Football Home Game
Sat, August 31, 2024
Sat, August 31, 2024
Basketball Home Game
Fri, November 1, 2024
Fri, November 1, 2024
New Rankings
-
- Posts: 675
- Joined: March 4th, 2012, 10:32 pm
- Has thanked: 108 times
- Been thanked: 391 times
New Rankings
The Aggies fell all the way to 25 after the loss Friday, edging out Florida by one vote.
Last edited by Aggiesbleedblue on December 2nd, 2019, 10:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
- flying_scotsman2.0
- Posts: 3495
- Joined: January 23rd, 2018, 12:29 pm
- Location: The Mighty City-State of Roy, Utah
- Has thanked: 5829 times
- Been thanked: 2207 times
Re: New Rankings
Seems fair. Actually, it's pretty good considering we're without one of our best players, our backup center, and other injured players.Aggiesbleedblue wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2019, 10:09 amThe Aggies fell all the way to 25 after the loss Friday.
The remarkable thing to me is that St. Mary's actually dropped in the rankings...
- ProvoAggie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: June 14th, 2010, 1:00 am
- Location: Provo, Utah
- Has thanked: 1483 times
- Been thanked: 2938 times
- Contact:
Re: New Rankings
Saint Mary's fell in the rankings but they got 4x as many votes as last week (86 compared to 22). Last week there was a big dropoff after 26. This week it doesn't really drop off until 31.
Aggies still ranked as high as 16: https://collegepolltracker.com/basketba ... ggies/2019
Aggies still ranked as high as 16: https://collegepolltracker.com/basketba ... ggies/2019
- treesap32
- Moderator
- Posts: 16796
- Joined: July 28th, 2005, 1:00 am
- Location: Washington D.C.
- Has thanked: 1141 times
- Been thanked: 2676 times
- Contact:
Re: New Rankings
Luckily Adam Grosbard didn't realize we lost last week and kept us at #16 in his ballot. Everyone give him some love:
https://collegepolltracker.com/basketba ... 019/week-5
https://collegepolltracker.com/basketba ... 019/week-5
- These users thanked the author treesap32 for the post:
- TheAKAggie
-
- Posts: 1985
- Joined: January 21st, 2011, 8:56 am
- Has thanked: 248 times
- Been thanked: 303 times
Re: New Rankings
It sucks that a close road loss to the #28 ranked team sends USU spiraling out of over 40 voters' top 25 but it shows that the margin for error in college basketball, particularly in the pre-season, is razor thin. All of the teams around 14-30 look to be equals at this point. This also shows the importance of winning these test games when it comes down to NCAA seeding. A 7-10 seed does not put is in a position of strength to win beyond R1 (assuming the Aggies put in the conference work to qualify). But a strong preseason, meaning beating S.Florida, BYU, even Florida, are critical to a 4-6 seed range where they can put themselves into position to win that elusive NCAA tourney game.
-
- Posts: 675
- Joined: March 4th, 2012, 10:32 pm
- Has thanked: 108 times
- Been thanked: 391 times
Re: New Rankings
Agree here. I would put that BYU game in the near "must-win" category if we have aspirations of a top 5 seed come March. If we can enter January with a 12-2 record with losses to St Mary's and Florida we'll be in shape to do so.aggiesdotcom wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2019, 11:16 amIt sucks that a close road loss to the #28 ranked team sends USU spiraling out of over 40 voters' top 25 but it shows that the margin for error in college basketball, particularly in the pre-season, is razor thin. All of the teams around 14-30 look to be equals at this point. This also shows the importance of winning these test games when it comes down to NCAA seeding. A 7-10 seed does not put is in a position of strength to win beyond R1 (assuming the Aggies put in the conference work to qualify). But a strong preseason, meaning beating S.Florida, BYU, even Florida, are critical to a 4-6 seed range where they can put themselves into position to win that elusive NCAA tourney game.
-
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: November 2nd, 2018, 7:52 am
- Has thanked: 1729 times
- Been thanked: 1084 times
Re: New Rankings
Just curious, do most people on here just assume we're going to lose to Florida? I have seen a few comments with that assumption. I've watched Florida a couple times this year and we can beat them. Just like any other game, we need to come ready to play, but they're not a unbeatable force.
Go Aggies!
- dyedblue
- Posts: 8427
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 4:21 pm
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 840 times
Re: New Rankings
We are not guaranteed anything in the tournament. If we lose to Florida then I would say we are almost in territory where we need to win our conference tournament to get in. Not being negative here, it is just the reality of things.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
“The winning team has a dedication. It will have a core of veteran players who set the standards. They will not accept defeat.” --Merlin Olsen
-
- Posts: 7793
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:07 pm
- Has thanked: 406 times
- Been thanked: 4809 times
Re: New Rankings
The LSU win may end up being better than any win we got last year depending on how their season goes. If we can split with BYU and Florida, and split with SDSU in conference, we should have three marquee wins and be solidly in the 6-10 range seeding wise barring bad losses.
- Real Life Aggie
- Posts: 3961
- Joined: April 10th, 2019, 4:28 pm
- Location: Tucson, AZ
- Has thanked: 5173 times
- Been thanked: 1816 times
Re: New Rankings
When pollsters vote on teams, do they vote on the team as currently constituted? Do they consider potential?
In our game against St. Mary's, our lead scorer was hobbled, we didn't have our main center, and our backup center was out getting his appendix removed. Despite all this, we led for most of the game, and held our own against St Mary's, right until they pulled away at the end. [Assume that those voting in the polls actually know/consider this.] Do they vote on us based on how we performed (i.e. not bad, but lost to an opponent just outside of the top 25), or do they also consider upside/potential? Or is it just up to the individual voting and there's no strict guidance?
In our game against St. Mary's, our lead scorer was hobbled, we didn't have our main center, and our backup center was out getting his appendix removed. Despite all this, we led for most of the game, and held our own against St Mary's, right until they pulled away at the end. [Assume that those voting in the polls actually know/consider this.] Do they vote on us based on how we performed (i.e. not bad, but lost to an opponent just outside of the top 25), or do they also consider upside/potential? Or is it just up to the individual voting and there's no strict guidance?
- dyedblue
- Posts: 8427
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 4:21 pm
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 840 times
Re: New Rankings
Voters and the committee care, at most, about the final score unless it’s duke. I bet most voters couldn’t name one player on Utah State and have never seen us play.Real Life Aggie wrote:When pollsters vote on teams, do they vote on the team as currently constituted? Do they consider potential?
In our game against St. Mary's, our lead scorer was hobbled, we didn't have our main center, and our backup center was out getting his appendix removed. Despite all this, we led for most of the game, and held our own against St Mary's, right until they pulled away at the end. [Assume that those voting in the polls actually know/consider this.] Do they vote on us based on how we performed (i.e. not bad, but lost to an opponent just outside of the top 25), or do they also consider upside/potential? Or is it just up to the individual voting and there's no strict guidance?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
“The winning team has a dedication. It will have a core of veteran players who set the standards. They will not accept defeat.” --Merlin Olsen
- BigBlueDart
- Pick'em Champ - '17 FB Predict the Score
- Posts: 9113
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 7:57 am
- Location: Syracuse, UT
- Has thanked: 254 times
- Been thanked: 1049 times
Re: New Rankings
I'm not bothered by any of this. I mean, I recognize that our fall in the polls is disproportionate to the movement that big name teams have had, especially given our loss was a close one on the road against another good team. But it's still early in the season. We have some more good teams left on our schedule, and more opportunities to prove ourselves. If we can get some more wins it will be recognized in the polls over time.
- These users thanked the author BigBlueDart for the post:
- vegasaggie
-
- Posts: 4014
- Joined: November 15th, 2010, 10:13 am
- Has thanked: 92 times
- Been thanked: 869 times
Re: New Rankings
The question isn't the seed range. I think your right that the Aggies would merit a 6-10 seed with 1 more non-conference loss, 1 regular season conference loss, and a loss in the Mountain West Championship and if they get in I think they get that. But I'm not sure the committee will let them in under that scenario. Had they beat Washington last year it would give them a lot more room for error but regardless of the fact that the committee is supposed to ignore conference bid totals I can seen them penciling a abnormally weak MWC as a one bid conference under that scenario.ineptimusprime wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2019, 12:56 pmThe LSU win may end up being better than any win we got last year depending on how their season goes. If we can split with BYU and Florida, and split with SDSU in conference, we should have three marquee wins and be solidly in the 6-10 range seeding wise barring bad losses.
I think the Aggies have one more loss in them during the regular season regardless of who that loss is too. Three losses going into the MWC tourney would be really dicey regardless of metrics and tier wins.
-
- Posts: 4014
- Joined: November 15th, 2010, 10:13 am
- Has thanked: 92 times
- Been thanked: 869 times
Re: New Rankings
hickaggie wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2019, 1:29 pmThe question isn't the seed range. I think your right that the Aggies would merit a 6-10 seed with 1 more non-conference loss, 1 regular season conference loss, and a loss in the Mountain West Championship and if they get in I think they get that. But I'm not sure the committee will let them in under that scenario. Had they beat Washington last year it would give them a lot more room for error but regardless of the fact that the committee is supposed to ignore conference bid totals I can seen them penciling a abnormally weak MWC as a one bid conference under that scenario.ineptimusprime wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2019, 12:56 pmThe LSU win may end up being better than any win we got last year depending on how their season goes. If we can split with BYU and Florida, and split with SDSU in conference, we should have three marquee wins and be solidly in the 6-10 range seeding wise barring bad losses.
I think the Aggies have one more loss in them during the regular season regardless of who that loss is too. Three losses going into the MWC tourney would be really dicey regardless of metrics and tier wins.
As far as the polls go I could not give a (I can't express myself without swearing). Absolutely meaningless drivel by media voters who know very little outside their locale. The coaches poll is even less relevant as they are filled out by some AD intern. 25th to 50th is probably where USU is as far as tiers of teams.. Capable of beating any team once but have a long way to go to show they could make a meaningful NCAA run against the best and/or hottest teams. Can they get there. Yes if the stars align health wise this team could be a very tough out.
-
- Posts: 7793
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:07 pm
- Has thanked: 406 times
- Been thanked: 4809 times
Re: New Rankings
You think a USU team with only three losses and a win over LSU and at least two of BYU, SDSU (x2), and Florida (with only three losses we’ll have to win at least two of those games) is going to be on the bubble going into the conference tourney?hickaggie wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2019, 1:29 pmThe question isn't the seed range. I think your right that the Aggies would merit a 6-10 seed with 1 more non-conference loss, 1 regular season conference loss, and a loss in the Mountain West Championship and if they get in I think they get that. But I'm not sure the committee will let them in under that scenario. Had they beat Washington last year it would give them a lot more room for error but regardless of the fact that the committee is supposed to ignore conference bid totals I can seen them penciling a abnormally weak MWC as a one bid conference under that scenario.ineptimusprime wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2019, 12:56 pmThe LSU win may end up being better than any win we got last year depending on how their season goes. If we can split with BYU and Florida, and split with SDSU in conference, we should have three marquee wins and be solidly in the 6-10 range seeding wise barring bad losses.
I think the Aggies have one more loss in them during the regular season regardless of who that loss is too. Three losses going into the MWC tourney would be really dicey regardless of metrics and tier wins.
No way, man. We’re solidly in with that resume.
Reality is, we’re probably gonna have more losses than that by the conference tourney, but even then I doubt we’re a bubble team.
- These users thanked the author ineptimusprime for the post:
- Real Life Aggie
-
- Posts: 4014
- Joined: November 15th, 2010, 10:13 am
- Has thanked: 92 times
- Been thanked: 869 times
Re: New Rankings
Hope you are right. Logically you are spot on. Never doubt the NCAA's depravity though in screwing programs like USU. The Aggies are doing everything right to play by the new rules. But I think they will be focused and win the MW tourney if they are healthy.ineptimusprime wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2019, 8:55 pmYou think a USU team with only three losses and a win over LSU and at least two of BYU, SDSU (x2), and Florida (with only three losses we’ll have to win at least two of those games) is going to be on the bubble going into the conference tourney?hickaggie wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2019, 1:29 pmThe question isn't the seed range. I think your right that the Aggies would merit a 6-10 seed with 1 more non-conference loss, 1 regular season conference loss, and a loss in the Mountain West Championship and if they get in I think they get that. But I'm not sure the committee will let them in under that scenario. Had they beat Washington last year it would give them a lot more room for error but regardless of the fact that the committee is supposed to ignore conference bid totals I can seen them penciling a abnormally weak MWC as a one bid conference under that scenario.ineptimusprime wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2019, 12:56 pmThe LSU win may end up being better than any win we got last year depending on how their season goes. If we can split with BYU and Florida, and split with SDSU in conference, we should have three marquee wins and be solidly in the 6-10 range seeding wise barring bad losses.
I think the Aggies have one more loss in them during the regular season regardless of who that loss is too. Three losses going into the MWC tourney would be really dicey regardless of metrics and tier wins.
No way, man. We’re solidly in with that resume.
Reality is, we’re probably gonna have more losses than that by the conference tourney, but even then I doubt we’re a bubble team.
- scotlandog
- Posts: 2432
- Joined: February 16th, 2011, 7:18 pm
- Has thanked: 103 times
- Been thanked: 810 times
Re: New Rankings
With the new NET rankings, last years field followed pretty well to what NET rankings were saying. Good Q1 and Q2 wins and no bad Q3/4 losses got seeded in. The last teams left out on the bubble were pretty mediocre resumes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- These users thanked the author scotlandog for the post:
- BLUERUFiO
- BLUERUFiO
- Posts: 2877
- Joined: August 30th, 2011, 1:22 pm
- Location: Smithfield
- Has thanked: 2796 times
- Been thanked: 302 times
Re: New Rankings
I forgot about the new NET rankings. That makes me feel a little more comfortable.
GO AGGIES! GO AGGIES! HEY! HEY! HEY!
-
- Posts: 8374
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 1001 times
- Been thanked: 875 times
Re: New Rankings
After last night’s somewhat underwhelming performance against SJS, TeamRankings now predicts USU to finish 2nd in the conference behind SDS with 2 more losses than we were projected to have before the game. Here’s the basic write-up:
After beating San Jose St 71-59 yesterday, Utah St. is now projected to finish the regular season 24-5 (15-3 Mountain West).
• The odds that the Aggies make the NCAA tournament are down to 75%, a decrease of 6% since yesterday.
• We currently rank Utah St. as the #25 team in the country, and the #2 team in the Mountain West.
• Next game: Sat, Dec 7 vs. #131 Fresno St. Our power ratings give the Aggies a 92% chance to win.
After beating San Jose St 71-59 yesterday, Utah St. is now projected to finish the regular season 24-5 (15-3 Mountain West).
• The odds that the Aggies make the NCAA tournament are down to 75%, a decrease of 6% since yesterday.
• We currently rank Utah St. as the #25 team in the country, and the #2 team in the Mountain West.
• Next game: Sat, Dec 7 vs. #131 Fresno St. Our power ratings give the Aggies a 92% chance to win.
-
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: November 2nd, 2018, 7:52 am
- Has thanked: 1729 times
- Been thanked: 1084 times
Re: New Rankings
Funny how quickly they forget we're still winning without our starting, future NBA, center or his back-up.utaggies wrote: ↑December 5th, 2019, 8:15 amAfter last night’s somewhat underwhelming performance against SJS, TeamRankings now predicts USU to finish 2nd in the conference behind SDS with 2 more losses than we were projected to have before the game. Here’s the basic write-up:
After beating San Jose St 71-59 yesterday, Utah St. is now projected to finish the regular season 24-5 (15-3 Mountain West).
• The odds that the Aggies make the NCAA tournament are down to 75%, a decrease of 6% since yesterday.
• We currently rank Utah St. as the #25 team in the country, and the #2 team in the Mountain West.
• Next game: Sat, Dec 7 vs. #131 Fresno St. Our power ratings give the Aggies a 92% chance to win.
All good, just keep winning fellas.
Go Aggies!
- Roy McAvoy
- Posts: 7546
- Joined: November 2nd, 2011, 1:30 pm
- Has thanked: 1191 times
- Been thanked: 2960 times
Re: New Rankings
SDSU is just tearing it up. They started the year ranked #97 in kenpom and already up to #25. It is an absolute shame that game in Logan is so early in the year and that the students will be gone for it dangit.
- These users thanked the author Roy McAvoy for the post:
- Real Life Aggie
-
- Posts: 9454
- Joined: September 12th, 2018, 2:01 pm
- Has thanked: 2929 times
- Been thanked: 4358 times
Re: New Rankings
They are a legit good team. I wish it was the game in Logan was after the students returned, but still should be a fun atmosphere. Guys will have to play super well to get the victory.Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑December 5th, 2019, 8:51 amSDSU is just tearing it up. They started the year ranked #97 in kenpom and already up to #25. It is an absolute shame that game in Logan is so early in the year and that the students will be gone for it dangit.
-
- Posts: 9454
- Joined: September 12th, 2018, 2:01 pm
- Has thanked: 2929 times
- Been thanked: 4358 times
Re: New Rankings
I feel the same way. We won the game, it was certainly not pretty. I think playing with these expectations is a lot harder than people want to believe. Nice thing is as although we have not looked pretty we are 8-1 and had a 4 point lead against a top 30 team on the road with under 4 minutes to play. We are also playing without arguably a first team all MW player and Merrill is still slowed with his ankle issues. There is a lot time left to play and I think the team will improve.Aggie19 wrote: ↑December 5th, 2019, 8:47 amFunny how quickly they forget we're still winning without our starting, future NBA, center or his back-up.utaggies wrote: ↑December 5th, 2019, 8:15 amAfter last night’s somewhat underwhelming performance against SJS, TeamRankings now predicts USU to finish 2nd in the conference behind SDS with 2 more losses than we were projected to have before the game. Here’s the basic write-up:
After beating San Jose St 71-59 yesterday, Utah St. is now projected to finish the regular season 24-5 (15-3 Mountain West).
• The odds that the Aggies make the NCAA tournament are down to 75%, a decrease of 6% since yesterday.
• We currently rank Utah St. as the #25 team in the country, and the #2 team in the Mountain West.
• Next game: Sat, Dec 7 vs. #131 Fresno St. Our power ratings give the Aggies a 92% chance to win.
All good, just keep winning fellas.
- Real Life Aggie
- Posts: 3961
- Joined: April 10th, 2019, 4:28 pm
- Location: Tucson, AZ
- Has thanked: 5173 times
- Been thanked: 1816 times
Re: New Rankings
I mean, really though. SDSU looks great right now, and I think they're going to be some brutal competition, even once we have Queta back. I'm not frustrated by our drop to #2 per TeamRankings... I'm excited because it gives us more quality competition. And when we win, we'll look that much better.Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑December 5th, 2019, 8:51 amSDSU is just tearing it up. They started the year ranked #97 in kenpom and already up to #25. It is an absolute shame that game in Logan is so early in the year and that the students will be gone for it dangit.
- sam tingey
- Pick'em Champ - '13, '16 FB Predict the Score; '17, '18 Bowl
- Posts: 3633
- Joined: October 2nd, 2012, 8:40 am
- Has thanked: 1836 times
- Been thanked: 894 times
Re: New Rankings
I'm just glad that SDSU is not crapping the bed in OOC like normal, just to go tear it up during conference play.
-
- Posts: 1568
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:01 pm
- Has thanked: 169 times
- Been thanked: 299 times
Re: New Rankings
So as to not anger AK and others with starting a new thread on this topic I figured I'd ask my question here. When do the first NET rankings come out? I've googled and can't find a date or time frame.scotlandog wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2019, 12:07 pmWith the new NET rankings, last years field followed pretty well to what NET rankings were saying. Good Q1 and Q2 wins and no bad Q3/4 losses got seeded in. The last teams left out on the bubble were pretty mediocre resumes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Roy McAvoy
- Posts: 7546
- Joined: November 2nd, 2011, 1:30 pm
- Has thanked: 1191 times
- Been thanked: 2960 times
Re: New Rankings
I've been wondering the same thing! I've tried extensively to google it but can't get any answers.AgMan21 wrote: ↑December 10th, 2019, 2:13 pmSo as to not anger AK and others with starting a new thread on this topic I figured I'd ask my question here. When do the first NET rankings come out? I've googled and can't find a date or time frame.scotlandog wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2019, 12:07 pmWith the new NET rankings, last years field followed pretty well to what NET rankings were saying. Good Q1 and Q2 wins and no bad Q3/4 losses got seeded in. The last teams left out on the bubble were pretty mediocre resumes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- These users thanked the author Roy McAvoy for the post:
- AgMan21
- ProvoAggie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: June 14th, 2010, 1:00 am
- Location: Provo, Utah
- Has thanked: 1483 times
- Been thanked: 2938 times
- Contact:
Re: New Rankings
Last year they came out in November and were heavily criticized initially because if some weird placements with limited data. If I remember right, Loyola Marymount was a top 10 team. I read a few weeks ago that it would be in December or January this year. I couldn't find an exact date either though.AgMan21 wrote:So as to not anger AK and others with starting a new thread on this topic I figured I'd ask my question here. When do the first NET rankings come out? I've googled and can't find a date or time frame.scotlandog wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2019, 12:07 pmWith the new NET rankings, last years field followed pretty well to what NET rankings were saying. Good Q1 and Q2 wins and no bad Q3/4 losses got seeded in. The last teams left out on the bubble were pretty mediocre resumes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
- Roy McAvoy
- Posts: 7546
- Joined: November 2nd, 2011, 1:30 pm
- Has thanked: 1191 times
- Been thanked: 2960 times
Re: New Rankings
The first net rankings are coming out tomorrow. I expect us to be around #40-#50.AgMan21 wrote: ↑December 10th, 2019, 2:13 pmSo as to not anger AK and others with starting a new thread on this topic I figured I'd ask my question here. When do the first NET rankings come out? I've googled and can't find a date or time frame.scotlandog wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2019, 12:07 pmWith the new NET rankings, last years field followed pretty well to what NET rankings were saying. Good Q1 and Q2 wins and no bad Q3/4 losses got seeded in. The last teams left out on the bubble were pretty mediocre resumes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Real Life Aggie
- Posts: 3961
- Joined: April 10th, 2019, 4:28 pm
- Location: Tucson, AZ
- Has thanked: 5173 times
- Been thanked: 1816 times
Re: New Rankings
And given how we've looked in the past couple of games, I think that's appropriate.Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑December 15th, 2019, 9:30 amThe first net rankings are coming out tomorrow. I expect us to be around #40-#50.AgMan21 wrote: ↑December 10th, 2019, 2:13 pmSo as to not anger AK and others with starting a new thread on this topic I figured I'd ask my question here. When do the first NET rankings come out? I've googled and can't find a date or time frame.scotlandog wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2019, 12:07 pmWith the new NET rankings, last years field followed pretty well to what NET rankings were saying. Good Q1 and Q2 wins and no bad Q3/4 losses got seeded in. The last teams left out on the bubble were pretty mediocre resumes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There's a lot of season left, a lot of time to work through the issues we have right now. I still believe we will make it to the tournament seeded better than last year.
- brownjeans
- Flatulent
- Posts: 18612
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 10:21 am
- Has thanked: 951 times
- Been thanked: 1739 times
Re: New Rankings
Agreed. If you compare last year's schedule and this year's, we're on a stronger position now than we were last year.Real Life Aggie wrote: ↑December 15th, 2019, 2:50 pmThere's a lot of season left, a lot of time to work through the issues we have right now. I still believe we will make it to the tournament seeded better than last year.
- Roy McAvoy
- Posts: 7546
- Joined: November 2nd, 2011, 1:30 pm
- Has thanked: 1191 times
- Been thanked: 2960 times
Re: New Rankings
Lol. SDSU is #3 in the nation in the 1st release of the Net rankings. This is GREAT new for USU, actually.
- ProvoAggie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: June 14th, 2010, 1:00 am
- Location: Provo, Utah
- Has thanked: 1483 times
- Been thanked: 2938 times
- Contact:
Re: New Rankings
USU is 47. Full rankings here:Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑December 16th, 2019, 9:14 amLol. SDSU is #3 in the nation in the 1st release of the Net rankings. This is GREAT new for USU, actually.
https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi/St ... 202019.pdf