2021 MVC Transfers

[Saluki 4 Life]

I've said it a couple times but if Krut and Williamson come back, it's freaking 2006 again.

UNI, Loyola, Drake and Missouri State are freaking loaded. Loaded to the point where I bet all 4 of them sweep the bottom 6 and have just out and out wars with each other.

Loyola is going to Atlantis. UNI has Wisconsin, Boise State, Richmond, Marshall plus an MTE (probably Vegas Invite) scheduled. If Drake and MSU can up their scheduling and win some games, 4 bids isn't a pipe dream

unfortunately, I think it is... The bottom will definitely pick off some of the teams you mentioned and almost any loss in the valley is now considered a bad loss with the metrics. It takes a team nearly going undefeated in the Valley anymore to get an at large. It sucks, but that is just the way it has been trending. The best chance is to have 2 dominant teams and have a 3rd win Arch Madness. Unless, like you said teams can schedule the big boys and win games in the non conference. It is not a pipe dream in that the teams are good enough, the pipe dream may be putting together the schedule then basically dominating that schedule along with a very hard and undervalued Valley. We all know even good teams can go to Peoria or Evansville and get picked off, happens all the time and that basically ends at large hopes these days.

[siudawgs]

I've said it a couple times but if Krut and Williamson come back, it's freaking 2006 again.

UNI, Loyola, Drake and Missouri State are freaking loaded. Loaded to the point where I bet all 4 of them sweep the bottom 6 and have just out and out wars with each other.

Loyola is going to Atlantis. UNI has Wisconsin, Boise State, Richmond, Marshall plus an MTE (probably Vegas Invite) scheduled. If Drake and MSU can up their scheduling and win some games, 4 bids isn't a pipe dream

unfortunately, I think it is... The bottom will definitely pick off some of the teams you mentioned and almost any loss in the valley is now considered a bad loss with the metrics. It takes a team nearly going undefeated in the Valley anymore to get an at large. It sucks, but that is just the way it has been trending. The best chance is to have 2 dominant teams and have a 3rd win Arch Madness. Unless, like you said teams can schedule the big boys and win games in the non conference. It is not a pipe dream in that the teams are good enough, the pipe dream may be putting together the schedule then basically dominating that schedule along with a very hard and undervalued Valley. We all know even good teams can go to Peoria or Evansville and get picked off, happens all the time and that basically ends at large hopes these days.

It was really good to see Drake get the at-large despite its late stumbles at also-rans Valpo and Bradley.

But, Drake started the year 18-0, which ain't exactly easy. I guess that's the point: MVC teams have to have something very special on their resume to grab an at-large, be it an amazing streak like Drake had or some very significant non-conference wins, which is the more likely scenario. Top MVC teams have to find ways to get those opportunities on their schedules and then cash them in as often as possible.

I do see potential for next year to be another multibid year, but of course there's a long way to go in the offseason, with many recruiting, transferring, injury and scheduling questions still to sort themselves out.

[Red]

I've said it a couple times but if Krut and Williamson come back, it's freaking 2006 again.

UNI, Loyola, Drake and Missouri State are freaking loaded. Loaded to the point where I bet all 4 of them sweep the bottom 6 and have just out and out wars with each other.

Loyola is going to Atlantis. UNI has Wisconsin, Boise State, Richmond, Marshall plus an MTE (probably Vegas Invite) scheduled. If Drake and MSU can up their scheduling and win some games, 4 bids isn't a pipe dream

unfortunately, I think it is... The bottom will definitely pick off some of the teams you mentioned and almost any loss in the valley is now considered a bad loss with the metrics. It takes a team nearly going undefeated in the Valley anymore to get an at large. It sucks, but that is just the way it has been trending. The best chance is to have 2 dominant teams and have a 3rd win Arch Madness. Unless, like you said teams can schedule the big boys and win games in the non conference. It is not a pipe dream in that the teams are good enough, the pipe dream may be putting together the schedule then basically dominating that schedule along with a very hard and undervalued Valley. We all know even good teams can go to Peoria or Evansville and get picked off, happens all the time and that basically ends at large hopes these days.

It was really good to see Drake get the at-large despite its late stumbles at also-rans Valpo and Bradley.

But, Drake started the year 18-0, which ain't exactly easy. I guess that's the point: MVC teams have to have something very special on their resume to grab an at-large, be it an amazing streak like Drake had or some very significant non-conference wins, which is the more likely scenario. Top MVC teams have to find ways to get those opportunities on their schedules and then cash them in as often as possible.

I do see potential for next year to be another multibid year, but of course there's a long way to go in the offseason, with many recruiting, transferring, injury and scheduling questions still to sort themselves out.

And they were still literally the last team in the field.

[siudawgs]

True, but Drake also had no major non-con wins, did not win the regular season title and had aforementioned losses against lower-half teams Bradley and Valpo. The bottom line is getting at-larges is very difficult for MVC teams but certainly not outta the question with a very strong resume, pending the fickle whims of a given selection committee.

[MNPanthers]

Drake was last in the field cause their SOS was horrendous and when they did lose, they lost in ugly fashion. That's a bad recipe for an at large, but they had a lot of stars align in a bizarre year.

Loyola and Drakes resumes were really similar. The difference was Loyola challenged themselves in OOC, (granted part of that was poaching UNI's missed game vs Wisco) and when they did lose they kept it competitive. Loyola was comfortably in the bracket even without the auto bid

Drake, Loyola, Missouri State, and UNI are all capable of making noise in the OOC against quality teams. The question is who is willing to put their money where their mouth is?

[Jsnhbe1Birds]

True, but Drake also had no major non-con wins, did not win the regular season title and had aforementioned losses against lower-half teams Bradley and Valpo. The bottom line is getting at-larges is very difficult for MVC teams but certainly not outta the question with a very strong resume, pending the fickle whims of a given selection committee.

Bottom line: win. Drake had an 86% win percentage and barely got in (no "good" wins according to experts besides Loyola). With 4 more games to equal the usual 33 85% is 28-5. If you go 28-5 you should get in even with no good wins and a couple bad losses.

[Action10]

If you have a team capable of making the NCAA Tournament, try to get in a quality exempt event and take buy games against high-level teams from power conferences. You will get a bunch of teams turning you down, but call them all. Also, don't be stubborn about getting a home game. Big Ten teams don't need to play MVC teams, but good MVC teams could darn sure a game with a Big Ten team. Outside of Indiana (twice), how many high major teams did SIU play at home when they made 6 straight NCAA trips? On the other hand, how many high major teams did SIU play in general during that time that weren't a part of an in-season exempt tournament? They were playing top level mid-major teams constantly though and the MVC was viewed differently.
Just something to ponder.

[Kyle_Saluki_17]

True, but Drake also had no major non-con wins, did not win the regular season title and had aforementioned losses against lower-half teams Bradley and Valpo. The bottom line is getting at-larges is very difficult for MVC teams but certainly not outta the question with a very strong resume, pending the fickle whims of a given selection committee.

Bottom line: win. Drake had an 86% win percentage and barely got in (no "good" wins according to experts besides Loyola). With 4 more games to equal the usual 33 85% is 28-5. If you go 28-5 you should get in even with no good wins and a couple bad losses.

That simply isn't true. Hey everyone, lets schedule 25 games against Chicago State and Mississippi Valley State caliber teams so we can go 25-0. This is why good wins are valued. Don't get me wrong, I know the deck is stacked against us. It frustrates me that a Big 10 team can go 17-15 and get in the tournament too.

But looking at an example this year...Belmont. They played 1 game against a Q2 opponent. Literally 1. And they lost that game. They went 25-4 (against D1 teams). How can you justify giving them an at-large beating the cupcakes of the OVC every night?

There is a balance between good records and quality of opponents. I think that the NCAA swings way too much towards the quality of opponents. But you can't simply ignore that and go purely off total wins.

[Adunk33]

Added: Loyola's Cooper Kaifes. Kid scorched the nets as a freshman a couple of seasons ago. Sustained an injury that kept him out a year and struggled this season. Every MVC school has now had at least one transfer.

[Adunk33]

Updated: Illinois State's Dedric Boyd to Tenn State. Should be a good spot for him. He'll have the green light.