Murray State not getting in is why I don't like the conference tournament winner getting the automatic bid. I known that it makes it more exciting, but every time there's an upset, there seems to be a mid-major that get's left out.

How many times did you watch Murray this year?

 

I saw them twice. Nearly lost to Morehead and lost to Belmonte. Case Closed

Murray State not getting in is why I don't like the conference tournament winner getting the automatic bid. I known that it makes it more exciting, but every time there's an upset, there seems to be a mid-major that get's left out.

 

They didn't get left out because of other teams getting upset, they got left out because they lost. The only way they were getting in was the conference tournament. People are acting like they were #69 , they weren't even close to getting an at large bid.

I saw them twice. Nearly lost to Morehead and lost to Belmonte. Case Closed

 

The team at the end of the year wasn't the same team as the beginning of the year

I've still yet to see anyone list a legit argument as to why Murray State deserved to be in.

 

I'm going to just assume that's because there isn't one.

I've still yet to see anyone list a legit argument as to why Murray State deserved to be in.

 

I'm going to just assume that's because there isn't one.

 

Best team in their conference, without doubt.

 

25 game win streak

 

Lost on a fluke/prayer at the buzzer in conference tournament

 

Arguably (maybe not even arguably) the most improved team from beginning to end of season.

 

Several teams who got in above them have no more of a "legitimate argument" to be in than you say Murray doesn't have, and quite honestly have LESS of an argument.

 

SOS means nothing if all those teams beat you.

 

So, if Murray played 12 top 30 teams during the season, and lost them all and went something like 16-14, would they have gotten in? I say no, and most people would say the same...but it sure seemed to have worked for UCLA.

 

And let's not forget...Murray can have a tough time getting top 25 teams on their schedule. No one likes to have a loss to a mid-major on their schedule, and Murray many years is very capable of delivering that.

Best team in their conference, without doubt.

 

25 game win streak

 

Lost on a fluke/prayer at the buzzer in conference tournament

 

Arguably (maybe not even arguably) the most improved team from beginning to end of season.

 

Several teams who got in above them have no more of a "legitimate argument" to be in than you say Murray doesn't have, and quite honestly have LESS of an argument.

 

SOS means nothing if all those teams beat you.

 

So, if Murray played 12 top 30 teams during the season, and lost them all and went something like 16-14, would they have gotten in? I say no, and most people would say the same...but it sure seemed to have worked for UCLA.

 

And let's not forget...Murray can have a tough time getting top 25 teams on their schedule. No one likes to have a loss to a mid-major on their schedule, and Murray many years is very capable of delivering that.

 

Best team in their conference....Congrats, they want a cookie? The OVC is atrocious.

 

25 game win streak....Their best win was Illinois State. The same Illinois State team that lost twice to 15-16 Indiana State. The same Illinois State team that lost to 12-21 Southern Illinois.

 

Lost on a prayer....Not sure what that has to do with them deserving an at-large. Should every team that losses in the conference title game be given a bid?

 

Most improved team...By who's metrics? Yours? There's no way to gauge that. What we do know is they played the toughest part of their schedule at the beginning of the year, where they got blown out by the only remotely above average teams they played all year. Was it that they improved, or that the competition just sucked?

 

I'm looking at Dayton, Ole Miss, BYU, and Boise State....All 4 have resumes that to the unbiased eye are HEADS and SHOULDERS better than Murray State. BYU - win @ Gonzaga. Dayton - wins @VCU and Ole Miss. Ole Miss - wins against UC, @ Oregon, and @ Arkansas. Boise State - season sweep of San Diego State. Every single one of those is more impressive than anything Murray State did. When the most impressive items on your resume are blowout losses, it's clear you aren't deserving.

 

UCLA - beat Oregon, Utah, & swept Stanford. Again, you have to play someone.

 

Murray State needs to realize it isn't in a position to demand these mid-major to major conference teams play them in home and home series or neutral court deals. They have to take what they can get, and when they get opportunities (Xavier & Valpo this season) they can't afford to get beaten like a JV team. That's the thing. They win one of those two, and they very well may have got in. They didn't just lose, they got embarrassed by both. I don't care if they got better as the year went on. So did those teams, and most teams do.

Best team in their conference....Congrats, they want a cookie? The OVC is atrocious.

 

25 game win streak....Their best win was Illinois State. The same Illinois State team that lost twice to 15-16 Indiana State. The same Illinois State team that lost to 12-21 Southern Illinois.

 

Lost on a prayer....Not sure what that has to do with them deserving an at-large. Should every team that losses in the conference title game be given a bid?

 

Most improved team...By who's metrics? Yours? There's no way to gauge that. What we do know is they played the toughest part of their schedule at the beginning of the year, where they got blown out by the only remotely above average teams they played all year. Was it that they improved, or that the competition just sucked?

 

I'm looking at Dayton, Ole Miss, BYU, and Boise State....All 4 have resumes that to the unbiased eye are HEADS and SHOULDERS better than Murray State. BYU - win @ Gonzaga. Dayton - wins @VCU and Ole Miss. Ole Miss - wins against UC, @ Oregon, and @ Arkansas. Boise State - season sweep of San Diego State. Every single one of those is more impressive than anything Murray State did. When the most impressive items on your resume are blowout losses, it's clear you aren't deserving.

 

UCLA - beat Oregon, Utah, & swept Stanford. Again, you have to play someone.

 

Murray State needs to realize it isn't in a position to demand these mid-major to major conference teams play them in home and home series or neutral court deals. They have to take what they can get, and when they get opportunities (Xavier & Valpo this season) they can't afford to get beaten like a JV team. That's the thing. They win one of those two, and they very well may have got in. They didn't just lose, they got embarrassed by both. I don't care if they got better as the year went on. So did those teams, and most teams do.

 

You asked for legit arguments...and come back with "want a cookie"? Nice.

 

Every one of those are legit arguments. And yes, arguably they are the most improved team from beginning to end in the country. Want a metric, I guess you could always come up with one.

 

I'd much rather see a mid major team, with a good record, who has a track record of being VERY competitive in the NCAA tournament against teams ranked MUCH HIGHR that they are...I'd rather see them get a shot than the same old tired major conference teams with 12 and 13 loses get in because they have a higher SOS yet didn't beat anybody. I think it makes for a much more interesting and fun tournament. And those teams have no better argument for being IN than anyone can make for someone like a Murray being left out.

What win did Murray State get this season that makes you say "yeah, that team can play with good teams"?

It is a double-edged sword when trying to compare a team from the start of the season to where they end up by season's end. I am probably one of the few on here that watched more than 2 or 3 of Murray State's games, and they are A LOT better than they were in November. With that said, I respect the committee's decision not to weigh parts of the season differently, you have to take the entire season in consideration. Although, the only thing it does do is encourage lower major teams not to schedule up at all and get to the conference tilt unscathed.

 

The only arguments for Murray State are based upon things the committee does not evaluate so they do not hold a lot of water to me.

- Taking a high major team that did not have a strong conference season.

- Would one of these teams on the bubble, say UCLA have gone undefeated in the OVC? No way of knowing, but I would wager a large sum of money they would not have, regardless of how poor the conference is.

What win did Murray State get this season that makes you say "yeah, that team can play with good teams"?

 

I'm not saying they did have wins...heck even 1 win against any team that was all that "good". But they did what they were supposed to do in their conference by dominating it, and came up one "lucky" basket short of winning the conference tournament. And with a 25 game win streak, no one outside of UK can claim to be any "hotter" at the end of the year, which I believe is a metric (last 10 games or so) the committee looks at when getting teams in.

 

But for any argument anyone can make to keep Murray out, there are just as good opposing arguments against several teams why they shouldn't have been let in.

 

And Murray isn't the only one with a beef. There are a couple of others, Temple and CSU with some good arguments why they should be in as well.

If you're a mid-major and don't win your conference tourney, you're going to be hard pressed to make the tournament most years, I'd think. Regardless of your record.

I'm not saying they did have wins...heck even 1 win against any team that was all that "good". But they did what they were supposed to do in their conference by dominating it, and came up one "lucky" basket short of winning the conference tournament. And with a 25 game win streak, no one outside of UK can claim to be any "hotter" at the end of the year, which I believe is a metric (last 10 games or so) the committee looks at when getting teams in.

 

But for any argument anyone can make to keep Murray out, there are just as good opposing arguments against several teams why they shouldn't have been let in.

 

And Murray isn't the only one with a beef. There are a couple of others, Temple and CSU with some good arguments why they should be in as well.

It is not a metric any longer. But subconsciously how could it not be for some teams? You always see teams get on a roll at the end and get a higher seed than they deserve.

You asked for legit arguments...and come back with "want a cookie"? Nice.

 

 

Probably because he asked for legitimate reasons, not just reasons... UC Davis won their league... St. Francis won theirs... South Dakota St.... NC Central... The list goes on. Winning your regular season league title isn't a realistic measure of small division 1 conferences.

As I have said, they need to find a way out of the OVC. Hire me to broker the power play move, place them in the MVC which only has 10 teams presently. Give us two divisions and lets get it on. SIU and Evansville are both less than 2 hours from Murray. We can make this work.