are 8th out right now.

Grand conspiracy? Or do you need to just go beat tournament level teams and not lose to shitty ones to be invited to a tournament full of good teams that have beaten good teams?

There were more good OOC opportunities for A-10 schools back in the day. The league was therefore able to register a few more quality wins. Very few power teams want to play A-10 opponents. Any games are typically few and at neutral site or on the road. The A-10 does not have multiple challenge series like several of the top leagues which guarantee them good OOC opponent games (against themselves).

It's just a bit disingenuous to act like there's a conspiracy out there that caters to the P6 teams. Those teams tend to be better overall. It's not offensive to say that a middle pack B1G, ACC, Big East or SEC team would throttle a top tier lower conference team. The NCAA is about getting the best teams in the field.

If you want to prove you're one of the best teams? Do one of two things. Beat the really good teams on your schedule, or even easier, don't lose to the really bad ones.

The past few years the A10 hasn't been able to do either. Especially the "don't lose to bad teams" part.

The Baron years were full of that. We never beat the good teams, but we were a bubble team until we would collapse and lose a couple of games to bad teams. Can't do that.

Yes those P6 schools get more games against good teams, so they have a larger margin for error. We don't. But asking a top 100 program to not lose to a bottom 100 program shouldn't be a heavy ask.

Blue Man wrote: ↑2 months ago

RF1 wrote: ↑2 months ago

PeterRamTime wrote: ↑2 months ago Yeah, how did the A-10 get multiple bids back in the day?

Winning marquee games in the non-conference and not losing to low majors. Even high majors need marquee OOC wins.

Look at Ole Miss right now. They went undefeated in the OOC, 13-0.

Best wins? UCF and Memphis who are NIT teams right now. Every other win was a Q3 or Q4.

They sit at 20-11 in a really strong SEC....yet they are 8th out right now.

Grand conspiracy? Or do you need to just go beat tournament level teams and not lose to shitty ones to be invited to a tournament full of good teams that have beaten good teams?

There were more good OOC opportunities for A-10 schools back in the day. The league was therefore able to register a few more quality wins. Very few power teams want to play A-10 opponents. Any games are typically few and at neutral site or on the road. The A-10 does not have multiple challenge series like several of the top leagues which guarantee them good OOC opponent games (against themselves).

It's just a bit disingenuous to act like there's a conspiracy out there that caters to the P6 teams. Those teams tend to be better overall. It's not offensive to say that a middle pack B1G, ACC, Big East or SEC team would throttle a top tier lower conference team. The NCAA is about getting the best teams in the field.

If you want to prove you're one of the best teams? Do one of two things. Beat the really good teams on your schedule, or even easier, don't lose to the really bad ones.

The past few years the A10 hasn't been able to do either. Especially the "don't lose to bad teams" part.

The Baron years were full of that. We never beat the good teams, but we were a bubble team until we would collapse and lose a couple of games to bad teams. Can't do that.

Yes those P6 schools get more games against good teams, so they have a larger margin for error. We don't. But asking a top 100 program to not lose to a bottom 100 program shouldn't be a heavy ask.

Completely agree. Take care of business and you can get into good OOC tournaments. Dayton takes care of business so they get to play in the Maui Invitational this upcoming year which might be the best MTE field of the year. Dayton could get 4 Q1 opportunities alone in that event.

RF1 wrote: ↑2 months ago

PeterRamTime wrote: ↑2 months ago Yeah, how did the A-10 get multiple bids back in the day?

Winning marquee games in the non-conference and not losing to low majors. Even high majors need marquee OOC wins.

Look at Ole Miss right now. They went undefeated in the OOC, 13-0.

Best wins? UCF and Memphis who are NIT teams right now. Every other win was a Q3 or Q4.

They sit at 20-11 in a really strong SEC....yet they are 8th out right now.

Grand conspiracy? Or do you need to just go beat tournament level teams and not lose to shitty ones to be invited to a tournament full of good teams that have beaten good teams?

There were more good OOC opportunities for A-10 schools back in the day. The league was therefore able to register a few more quality wins. Very few power teams want to play A-10 opponents. Any games are typically few and at neutral site or on the road. The A-10 does not have multiple challenge series like several of the top leagues which guarantee them good OOC opponent games (against themselves).

That's not necessarily true. Some schools OOC was better then because they had sustained success over a long period of time. It was earned. Even then I can't find that big of a difference.

The Fordhams, St Bona's and Duquesne's of the league have NEVER scheduled well.

We are in rebuild mode and still had Providence, Washington St and Northwestern on there with two strong mid majors in Charleston and Yale.

Who had better schedules 10 years ago then they do now? It's basically the same.

Let's look at SLU this year

They were in the Charleston classic

Here are the strongest OOC teams they faced this year

Wyoming, Vermont, Drake, Wichita St, NC State, Louisiana Tech, Hofstra, Southern Illinois, Illinois St and Utah State.

Ten years ago

Wichita State, Southern Illinois, ODU, Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, Indiana State and Valpo

Pretty much the same. One or two high majors, some strong and some weak mid majors.

Same thing for Dayton, VCU, Richmond etc.

RF1 wrote: ↑2 months ago

PeterRamTime wrote: ↑2 months ago Yeah, how did the A-10 get multiple bids back in the day?

Winning marquee games in the non-conference and not losing to low majors. Even high majors need marquee OOC wins.

Look at Ole Miss right now. They went undefeated in the OOC, 13-0.

Best wins? UCF and Memphis who are NIT teams right now. Every other win was a Q3 or Q4.

They sit at 20-11 in a really strong SEC....yet they are 8th out right now.

Grand conspiracy? Or do you need to just go beat tournament level teams and not lose to shitty ones to be invited to a tournament full of good teams that have beaten good teams?

There were more good OOC opportunities for A-10 schools back in the day. The league was therefore able to register a few more quality wins. Very few power teams want to play A-10 opponents. Any games are typically few and at neutral site or on the road. The A-10 does not have multiple challenge series like several of the top leagues which guarantee them good OOC opponent games (against themselves).

Good point, RF1. The Q1 opportunities are fewer. The P6 increasing conference games hurts and take away opportunities from us with their intra-conf challenges.

The battleaxe along with each A10 program need to figure out a way to overcome that hurdle.

A good first step is the A10 coaches upping their game by winning some more Q1 games, more Q2 games and by losing less to Q3&4 teams.

Beyond that above, I am sure others here will come up with good suggestions.

I think another issue too is timing, in that a non-P6 program like Rhody could get some more P6 games one year but, unfortunately, those teams could be down that year due to injuries, players leaving, underachievement, etc.

I guess sometimes it helps to be lucky and catch those teams at a time that will most benefit a team like Rhody.

As others have said as well, you have to make yourself an attractive opponent in order to earn those scheduling opportunities. Why would a P5 or other top teams from the better conferences want to play URI right now? Nothing good can come from it for them.

VCU this year played: Iowa State, Boise State, Penn State, Memphis
Dayton this year played: Northwestern, LSU, St John's, Houston, SMU, UNLV, Cincinnati

adam914 wrote: ↑2 months ago As others have said as well, you have to make yourself an attractive opponent in order to earn those scheduling opportunities. Why would a P5 or other top teams from the better conferences want to play URI right now? Nothing good can come from it for them.

VCU this year played: Iowa State, Boise State, Penn State, Memphis
Dayton this year played: Northwestern, LSU, St John's, Houston, SMU, UNLV, Cincinnati

Gonzaga-ish of the East or, at least one of them.

I think a recent former coach alluded to something similar. Smart guy, that coach.

adam914 wrote: ↑2 months ago As others have said as well, you have to make yourself an attractive opponent in order to earn those scheduling opportunities. Why would a P5 or other top teams from the better conferences want to play URI right now? Nothing good can come from it for them.

VCU this year played: Iowa State, Boise State, Penn State, Memphis
Dayton this year played: Northwestern, LSU, St John's, Houston, SMU, UNLV, Cincinnati

Great point on Daytons schedule, that’s how you do it A Grant

Jdrums#3 wrote: ↑2 months ago

adam914 wrote: ↑2 months ago As others have said as well, you have to make yourself an attractive opponent in order to earn those scheduling opportunities. Why would a P5 or other top teams from the better conferences want to play URI right now? Nothing good can come from it for them.

VCU this year played: Iowa State, Boise State, Penn State, Memphis
Dayton this year played: Northwestern, LSU, St John's, Houston, SMU, UNLV, Cincinnati

Gonzaga-ish of the East or, at least one of them.

I think a recent former coach alluded to something similar. Smart guy, that coach.

I miss that guy more and more every day.

12-13 game tips off first at 11:30.
Will Rhody be on the way home before rush hour?

rhodyrudder wrote: ↑2 months ago 12-13 game tips off first at 11:30.
Will Rhody be on the way home before rush hour?

Nice looking forward to it !

still possible to avoid that 20L season... #streakin

RF1 wrote: ↑2 months ago

Looks like we’ll have to extend Dayton’s streak of not winning the A10 tourney.

NYGFan_Section208 wrote: ↑2 months ago still possible to avoid that 20L season... #streakin

Can avoid a losing season by making it to the final 4

2 games we can win. Let’s see some effort.

hrstrat57 wrote: ↑2 months ago 2 games we can win. Let’s see some effort.

That would make me feel pretty good going into the offseason, the win today, beating SLU and Duquesne.

Revenge tour.

Would have liked the early game on Tuesday but if we do win definitely rather play Duquesne instead of VCU

At the ends of the day, you can only play your schedule. Beat the teams on your schedule and the body of work speaks for itself

Getting Duquesne as the possible second game is the best possible draw, even if the team goes 1 and done

DraftKings looks to agree with the NET ranks and gives Rhody the worst odds in the league to win the A-10 Tournament

Dayton +150
Richmond +475
Loyola +550
UMass +700
VCU +1000
St Bonaventure +1300
Duquesne +1400
George Mason +1500
St Joe's +2500
Davidson +5000
Fordham +35000
LaSalle +35000
GW +40000
St Louis +40000
URI +50000

Good news for Dayton.

RF1 wrote: ↑2 months ago DraftKings looks to agree with the NET ranks and gives Rhody the worst odds in the league to win the A-10 Tournament

Dayton +150
Richmond +475
Loyola +550
UMass +700
VCU +1000
St Bonaventure +1300
Duquesne +1400
George Mason +1500
St Joe's +2500
Davidson +5000
Fordham +35000
LaSalle +35000
GW +40000
St Louis +40000
URI +50000

Imagine believing GW is talented. Lmao a joke. Talk about not knowing ball. Those people should no longer be allowed to talk about talent. Team had 1 win in the last 15 games played of season. And only 1 win since mid January.


I tried to tell you guys over a month ago.

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago Imagine believing GW is talented. Lmao a joke. Talk about not knowing ball. Those people should no longer be allowed to talk about talent. Team had 1 win in the last 15 games played of season. And only 1 win since mid January.


I tried to tell you guys over a month ago.

One All Conference player.

One All Rookie Team player.

One All Defensive Team player.

Three awards for no talent? Ok.

Their other talented freshman, Garrett Johnson, hasn’t played since February 13. Was averaging 13 and 6, 40% from 3.

There is talent on the team. It is very obvious.

Really good finish there , LaSalle trailed the majority of the way then the game winner

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago Imagine believing GW is talented. Lmao a joke. Talk about not knowing ball. Those people should no longer be allowed to talk about talent. Team had 1 win in the last 15 games played of season. And only 1 win since mid January.


I tried to tell you guys over a month ago.

One All Conference player.

One All Rookie team player.

Their other talented freshman, Garrett Johnson, hasn’t played since February 13. Was averaging 13 and 6, 40% from 3.

There is talent on the team. It is very obvious.

1 win in last 15 games played. Enough said.


Not to mention we all know the A10 conference awards are the biggest sham and joke there is.


As I said Bishop was only good player who is no longer there.


1 win in last 15 doesn't get excused by losing one player. They lost 6 straight with him in the lineup so him being out isn't an excuse.


People called them a top 5 potential team in league. They were the worst team.

Bad teams find a way to lose and GW showed that all year long

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago Imagine believing GW is talented. Lmao a joke. Talk about not knowing ball. Those people should no longer be allowed to talk about talent. Team had 1 win in the last 15 games played of season. And only 1 win since mid January.


I tried to tell you guys over a month ago.

One All Conference player.

One All Rookie team player.

Their other talented freshman, Garrett Johnson, hasn’t played since February 13. Was averaging 13 and 6, 40% from 3.

There is talent on the team. It is very obvious.

1 win in last 15 games played. Enough said.


Not to mention we all know the A10 conference awards are the biggest sham and joke there is.


As I said Bishop was only good player who is no longer there.


1 win in last 15 doesn't get excused by losing one player. They lost 6 straight with him in the lineup so him being out isn't an excuse.

So if the A10 awards are a joke:

Buchanan, who put up 16 7 3 1 steal and shot 55%, shouldn’t have made all rookie? His inclusion was a joke?

Akingbola who blocked 2.7 shots a game, shouldn’t have made all defense? His inclusion was a joke also?

People called them a top 5 team in conference. That were the worst team by far

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

One All Conference player.

One All Rookie team player.

Their other talented freshman, Garrett Johnson, hasn’t played since February 13. Was averaging 13 and 6, 40% from 3.

There is talent on the team. It is very obvious.

1 win in last 15 games played. Enough said.


Not to mention we all know the A10 conference awards are the biggest sham and joke there is.


As I said Bishop was only good player who is no longer there.


1 win in last 15 doesn't get excused by losing one player. They lost 6 straight with him in the lineup so him being out isn't an excuse.

So if the A10 awards are a joke:

Buchanan, who put up 16 7 3 1 steal and shot 55%, shouldn’t have made all rookie? His inclusion was a joke?

Akingbola who blocked 2.7 shots a game, shouldn’t have made all defense? His inclusion was a joke also?

I would also be shocked in buchannan didn't transfer after this year.

So fuchs shouldn't have been included?

I'd prefer estevez and fuchs

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago



1 win in last 15 games played. Enough said.


Not to mention we all know the A10 conference awards are the biggest sham and joke there is.


As I said Bishop was only good player who is no longer there.


1 win in last 15 doesn't get excused by losing one player. They lost 6 straight with him in the lineup so him being out isn't an excuse.

So if the A10 awards are a joke:

Buchanan, who put up 16 7 3 1 steal and shot 55%, shouldn’t have made all rookie? His inclusion was a joke?

Akingbola who blocked 2.7 shots a game, shouldn’t have made all defense? His inclusion was a joke also?

So fuchs shouldn't have been included?

I'd prefer estevez and fuchs

(Way to change the goalposts and completely ignore my question)

But no, in no way shape or form should Cam or Fuchs been included over Buchanan.

They weren’t even close to Buchanan this year.

Can make the argument for Fuchs over a couple others, but not Buchanan.

It’s not close.

Oh and by the way, we wanted Buchanan. We recruited him, so Archie and co know he’s talented.

Anyone hear about the tournament location for next year?

A google search tells that the women are back in richmond, but I can’t find any news about the men

rhodyrudder wrote: ↑2 months ago Anyone hear about the tournament location for next year?

A google search tells that the women are back in richmond, but I can’t find any news about the men

DC

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

So if the A10 awards are a joke:

Buchanan, who put up 16 7 3 1 steal and shot 55%, shouldn’t have made all rookie? His inclusion was a joke?

Akingbola who blocked 2.7 shots a game, shouldn’t have made all defense? His inclusion was a joke also?

So fuchs shouldn't have been included?

I'd prefer estevez and fuchs

(Way to change the goalposts and completely ignore my question)

But no, in no way shape or form should Cam or Fuchs been included over Buchanan.

They weren’t even close to Buchanan this year.

Can make the argument for Fuchs over a couple others, but not Buchanan.

It’s not close.

Oh and by the way, we wanted Buchanan. We recruited him, so Archie and co know he’s talented.

Buchannan was used more than any other freshman because GW was trash. They had no choice but to play him a ton.


If we played estevez that much he would have similar numbers.

If the team was so talented why were they 1 of last 15 please explain.


Talent usually finds a way to win more than one game in 2 months

DC I read here.

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago


So fuchs shouldn't have been included?

I'd prefer estevez and fuchs

(Way to change the goalposts and completely ignore my question)

But no, in no way shape or form should Cam or Fuchs been included over Buchanan.

They weren’t even close to Buchanan this year.

Can make the argument for Fuchs over a couple others, but not Buchanan.

It’s not close.

Oh and by the way, we wanted Buchanan. We recruited him, so Archie and co know he’s talented.

Buchannan was used more than any other freshman because GW was trash. They had no choice but to play him a ton.


If we played estevez that much he would have similar numbers.

If the team was so talented why were they 1 of last 15 please explain.


Talent usually finds a way to win more than one game in 2 months

They have 3 all conference players.

If you don’t think that those three players are individually talented, I don’t know what to tell you.

Also, look at Cam and Buchanan’s per 40 numbers in conference.

They are not close across the board.

If Cam was good enough, he’d play more. He wasn’t ready for big minutes.

adam914 wrote: ↑2 months ago

RF1 wrote: ↑2 months ago

ramster wrote: ↑2 months ago 9 A10 Teams with NET between 68 and 108

The power conferences and their allies that run the NCAA must be very pleased that their secretive NET ranking system is working exactly as they intended. It means that only one A-10 team (#21 Dayton) is at this time guaranteed an NCAA bid. Rankings in the range of 68-108 are just outside the NCAA Tournament as they desire. Would think the A-10 may have several NIT teams but that may now even be impacted by the guaranteed minimum number of bids to power conferences + BE regardless of their records.

Which A-10 teams do you believe deserve to be in the NCAA Tournament but are being held out solely because of their NET ranking?

None. 1 bid league.

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

(Way to change the goalposts and completely ignore my question)

But no, in no way shape or form should Cam or Fuchs been included over Buchanan.

They weren’t even close to Buchanan this year.

Can make the argument for Fuchs over a couple others, but not Buchanan.

It’s not close.

Oh and by the way, we wanted Buchanan. We recruited him, so Archie and co know he’s talented.

Buchannan was used more than any other freshman because GW was trash. They had no choice but to play him a ton.


If we played estevez that much he would have similar numbers.

If the team was so talented why were they 1 of last 15 please explain.


Talent usually finds a way to win more than one game in 2 months

They have 3 all conference players.

If you don’t think that three players are individually talented, I don’t know what to tell you.

Also, look at Cam and Buchanan’s per 40 numbers in conference.

They are not close across the board.

If Cam was good enough, he’d play more. He wasn’t ready for big minutes.

3 all conference players lead to them being the worst team in the A10.

So the postseason awards mean literally nothing when these all conference players couldn't win a game if their life depended on it.

If you put Cam on GW it is a different story.


If you can't see that a team that has 1 win since Jan 20th is trash idk what to tell you.

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago

Rhody15 wrote: ↑2 months ago

sevegny7 wrote: ↑2 months ago

Buchannan was used more than any other freshman because GW was trash. They had no choice but to play him a ton.


If we played estevez that much he would have similar numbers.

If the team was so talented why were they 1 of last 15 please explain.


Talent usually finds a way to win more than one game in 2 months

They have 3 all conference players.

If you don’t think that three players are individually talented, I don’t know what to tell you.

Also, look at Cam and Buchanan’s per 40 numbers in conference.

They are not close across the board.

If Cam was good enough, he’d play more. He wasn’t ready for big minutes.

3 all conference players lead to them being the worst team in the A10.

So the postseason awards mean literally nothing when these all conference players couldn't win a game if their life depended on it.

If you put Cam on GW it is a different story.


If you can't see that a team that has 1 win since Jan 20th is trash idk what to tell you.

The team can be trash, but Buchanan can still be good. See: URI 2022-23, featuring the now-ACC Sixth Man of the Year, Ish Leggett. Buchanan averaged 15.7 PPG on 10.2 FGA per game, so it wasn't like he was some guy gunning out there. I don't think there's a ton of difference between us and GW - we were two games "better" in conference play, and they had more wins OOC. Both teams stunk, in different ways at different times.

URI plays on day one in the PIG Round and losses. Fordham and LaSalle play the same day but advance.

RF1 wrote: ↑2 months ago URI plays on day one in the PIG Round and losses. Fordham and LaSalle play the same day but advance.

Just as LaSalle did last year and LaSalle also won in the 2nd round last year and advanced to the Quarterfinals on Thursday. LaSalle beat URI by 17 last year so at least this year the URI loss was close down to the final seconds. .

Fran Dunphy is a solid coach. Can’t imagine how anyone could think his seat was ever hot or even warm.

He manages his players professionally, instills confidence in them and they have confidence in him. He cares about his players and they care about him. Listen to him talk and his humility is easy to see. He is a fatherly figure that his players never want to disappoint. I hope he stays around the A10 for many more years.

Pretty impressive that St Joes got ahead by 18 over Mason

Say it ain’t so Coach Tony Skinn