|
Post by WCHC Sports on Mar 9, 2018 14:34:23 GMT -5
I would rather see the team loose in a good conference, than win in a weak one. Beating Lafayette does not make them ready for a tournament game against a one seed. Plus the Patriot League is never had a team seeded in the top ten. Always 16, 15, 14, 13,. Also a good point made above, is the PL can never even get an at large bid. Only hope is the power five break from the NCAA and have their own tournament. Causing the NCAA to let in more smaller conference teams. You're missing my point. THEY AREN'T BEATING LAFAYETTE NOW! You're thinking you're better than the competition (which you call weak and unimpressive), but it isn't happening. Do we have two league championships in 10 years? Is a 20% success rate beating the "weak teams" showing any capabilities, even in the limited fashion you would characterize it as? You would rather see the team lose in a good conference than win in a weak one. With the current situation, they're losing in both.
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Mar 9, 2018 14:44:17 GMT -5
I would rather see the team loose in a good conference, than win in a weak one. Beating Lafayette does not make them ready for a tournament game against a one seed. Plus the Patriot League is never had a team seeded in the top ten. Always 16, 15, 14, 13,. Also a good point made above, is the PL can never even get an at large bid. Only hope is the power five break from the NCAA and have their own tournament. Causing the NCAA to let in more smaller conference teams. Wrong. Bucknell #8 seed in 2006 (beat Arkansas in 64, lost to #1 Memphis in 32)
And while true we have never had an at-large bids, there have been at least two years in which the league WOULD have gotten an at-large had the top PL seed not won the conference tournament. Bucknell in 2013 and Bucknell in 2006. Had McCollum not gotten hurt his senior year, Lehigh may have been another in 2014.
But one would hope that the league would improve to the point where multiple programs could get to and stay at that same level that Bucknell has maintained for close to 15 years now.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 9, 2018 14:55:46 GMT -5
To be quite clear, I don't love the Patriot League, but I think the focus should be on us doing everything we can do in our control, and doing it exceptionally well, first... and THEN worrying about the league. We are bitching and moaning about deserving or needing a raise to be more productive, when there are 2-3 other employees in the department doing a better job than us. Baloney. If they win 5 Patriot League Championships in a row and then switched conferences, they would get crushed by other teams. The team will get better in a better conference. Beating up on the weak means nothing. What then does losing to them mean?
|
|
|
Post by thecrossisback on Mar 9, 2018 15:09:53 GMT -5
I would rather see the team loose in a good conference, than win in a weak one. Beating Lafayette does not make them ready for a tournament game against a one seed. Plus the Patriot League is never had a team seeded in the top ten. Always 16, 15, 14, 13,. Also a good point made above, is the PL can never even get an at large bid. Only hope is the power five break from the NCAA and have their own tournament. Causing the NCAA to let in more smaller conference teams. You're missing my point. THEY AREN'T BEATING LAFAYETTE NOW! You're thinking you're better than the competition (which you call weak and unimpressive), but it isn't happening. Do we have two league championships in 10 years? Is a 20% success rate beating the "weak teams" showing any capabilities, even in the limited fashion you would characterize it as? You would rather see the team lose in a good conference than win in a weak one. With the current situation, they're losing in both. I get the loosing. But it does not matter. If they go 18-0 in the league and loose the conference tournament championship game. They don't even make the NCAA's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Mar 9, 2018 15:12:52 GMT -5
Syracuse would complain about the same thing too and they played in the Big East. And Calhoun was a crybaby whiny little pug whenever it happened. You know how to avoid it? Take care of business. Win games.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Mar 9, 2018 15:12:57 GMT -5
Lose* and losing*
If a PL team went 18-0 in the league, coupled with beating some good teams in the non-conference, an at-large bid would be very possible.
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Mar 9, 2018 15:15:04 GMT -5
For those seeking a conference change, there was a standing offer to HC from the MAAC (still may be). HC shot it down. While I would much prefer seeing the likes of Iona and Manhattan at the Hart over American and Loyola (and think most here would), the fact that HC said no tells you everything you need to know: HC is going nowhere unless the PL were to dissolve.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Mar 9, 2018 15:21:39 GMT -5
WCHC: "HC loved when it had scholarships and nobody else did, so it could compete with two hands while everyone else had a hand tied behind their back. It's enjoyable for the team to win, but HC could not reasonably expect that advantage to last forever, nor could the PL expect to be viable (let alone respectable) if that imbalance was maintained." - No I completely agree with you here. When you win, have SRO at home games, and go dancing, you kind of forget about how crappy of a league you're in. I'd take that in a heartbeat. Bison137: "Conference has actually won three first round games plus one play-in." - Noted. My opinion remains unchanged. The league has been around long enough to figure out how to do better than this, AI or not. As I said, when I think of a decent conference I think of going deeper than 32, not getting blown out in the 64, and being able to get an at-large bid once in a while. For example, let's say HC ended up winning the PLT this year. The regular season champ with 20+ wins should at least HAVE A CHANCE at an at-large. A CHANCE, that's all I'm saying. Bucknell would have had zero. This makes the PLT both exciting and, as Carm agrees, somewhat intrinsically unfair. Last year at large bids went to the power 6 (or power 5 plus Big East) plus the A-10 with 2 and AAC and West Coast with one each. . . so for clarification, as stated earlier, are we basically talking about the Big East or A-10?
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 9, 2018 15:40:47 GMT -5
For those seeking a conference change, there was a standing offer to HC from the MAAC (still may be). HC shot it down. While I would much prefer seeing the likes of Iona and Manhattan at the Hart over American and Loyola (and think most here would), the fact that HC said no tells you everything you need to know: HC is going nowhere unless the PL were to dissolve. Or it just says that HC wouldn't make a lateral athletic move that could hurt the academic profile. Leaving the PL for another 1-big league would be silly.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 9, 2018 15:44:25 GMT -5
To be quite clear, I don't love the Patriot League, but I think the focus should be on us doing everything we can do in our control, and doing it exceptionally well, first... and THEN worrying about the league. We are bitching and moaning about deserving or needing a raise to be more productive, when there are 2-3 other employees in the department doing a better job than us. Baloney. If they win 5 Patriot League Championships in a row and then switched conferences, they would get crushed by other teams. The team will get better in a better conference. Beating up on the weak means nothing. Many of RW and Pat Flannery's Patriot League teams would have been competitive in the A-10 (RW had a strong record against A-10 teams when he was at HC). Jumping up to a league like the A-10 would certainly provide some benefits in being more attractive to recruits, but without everything else in place (starting with coaching), that doesn't mean anything. Unfortunately, HC is not even remotely close to being ready to start competing in a league like the A-10 right now.
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Mar 9, 2018 15:51:18 GMT -5
To those that love the PL and feel it's the best fit for HC, please don't complain about small crowds or lack of local support. Everyone except the 10 daily posters here hates the PL and has given up supporting HC athletics. I don’t like the PL but will always support HC athletics.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Mar 9, 2018 16:09:24 GMT -5
Lose* and losing* If a PL team went 18-0 in the league, coupled with beating some good teams in the non-conference, an at-large bid would be very possible. Yes. Bucknell would have undoubtedly received an at-large bid in 2006 had they lost in the finals.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Mar 9, 2018 16:14:36 GMT -5
. Plus the Patriot League is never had a team seeded in the top ten. Always 16, 15, 14, 13,. Also a good point made above, is the PL can never even get an at large bid. Your lack of basketball knowledge continues to astound me. Bucknell was seeded 9th in one tournament and was seeded 11th in 2013. Also in 2006, Bucknell would have received an at-large bid had it not won the PL tournament.
|
|
|
Post by cmo on Mar 9, 2018 16:37:59 GMT -5
Should Bucknell look to get out of the PL or are they happy being a big fish in a small pond?
Would a better league take them?
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Mar 9, 2018 18:17:35 GMT -5
In TCIB's defense, I believe he is a youngun, so I'll forgive him for being a little hazy on history. I'll try to be constructive, too. Here's what I would like the PL to do in terms of improvements: 1). Go back to the Friday-Sunday schedule. Maybe a few folks that are not interested in a one game road trip in the middle of the week might consider a long weekend to catch 2 games. 2). Give the 2-pod PL tournament another try. I thought it was a great compromise between trying to get some kind of a regular tournament feeling with not denying the top teams a chance to play a couple of games at home. 3). For the teams: follow the lead of BUCKNELL and consistently schedule up, and again, follow the lead of BUCKNELL and win one once in a while. Then maybe there won't such a need to b*tch about how bad the PL is. But let's say that's not viable, and HC somehow finds a higher level league that would actually prefer them over Bucknell (shaking my head as I write this). A question: Where are we grabbing the fans needed to semi fill the DCU? Are we taking away Celtics fans? Bruins fans? BC or UMass fans? Railers fans? Or is there a sizeable population out there that just doesn't go to sporting events now, but would get on the HC bandwagon the minute they upgrade. Remember, we're talking at least an extra 4K fans per game. When I try to find other examples, I come up with this: Davidson, located in college hoops hotbed: pretty good success! Richmond, located a bit between the college and pro masses: ok success, but do they still have any national appeal? Fordham, located in a pro sports dominated region: ah, not so good. Doesn't give me the warmest fuzzy feeling about moving up, but maybe I should take another big swig of the purple Kool Aid in my pitcher.
|
|
|
Post by spenser on Mar 9, 2018 19:14:09 GMT -5
To those that love the PL and feel it's the best fit for HC, please don't complain about small crowds or lack of local support. Everyone except the 10 daily posters here hates the PL and has given up supporting HC athletics. I don’t like the PL but will always support HC athletics. Ditto. But let’s face the fact that we are in the PL for the foreseeable future. Don’t have to like it but accept it.
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Mar 9, 2018 21:08:24 GMT -5
Some of us old timers still believe HC should be competing at the highest level. If they were, Worcester would embrace them.
|
|
|
Post by hcnation on Mar 9, 2018 21:30:26 GMT -5
Just the opposite of when we turned down the Big East , if we upgrade leagues the talent level in recruits will go from 1-2 stars to 3-4 stars overnight. ( or 1 star to 3 )
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Mar 9, 2018 21:59:41 GMT -5
I don’t like the PL but will always support HC athletics. Ditto. But let’s face the fact that we are in the PL for the foreseeable future. Sent have to like it but accept it. I am at the acceptance stage. No need to waste any energy thinking about other options for the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Mar 10, 2018 1:12:12 GMT -5
For those seeking a conference change, there was a standing offer to HC from the MAAC (still may be). HC shot it down. While I would much prefer seeing the likes of Iona and Manhattan at the Hart over American and Loyola (and think most here would), the fact that HC said no tells you everything you need to know: HC is going nowhere unless the PL were to dissolve. Or it just says that HC wouldn't make a lateral athletic move that could hurt the academic profile. Leaving the PL for another 1-big league would be silly. Exactly, ACTP is not wrong when he indicates that the MAAC would bring SOME more recognizable/interesting basketball opponents than the PL. Being in a hoops league with Siena, Fairfield, Manhattan, Iona, Canisius and Niagara would be fun. A conference with a postseason tournament at a central location is an upgrade too, IMO. Nothing screams "crappy low-major, barely Division I" like a conference tourney held exclusively at home sites.
But, spot on with the academic profile. TPTB would view MAAC membership as us becoming just another Northeastern Catholic safety school. Looking at athletics in a vacuum, I wouldn't mind MAAC all-sports and CAA Football.
As a sort-of young alumni, I don't have the hate for the PL that many here have. As far as my life as a Crusader, I was born into it.
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Mar 10, 2018 5:08:19 GMT -5
Would HC be ok with non medical redshirting? How would they take in grad transfers when there is no grad school?
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Mar 10, 2018 5:27:08 GMT -5
I'm perfectly fine with being the the absolute best at the level we are at (that doesn't necessarily mean league); I always root for David vs. Goliath anyway. No right or wrong in this discussion; just personal preference.
|
|
|
Post by trimster on Mar 10, 2018 8:39:47 GMT -5
I have resigned myself to the the likelihood HC athletics will always be a shadow of what it was during my youth and my time, front half of the 70's, as a student. I still buy hoop season tickets but the tickets often go unused. I find it so sad.
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Mar 10, 2018 8:54:01 GMT -5
Would HC be ok with non medical redshirting? How would they take in grad transfers when there is no grad school? It's my understanding that medical redshirting is much more rare in basketball than it is in football, but I doubt the school would support the practice.
Speaking of transfers, when was the last time we brought one in? Mike Cavataio?
|
|
|
Post by notjuanjones on Mar 10, 2018 9:05:06 GMT -5
I have absolutely no dog in this hunt. I'm just curious, being an outsider. Is the desire by those who want Holy Cross to leave the Patriot League based on:
a) A belief that HC could return to being a national powerhouse in basketball if it were in a bigger, more "prestigious" conference than the PL?; b) A belief that the Patriot League, as a basketball conference, is not good enough for HC; c) A belief that leaving the PL would increase student and/or alumni interest in the program; d) A desire to be in a Catholic-based basketball league for non-basketball reasons; e) Some combination of the above; f) None of the Above/Some other reason
Again, I'm just curious. Speaking for myself and not AU, I've come to enjoy the PL very much. We were not willing to spend what was necessary at the time to remain in the CAA, and the CAA wasn't exactly clamoring for us to stay, anyway. Some AU folks thought similarly to some people I've read here, that we would quickly come to dominate the PL and then get invited to a "bigger" conference. That hasn't exactly happened. Since we've been in the conference there have been some very good programs to compete against--HC last decade, Lehigh/Bucknell in the McCollum/Muscala years and Bucknell now. But the level of competition has been consistently good at the top throughout the years we've been here, IMHO. Hopefully we'll be back at that top again soon as we were for a decade under Jeff Jones.
|
|