I truly hope you are right! I have nothing but the best wishes for the Ladies but everything I see and comment I read, truly gives me deja vu. Reminds me of comments regarding Barry on the ole letsgobears forum.
It's not that simple. The players were literally waging a mutiny, and players and parents alike were demanding Coach be fired, or they'd take their kids elsewhere. Instead of the program on an upswing, it was burning and falling to the ground.
It might be noted that in Coach Abe's 3rd year the Lady Bears won the NIT--Four of the starters were not her recruits and the 5th starter had all but committed to the program prior to previous coach resigning. In her 4th year, 3 starters were not her recruits. That team did get in NCAA by winning four games in conference tourney at home.
It should also be noted that the Lady Bears' 2006 NCAA appearance was almost a fluke - I believe the team finished something like 7-11 in conference play and made a four-game run through the conference tournament, which was held at Hammons Student Center that year. The Lady Bears in fact had a losing record going into the conference tournament. That appearance gave Coach Abe a one-year reprieve, and if I'm not mistaken the next year the Lady Bears were in the play-in game again, possibly in last place. The drop from 2001 to 2007 was dramatic and consistent. Those who think otherwise aren't paying enough attention or are just in denial. By the way, did anyone else notice that UNI received a THIRTEEN seed in the women's NCAA? That's almost a bigger joke than the men's bracket. UNI went 17-1 in th 8th-rated conference. I hope they take down Michigan State (and they might - that UNI team is extremely well coached, defense-oriented, and reminds me a lot of the UNI men's team of last year).
next five years I wasn't paying much attention to all the behind the scenes stuff. Just what the program did in that five year period. Seems like the program on the outside looking in was successful. In year three then of this next five year period, the Lady Bears have returned to the NIT and hopefully make some noise. I think it is very realistic for this program to get back to the ncaa tournament in year four and five. But first things first, let's get some wins in the NIT. Good luck!
RPI was in the upper 20s. They deserved an 8 or 9 seed. Same treatment Utah St got on the men's side.
And like Utah State, they did ever beat anyone...3 top50 wins...All against us. Best non-conference win was 129. Had 2 terrible loses as well. The RPI does not tell you everything. You cannot take that number by itself
All through this season, I have asked this question and have yet to get a satisfactory response: Why not? Why doesn't the RPI tell you everything? I'm so sick of people shrugging off a good RPI by isolating 1 or 2 COMPONENTS of an RPI and saying, see? There's more to a resume than an RPI! But an RPI is DESIGNED to reflect all different aspects of a resume. Your win-loss records, your good wins, your bad losses, your opponent's wins and losses, your opponent's opponent's wins and losses, whether you played your games at home or on the road. I'm so sick of hearing this. Anyone who doesn't understand that this whole "oh, well the RPI is just one factor..." B.S. is just a ruse by the power$ that be to put a mid-major team that went 17-1 in the 8th-rated conference to a 13-seed is just being naive. And don't take this personally, and I know you didn't mean to strike a nerve, but I have really wanted to bring this up for a while now.
Because it can, and has been, manipulated. Take Utah State for example. They have played 2 top50 teams and 4 top100 teams. They are 0-2 and 2-2 respectively. Do they really belong at #15 with 27 of their wins coming from teams 100+? If you keep winning, no matter who you have played, your RPI will continue to rise or at least stay the same. It can be used as a starting point but you have to break it down to look at the whole picture.
I'm still not buying it. Utah State's record is 29-3. Their current RPI is 15. And by the way, they are 1-2 against the Top 50 (loss @ 5 BYU, loss @ 13 Georgetown, win @ 46 St. Mary's). I'm not saying look only at the record. But yes, a team should get credit for winning 29 games, even against a lackluster schedule. How many other teams, even from the top standings of BCS conferences, wouldn't have slipped up and had more than one bad loss during that 32-game stretch? For the record, one bad loss @ 137 Idaho is pretty damn good. Their 29-3 record isn't as impressive as 29-3 with a tough schedule - that's why they are #15 and not #5 like BYU is with a similar record and tougher schedule.
I think you're both right, for what it's worth. The RPI is the metric we're agreeing to use, but it's never good enough when it's a non-power 6 and always a source of "see! They're good!" when it is a power-6. You have to delve deeper and look at it over to get a clearer view. If we played Utah State's schedule, I wager we'd have 30 wins as well. So would Clemson, or Virginia Tech, or several other teams. I can see both sides, and that's why it's so frustrating for the teams that get 1 or 2 shots at teams, normally in a situation that isn't advantageous to them, and they have to capitalize or they're punished for no one playing them on their home floor or a neutral setting at least. Bang your head, but the powers that be always have an out, and it's built to be that way.
I'm not even suggesting that the RPI is the be-all, end-all of ranking teams. Nor am I suggesting it is perfect. But I am suggesting that it is the closest metric we have to objectively comparing teams, which, as Vision pointed out, is exactly why the power-6 money changers belittle it at their convenience. I accept this as reality, but I get frustrated when mid-major uncle toms get on here and throw out the exact same Digger Phelps-style buzz words to justify why a team from our conference who should be in the 8-9 bracket got a stinking 13-seed with a high-20s RPI and a 17-1 record in the No. 8 conference.
Heard on the Highroad today that Tia Mays is leaving the team. Another decent player bites the dust in the Lady Bear program. Interested in hearing about Tia's reasoning for ending her Lady Bear playing days
She's better than decent. She's the Valley Defensive Player of the Year, and blew away the single season school block record with 107. Tia's father passed away during the season so she obviously has some very understandable personal reasons for not playing basketball.
This is unfortunate news - Tia was a great player and one of the best defensive players in the country.
Three schools in 3 years....and now 4 in 4 sez something to me. Personal challenges and the family death is a kicker. Sorry to see her go but not casting blame.
