I agree with Leon on this.

https://www.idahopress.com/blueturfspor ... 2943c.html

I probably agree for this year, but outside of the pandemic, I like it the way it is.

Dropping the number of teams from 11 to 8 doesn’t protect the top teams from early elimination.

The top five teams get byes as it now stands, so from their perspective, it already is an eight-team tournament. In addition, there’s the chance of the six, seven and eight seeds losing in the first round (i.e., a play-in round) and being replaced with eleven, ten or nine, which would presumably make it easier for the top three seeds.

Leon has had what, 2 teams finish in the top of the MW? He’s thinking he carries more clout than he actually does.

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:24 pm

Leon has had what, 2 teams finish in the top of the MW? He’s thinking he carries more clout than he actually does.

I can't stand Rice. He seems to be whine a lot. He thinks he is all that since his team is really good this year.

How convenient for him to say that this year. He wouldn’t have said that last year when his only hope was to win the conference tournament. Kick rocks

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:26 pm

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

Yep. For this specific year I would just do a 4 team tournament. I love the conference tournament and have had a blast when I've gone, but this is a different year.

Aggiesbleedblue wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:49 pm

How convenient for him to say that this year. He wouldn’t have said that last year when his only hope was to win the conference tournament. Kick rocks

I agree he wouldn't and any other year a coach saying this should be rightfully laughed at. This is a weird year though and it would be fine to just have the top 4 teams go. In a year with no fans and with some teams that possibly will have issues and can't play in it anyway, it makes sense.

The problem I have with cutting it off at 4 is that I think that the conference runs a bit deeper than that this year. Records are a bit skewed right now by teams not having played everyone yet. Everyone is crowning Boise as the champ already even though they haven't played a decent conference opponent yet. They still have to play USU, SDSU, CSU and Nevada. SDSU and CSU are both road series. That is going to be 8 very tough games. Nevada is getting forgotten about by some and they've definitely slipped up a few times but they've also played a tougher slate. A few weeks ago I thought the conference had a clear cut top 3 (Boise, SDSU, USU) with CSU at 4 and then a dropoff. CSU has now split road series with 2 of the teams I had at the top and I also think Nevada has shown that they can compete. I'd be okay maybe scaling the tournament back to 6 with a bye for the top 2 seeds but 8 would be my preference.

I feel like Leon Rice is Mountain West Basketball's equivalent of Troy Calhoun. Always whining about everything and thinking they're more important than everyone else.

Aggie84025 wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:37 pm

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:24 pm

Leon has had what, 2 teams finish in the top of the MW? He’s thinking he carries more clout than he actually does.

I can't stand Rice. He seems to be whine a lot. He thinks he is all that since his team is really good this year.

I agree! He's a big whiney Douche-Bag. He thought he was all that prior to this year.

ProvoAggie wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 1:43 pm

The problem I have with cutting it off at 4 is that I think that the conference runs a bit deeper than that this year. Records are a bit skewed right now by teams not having played everyone yet. Everyone is crowning Boise as the champ already even though they haven't played a decent conference opponent yet. They still have to play USU, SDSU, CSU and Nevada. SDSU and CSU are both road series. That is going to be 8 very tough games. Nevada is getting forgotten about by some and they've definitely slipped up a few times but they've also played a tougher slate. A few weeks ago I thought the conference had a clear cut top 3 (Boise, SDSU, USU) with CSU at 4 and then a dropoff. CSU has now split road series with 2 of the teams I had at the top and I also think Nevada has shown that they can compete. I'd be okay maybe scaling the tournament back to 6 with a bye for the top 2 seeds but 8 would be my preference.

Yeah you do bring up a good point about Nevada. They are not thought of as a top 4 team, but they are in 4th right now. I imagine SDSU would throw a fit if they were left out. UNLV has a gripe too although they have barely played any games and might play their way out of it.

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:17 pm

ProvoAggie wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 1:43 pm

The problem I have with cutting it off at 4 is that I think that the conference runs a bit deeper than that this year. Records are a bit skewed right now by teams not having played everyone yet. Everyone is crowning Boise as the champ already even though they haven't played a decent conference opponent yet. They still have to play USU, SDSU, CSU and Nevada. SDSU and CSU are both road series. That is going to be 8 very tough games. Nevada is getting forgotten about by some and they've definitely slipped up a few times but they've also played a tougher slate. A few weeks ago I thought the conference had a clear cut top 3 (Boise, SDSU, USU) with CSU at 4 and then a dropoff. CSU has now split road series with 2 of the teams I had at the top and I also think Nevada has shown that they can compete. I'd be okay maybe scaling the tournament back to 6 with a bye for the top 2 seeds but 8 would be my preference.

Yeah you do bring up a good point about Nevada. They are not thought of as a top 4 team, but they are in 4th right now. I imagine SDSU would throw a fit if they were left out. UNLV has a gripe too although they have barely played any games and might play their way out of it.

We honestly don't know how good Boise is right now. They've played the bottom 5 teams in the conference and that includes a 1 point victory over San Jose State and needing a big run to beat Fresno. Reading their message board they don't think that anyone in the conference can match up with them but their remaining schedule is @CSU, @Nevada, UNLV, USU, and @SDSU. That is a very tough stretch and I'd bet good money they don't come out of it unscathed.

ProvoAggie wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:25 pm

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:17 pm

ProvoAggie wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 1:43 pm

The problem I have with cutting it off at 4 is that I think that the conference runs a bit deeper than that this year. Records are a bit skewed right now by teams not having played everyone yet. Everyone is crowning Boise as the champ already even though they haven't played a decent conference opponent yet. They still have to play USU, SDSU, CSU and Nevada. SDSU and CSU are both road series. That is going to be 8 very tough games. Nevada is getting forgotten about by some and they've definitely slipped up a few times but they've also played a tougher slate. A few weeks ago I thought the conference had a clear cut top 3 (Boise, SDSU, USU) with CSU at 4 and then a dropoff. CSU has now split road series with 2 of the teams I had at the top and I also think Nevada has shown that they can compete. I'd be okay maybe scaling the tournament back to 6 with a bye for the top 2 seeds but 8 would be my preference.

Yeah you do bring up a good point about Nevada. They are not thought of as a top 4 team, but they are in 4th right now. I imagine SDSU would throw a fit if they were left out. UNLV has a gripe too although they have barely played any games and might play their way out of it.

We honestly don't know how good Boise is right now. They've played the bottom 5 teams in the conference and that includes a 1 point victory over San Jose State and needing a big run to beat Fresno. Reading their message board they don't think that anyone in the conference can match up with them but their remaining schedule is @CSU, @Nevada, UNLV, USU, and @SDSU. That is a very tough stretch and I'd bet good money they don't come out of it unscathed.

That was my point in another thread. Boise is likely going to lose at least 2 games during that stretch. If we take care of business over the next 6 games we'll be fine.

And I'm not trying to defend their coach, but I do see with the type of season this is with no fans(or very limited fans) and with teams having to cancel or postpone games, having a small tournament is fine for just this year.

ProvoAggie wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 1:43 pm

The problem I have with cutting it off at 4 is that I think that the conference runs a bit deeper than that this year. Records are a bit skewed right now by teams not having played everyone yet. Everyone is crowning Boise as the champ already even though they haven't played a decent conference opponent yet. They still have to play USU, SDSU, CSU and Nevada. SDSU and CSU are both road series. That is going to be 8 very tough games. Nevada is getting forgotten about by some and they've definitely slipped up a few times but they've also played a tougher slate. A few weeks ago I thought the conference had a clear cut top 3 (Boise, SDSU, USU) with CSU at 4 and then a dropoff. CSU has now split road series with 2 of the teams I had at the top and I also think Nevada has shown that they can compete. I'd be okay maybe scaling the tournament back to 6 with a bye for the top 2 seeds but 8 would be my preference.

I agree about Nevada. They played SDSU really close. They are going to be tough out. Be interesting how it all plays out. Boise still has a tough road ahead. No one is talking about UNLV, but I think they are going to be pretty solid as well.

treesap32 wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:12 pm

I feel like Leon Rice is Mountain West Basketball's equivalent of Troy Calhoun. Always whining about everything and thinking they're more important than everyone else.

You are correct. Leon is simliar to Calhoun, Calhoun is my least favorite coach in the MWC and it is not even close.

If Boise finishes with less than 4 losses I'll name my next born child Leon.

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:43 pm

If Boise finishes with less than 4 losses I'll name my next born child Leon.

For the year or before conference tournament?

I am a dinosaur..Even though NV has benefitted in the past by a conference tourney I prefer the old fashioned way. Schedule up and win tough ooc games, play really well for a whole season and earn a spot in the NCAA's the hard way. That is far more satisfying to me than a hot run over 3 days..

I understand a conference tourney is designed to make money for the conference. Still, I think it hurts more than it helps as often as not..Even if my school won the tourney I would never consider them as the champs of the MW unless they also won the regular season title. But that is just me..

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:43 pm

If Boise finishes with less than 4 losses I'll name my next born child Leon.

They do have a tough stretch coming up. I'm curious to see how they do against CSU next week.

slcagg wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:59 pm

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:43 pm

If Boise finishes with less than 4 losses I'll name my next born child Leon.

For the year or before conference tournament?

Regular season. If Boise pulls it off the real loser in this scenario of course would be my wife.
Playing with house money.

My opinion is actually that we shouldn't have a conference tournament & if we do, only do 6 teams (with the top 2 teams getting a 1st round bye).

I think the MWC needs to position itself accordingly with relation to Covid & The NCAA Tournament.

ProvoAggie wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:25 pm

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:17 pm

ProvoAggie wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 1:43 pm

The problem I have with cutting it off at 4 is that I think that the conference runs a bit deeper than that this year. Records are a bit skewed right now by teams not having played everyone yet. Everyone is crowning Boise as the champ already even though they haven't played a decent conference opponent yet. They still have to play USU, SDSU, CSU and Nevada. SDSU and CSU are both road series. That is going to be 8 very tough games. Nevada is getting forgotten about by some and they've definitely slipped up a few times but they've also played a tougher slate. A few weeks ago I thought the conference had a clear cut top 3 (Boise, SDSU, USU) with CSU at 4 and then a dropoff. CSU has now split road series with 2 of the teams I had at the top and I also think Nevada has shown that they can compete. I'd be okay maybe scaling the tournament back to 6 with a bye for the top 2 seeds but 8 would be my preference.

Yeah you do bring up a good point about Nevada. They are not thought of as a top 4 team, but they are in 4th right now. I imagine SDSU would throw a fit if they were left out. UNLV has a gripe too although they have barely played any games and might play their way out of it.

We honestly don't know how good Boise is right now. They've played the bottom 5 teams in the conference and that includes a 1 point victory over San Jose State and needing a big run to beat Fresno. Reading their message board they don't think that anyone in the conference can match up with them but their remaining schedule is @CSU, @Nevada, UNLV, USU, and @SDSU. That is a very tough stretch and I'd bet good money they don't come out of it unscathed.

Bozo fans with an ego. Go figure.

In fairness, they have the most talented team in Boise I've ever seen. That said, there's no way they go undefeated in conference play.

AggieFBObsession wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 10:00 pm

ProvoAggie wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:25 pm

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:17 pm

ProvoAggie wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 1:43 pm

The problem I have with cutting it off at 4 is that I think that the conference runs a bit deeper than that this year. Records are a bit skewed right now by teams not having played everyone yet. Everyone is crowning Boise as the champ already even though they haven't played a decent conference opponent yet. They still have to play USU, SDSU, CSU and Nevada. SDSU and CSU are both road series. That is going to be 8 very tough games. Nevada is getting forgotten about by some and they've definitely slipped up a few times but they've also played a tougher slate. A few weeks ago I thought the conference had a clear cut top 3 (Boise, SDSU, USU) with CSU at 4 and then a dropoff. CSU has now split road series with 2 of the teams I had at the top and I also think Nevada has shown that they can compete. I'd be okay maybe scaling the tournament back to 6 with a bye for the top 2 seeds but 8 would be my preference.

Yeah you do bring up a good point about Nevada. They are not thought of as a top 4 team, but they are in 4th right now. I imagine SDSU would throw a fit if they were left out. UNLV has a gripe too although they have barely played any games and might play their way out of it.

We honestly don't know how good Boise is right now. They've played the bottom 5 teams in the conference and that includes a 1 point victory over San Jose State and needing a big run to beat Fresno. Reading their message board they don't think that anyone in the conference can match up with them but their remaining schedule is @CSU, @Nevada, UNLV, USU, and @SDSU. That is a very tough stretch and I'd bet good money they don't come out of it unscathed.

Bozo fans with an ego. Go figure.

In fairness, they have the most talented team in Boise I've ever seen. That said, there's no way they go undefeated in conference play.

I think he still has PTSD from 2018 when the lowly 7th seed USU sent the 2 seeded Donkeys packing in the quarterfinals. Merrill dropped 28 on them, and it was glorious. By all means he can’t have that happen again, it’s easier to not play those pesky lower seeds.

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:26 pm

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

I don’t think it’s fair to the also-rans to shuffle the deck just because there are 4 teams that may have a legitimate shot at the NCAA tourney. Would we Aggies have embraced this same notion last year? No. Because we needed a resume builder in the conference torney to get to the Big Dance.

I recognize that outside the top four MWC teams there is no one else that will be where we were last year. But there are countless examples of bottom-feeding teams rising to the occasion and winning the automatic bid. Would that be a bummer for one or two of the top 4 teams? Absolutely — so don’t stumble.

I do agree with Rice on the COVID-19 risk and further agree that instead of bringing all 11 teams to Vegas they allow the three play-in games (for the #6 through #11 seeds) to be played on the home court of the higher seeded teams. Those games could be played on Saturday. Then on Tuesday the second round games could be played on the home court of the four highest seeded teams. The four remaining teams would then play the semi-final and championship games in Vegas on Friday and Saturday.

That format would accomplish a few things: 1) reduce travel costs for the higher-seeded teams; 2) protect the five highest-seeded teams by allowing them to play their second round games on their home courts; and 3) reduce the risk of the coronavirus spreading through the teams which potentially could sideline the conference’s best teams for the NCAA tourney.

utaggies wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 10:51 pm

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:26 pm

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

I don’t think it’s fair to the also-rans to shuffle the deck just because there are 4 teams that may have a legitimate shot at the NCAA tourney. Would we Aggies have embraced this same notion last year? No. Because we needed a resume builder in the conference torney to get to the Big Dance.

Wait playing Wyoming (11 seed) in the semifinals was a resume builder for the team rather than playing whoever the 3 seed was? Not following your logic on that one my friend.

But I like your ideas to find ways to allow all teams play. It would be unfortunate for a team to be told half way throufn the conf season that you won’t be in the conference tournament. Especially for the kids from New Mexico and SJSU who have already had a lot issues this season.

slcagg wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 7:15 am

utaggies wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 10:51 pm

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:26 pm

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

I don’t think it’s fair to the also-rans to shuffle the deck just because there are 4 teams that may have a legitimate shot at the NCAA tourney. Would we Aggies have embraced this same notion last year? No. Because we needed a resume builder in the conference torney to get to the Big Dance.

Wait playing Wyoming (11 seed) in the semifinals was a resume builder for the team rather than playing whoever the 3 seed was? Not following your logic on that one my friend.

But I like your ideas to find ways to allow all teams play. It would be unfortunate for a team to be told half way throufn the conf season that you won’t be in the conference tournament. Especially for the kids from New Mexico and SJSU who have already had a lot issues this season.

We needed wins in the conference tourney last year — even against #11 Wyoming. But you do have a point about lower-seeded teams putting a damper on a team like USU trying to build its NCAA resume yet being required to face a heavy underdog that is peaking at the end of the season. Still, I wouldn’t recommend reseeding conference tourney teams after every round. I like the fixxed bracket format and the excitement of potential upsets. If fans and conferences didn’t prefer this as well we’d see the elimination of conference tournaments and the return of having only the conference champions invited to the NCAA tourney.

utaggies wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 7:56 am

slcagg wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 7:15 am

utaggies wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 10:51 pm

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:26 pm

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

I don’t think it’s fair to the also-rans to shuffle the deck just because there are 4 teams that may have a legitimate shot at the NCAA tourney. Would we Aggies have embraced this same notion last year? No. Because we needed a resume builder in the conference torney to get to the Big Dance.

Wait playing Wyoming (11 seed) in the semifinals was a resume builder for the team rather than playing whoever the 3 seed was? Not following your logic on that one my friend.

But I like your ideas to find ways to allow all teams play. It would be unfortunate for a team to be told half way throufn the conf season that you won’t be in the conference tournament. Especially for the kids from New Mexico and SJSU who have already had a lot issues this season.

We needed wins in the conference tourney last year — even against #11 Wyoming. But you do have a point about lower-seeded teams putting a damper on a team like USU trying to build its NCAA resume yet being required to face a heavy underdog that is peaking at the end of the season. Still, I wouldn’t recommend reseeding conference tourney teams after every round. I like the fixxed bracket format and the excitement of potential upsets. If fans and conferences didn’t prefer this as well we’d see the elimination of conference tournaments and the return of having only the conference champions invited to the NCAA tourney.

I’m right there with you. Wyoming is a great example as their run was very fun.

Also a lot of it is about money. We get more games on tv and also additional fans to travel to Vegas if you include everyone. Maybe this year some adjustment might be made but I don’t think in future years.

slcagg wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 7:15 am

utaggies wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 10:51 pm

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:26 pm

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

I don’t think it’s fair to the also-rans to shuffle the deck just because there are 4 teams that may have a legitimate shot at the NCAA tourney. Would we Aggies have embraced this same notion last year? No. Because we needed a resume builder in the conference torney to get to the Big Dance.

Wait playing Wyoming (11 seed) in the semifinals was a resume builder for the team rather than playing whoever the 3 seed was? Not following your logic on that one my friend.

But I like your ideas to find ways to allow all teams play. It would be unfortunate for a team to be told half way throufn the conf season that you won’t be in the conference tournament. Especially for the kids from New Mexico and SJSU who have already had a lot issues this season.

New Mexico is 1-8 and San Jose State is 0-9. It wouldn't be unfair to have the two worst teams in the conference not be in the tournament this year. That was standard practice in the Big West. They might voluntarily pull out anyway with all of the problems those two schools have had this year. This is a unique year and shortening the tournament is not the end of the world for one year with all the challenges that have come with it.

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 9:18 am

slcagg wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 7:15 am

utaggies wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 10:51 pm

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:26 pm

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

I don’t think it’s fair to the also-rans to shuffle the deck just because there are 4 teams that may have a legitimate shot at the NCAA tourney. Would we Aggies have embraced this same notion last year? No. Because we needed a resume builder in the conference torney to get to the Big Dance.

Wait playing Wyoming (11 seed) in the semifinals was a resume builder for the team rather than playing whoever the 3 seed was? Not following your logic on that one my friend.

But I like your ideas to find ways to allow all teams play. It would be unfortunate for a team to be told half way throufn the conf season that you won’t be in the conference tournament. Especially for the kids from New Mexico and SJSU who have already had a lot issues this season.

New Mexico is 1-8 and San Jose State is 0-9. It wouldn't be unfair to have the two worst teams in the conference not be in the tournament this year. That was standard practice in the Big West. They might voluntarily pull out anyway with all of the problems those two schools have had this year. This is a unique year and shortening the tournament is not the end of the world for one year with all the challenges that have come with it.

Why not let each individual school decide what they want to do and we'll figure out a format from there? I hate the idea of some team that has struggled but wants to play, not playing. That's what makes college basketball great. A team that isn't supposed to be there, coming together at the right time to shock the world. I know some may say that we're knocking a better team out of the ncaa tourney. Who cares - they wanted in, they should've won. That's why it's a great tournament and not that joke of a college football playoff we have. Our conference tourney plays into all of that, so I say let they play.

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 9:18 am

slcagg wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 7:15 am

utaggies wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 10:51 pm

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:26 pm

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

I don’t think it’s fair to the also-rans to shuffle the deck just because there are 4 teams that may have a legitimate shot at the NCAA tourney. Would we Aggies have embraced this same notion last year? No. Because we needed a resume builder in the conference torney to get to the Big Dance.

Wait playing Wyoming (11 seed) in the semifinals was a resume builder for the team rather than playing whoever the 3 seed was? Not following your logic on that one my friend.

But I like your ideas to find ways to allow all teams play. It would be unfortunate for a team to be told half way throufn the conf season that you won’t be in the conference tournament. Especially for the kids from New Mexico and SJSU who have already had a lot issues this season.

New Mexico is 1-8 and San Jose State is 0-9. It wouldn't be unfair to have the two worst teams in the conference not be in the tournament this year. That was standard practice in the Big West. They might voluntarily pull out anyway with all of the problems those two schools have had this year. This is a unique year and shortening the tournament is not the end of the world for one year with all the challenges that have come with it.

There’s a big difference between having pre-established rules that eliminate the lowest two seeds from a conference tournament and on the fly deciding to disinvite two teams that otherwise had anticipated being in the conference tournament. If SJS and NM voluntarily decide not to go to the tournament that’s their right. Otherwise I believe they should be included.

utaggies wrote:

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 9:18 am

slcagg wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 7:15 am

utaggies wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 10:51 pm

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:26 pm

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

I don’t think it’s fair to the also-rans to shuffle the deck just because there are 4 teams that may have a legitimate shot at the NCAA tourney. Would we Aggies have embraced this same notion last year? No. Because we needed a resume builder in the conference torney to get to the Big Dance.

Wait playing Wyoming (11 seed) in the semifinals was a resume builder for the team rather than playing whoever the 3 seed was? Not following your logic on that one my friend.

But I like your ideas to find ways to allow all teams play. It would be unfortunate for a team to be told half way throufn the conf season that you won’t be in the conference tournament. Especially for the kids from New Mexico and SJSU who have already had a lot issues this season.

New Mexico is 1-8 and San Jose State is 0-9. It wouldn't be unfair to have the two worst teams in the conference not be in the tournament this year. That was standard practice in the Big West. They might voluntarily pull out anyway with all of the problems those two schools have had this year. This is a unique year and shortening the tournament is not the end of the world for one year with all the challenges that have come with it.

There’s a big difference between having pre-established rules that eliminate the lowest two seeds from a conference tournament and on the fly deciding to disinvite two teams that otherwise had anticipated being in the conference tournament. If SJS and NM voluntarily decide not to go to the tournament that’s their right. Otherwise I believe they should be included.

I'm the end, any change will have to be voted on by the University Presidents. They are the decision makers.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

utaggies wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 9:33 am

Aggie formerly in Hawaii wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 9:18 am

slcagg wrote: ↑

January 23rd, 2021, 7:15 am

utaggies wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 10:51 pm

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 12:26 pm

Won’t be popular, but I would honestly reduce it to the top 4 teams this year.

COVID concerns aside, without a full non-con slate where teams had a chance to build a good resume in the non-con, I think we need to protect our top teams from resume busting bad losses in the conference tourney this year.

I don’t think it’s fair to the also-rans to shuffle the deck just because there are 4 teams that may have a legitimate shot at the NCAA tourney. Would we Aggies have embraced this same notion last year? No. Because we needed a resume builder in the conference torney to get to the Big Dance.

Wait playing Wyoming (11 seed) in the semifinals was a resume builder for the team rather than playing whoever the 3 seed was? Not following your logic on that one my friend.

But I like your ideas to find ways to allow all teams play. It would be unfortunate for a team to be told half way throufn the conf season that you won’t be in the conference tournament. Especially for the kids from New Mexico and SJSU who have already had a lot issues this season.

New Mexico is 1-8 and San Jose State is 0-9. It wouldn't be unfair to have the two worst teams in the conference not be in the tournament this year. That was standard practice in the Big West. They might voluntarily pull out anyway with all of the problems those two schools have had this year. This is a unique year and shortening the tournament is not the end of the world for one year with all the challenges that have come with it.

There’s a big difference between having pre-established rules that eliminate the lowest two seeds from a conference tournament and on the fly deciding to disinvite two teams that otherwise had anticipated being in the conference tournament. If SJS and NM voluntarily decide not to go to the tournament that’s their right. Otherwise I believe they should be included.

This is a different year. Nobody has asked for much of what has happened this year. There is even talk the NCAA tournament might only include 48 teams. Probably won't happen, but it is a contingency plan and Lunardi has a bracketology for that 48 team tournament if it goes that way. It will not be the end of the world or unfair if they shorten the tournament and two teams that have been blown out almost every game aren't there. San Jose State showing up for one game to get blown out by 30+ are the type of things that can be scratched off in years like this.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. San Jose State sh

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑

January 22nd, 2021, 2:43 pm

If Boise finishes with less than 4 losses I'll name my next born child Leon.

Me too and I'm 71 years old.