Who has legitimate at large chances?

[musiccitybulldog]

So far I see Creighton and Wichita with legitamate chances. Neither team can afford more than a couple confernce losses and those would have to come from top 3/4 conference teams.
I also wonder how much attention is paid to fan bases, such as Wichita, which would appear to "travel" well and fill seats and bring excitement at first round venues.

[glm38]

Where was I a couple days ago? What does that even mean? I am posting in the thread that was put up today about at-large bids.

This is about "at-large chances". There are 4 teams with "at-large chances" as it currently stands. The numbers, and the national pundits back it up.

That's just his latest schtick champ. If a poster from an opposing fan base doesn't post for a few days then he calls them out for being more or less "fair weather" fans. The thing is it's only human nature for fans to come on here and talk about their team after a big win. After a big loss there really isn't as much to say.

[omahaben]

I also wonder how much attention is paid to fan bases, such as Wichita, which would appear to "travel" well and fill seats and bring excitement at first round venues.

None. The NCAA wants its first round sites sold out well before the teams are ever picked.

[Ace Dad]

Two bids at most. And, Creighton and WSU better beat the Weaker Sisters in the Valley. WSU barely escaped at Evansville. The Committee will not understand and care if our top two teams cannot beat our so called weaker teams.

[Snaggletooth]

Two bids at most. And, Creighton and WSU better beat the Weaker Sisters in the Valley. WSU barely escaped at Evansville. The Committee will not understand and care if our top two teams cannot beat our so called weaker teams.

Fortunately for the valley wsu did find away to hang on.

But you do highlight one of the problems with the mvc - certain teams pretty much just sucked in non-conference play but as soon as conference play seem to get motivated. That is the difference between this year and 2006 - then almost every team in the mvc had a good non-conf and no loss was looked down on.

Maybe Elgin needs to send a memo out - "if u are going to suck during non-conference play, please continue to suck the reset of the way".

[BirdmanBB]

I don't think you can really count anyone out yet. There are more quality wins available in conference play this year than years past. This along with the bracketbusters will keep quite a few valley teams in the fold. You have to remember, with the now 68 team field it became that much easier for teams to get in with a slightly weaker resume. The only thing that was really holding us back last year was a weak showing in the bracketbusters and the challenge. We already excelled at one of those this year.

ESPN and other news outlets have done us a huge favor in talking about the strength of our conference this year and how its going to be an exciting race. I think this will help us a lot down the road when trying to attain multiple bids. We haven't had that in the past, and if the committee believes our conference is a superior one, they will give more credit for wins within it.

I have also noticed in reading random articles so far this year that it seems like there is going to be a good media presence at the MVC tourney this year.

[PowderBlue]

ISUb has the marquee non-conference win to help them. If they finish top 3 with 13+ wins and win some in STL and the BB they will put themselves in position for an at-large

1-2 to start the conference isn't a HUGE surprise for ISUb considering they've played two road games against top half of the conference teams...BUT...they're going to have to steal more than a couple on the road to be a 13 win team. Based on the way they've looked in the first three games, they aren't a 13 win team.

[Ace Dad]

Two bids at most. And, Creighton and WSU better beat the Weaker Sisters in the Valley. WSU barely escaped at Evansville. The Committee will not understand and care if our top two teams cannot beat our so called weaker teams.

Fortunately for the valley wsu did find away to hang on.

But you do highlight one of the problems with the mvc - certain teams pretty much just sucked in non-conference play but as soon as conference play seem to get motivated. That is the difference between this year and 2006 - then almost every team in the mvc had a good non-conf and no loss was looked down on.

Maybe Elgin needs to send a memo out - "if u are going to suck during non-conference play, please continue to suck the reset of the way".

There is another perspective:

Some teams take longer to "jell" and the nonconference period allows them to transition from ragged play to competitive play. Sometimes a weaker team grows more than a stronger team during OOC play and when conference games start, the weaker team can knock off the stronger team, if the stronger team does not play to their capability. Evansville's record is deceiving based on the number of close losses we have had.

[DoubleJayAlum]

The only thing that was really holding us back last year was a weak showing in the bracketbusters and the challenge.

You mean the only thing other than the conference's noncon performance, right?

[BirdmanBB]

The only thing that was really holding us back last year was a weak showing in the bracketbusters and the challenge.

You mean the only thing other than the conference's noncon performance, right?

No, because when the bracketbusters came around, we had teams who many considered in if they performed well in the event. We ended up falling flat in them last year and therefore lost bids to teams like VCU. Had WSU beat them at home, they might have made it in and could have been the ones making a run to the final 4, where VCU would have been in the NIT.