SIU AD - WSU Too Big For Their Britches

[Wufan]

Oh my I am so wounded - LOL

I'm not angry, just disappointed.

[Born2Shock]

I like Tommy Bell but I don't see a lot of upside to this comment. Wichita's success has been great for the Valley and came at a critical time after CU left. I'd love to see other programs (especially the one in Carbondale) close the gap rather than see WSU come back to the pack. Certainly would love to keep the Shockers in the conference for the long haul.

[mule]

Simply Wow - I complement Mike on an interesting post and because the content wasn't favorable to WSU it is followed followed by WSU looking to trash UE and pivot from the facts Mike posted.

The sun does not only rise and set in Wichita.

PS - I didn't make any mention of UE yet still see the wrath of WSU posters.

I do believe it was the "rare to see WSU scramble comment." You, mule and I believe one other poster can't wait to try and "get" WSU and when you find out that it didn't really work out, you accuse WSU of trashing the Aces. If you make those types of comments, you will see backlash. Take responsibility for your words.

No accusations necessary! I just read the 3 posts sandwiched between UEACES80s 2 posts by the WSU fans.

[Cdizzle]

I like Tommy Bell but I don't see a lot of upside to this comment. Wichita's success has been great for the Valley and came at a critical time after CU left. I'd love to see other programs (especially the one in Carbondale) close the gap rather than see WSU come back to the pack. Certainly would love to keep the Shockers in the conference for the long haul.

See. It's not that hard to get it.

[RoyalShock]

I like Tommy Bell but I don't see a lot of upside to this comment. Wichita's success has been great for the Valley and came at a critical time after CU left. I'd love to see other programs (especially the one in Carbondale) close the gap rather than see WSU come back to the pack. Certainly would love to keep the Shockers in the conference for the long haul.

See. It's not that hard to get it.

siudawgs for SIU AD!

[Veritas]

Loyola took CU's place in the MVC.

No MVC team could match WSU's post season success (Sweet 16 in 2006 and Final 4 in 2013) during the last 17 years of CU's membership (1996-97 through 2012-13) when MVC membership was the same. SIU did have two Sweet 16 appearances during that time frame.

No MVC team came close to CU's overall conference success during that same 17 year period (WSU figures in parenthesis for comparison):
Regular Season MVC Win Percentage .673 (.546)
Regular Season Championships 4 (2)
MVC Tournament Championships 8 (0)
NCAA Tournament Appearances 9 (3)
20-win seasons 14 (7)
10-win MVC conference seasons 17 (9)

Interesting CU did fairly well during the great Shocker doldrum period of late 90s / early 00s. There is certainly a direct correlation.
Also interesting to see it noted that CU measures the success wholly on the aforementioned while the Shox measure their success also in part on their tournament results.
CU always disappointed the MoVal in the NCAA tournament. They
peaked to get that tournament invite and then they were gassed. Excluding the 1 at large invite, wonder how many more CU would have received had they not won the MoVal tournament. WSU, BU, UNI all have represented the MoVal much better than the ever disappointing BJs in the NCAA tournament. Their lack of success is a real

[Cdizzle]

WSU, BU, UNI all have represented the MoVal much better than the ever disappointing BJs in the NCAA tournament. Their lack of success is a real

Not really. Bunch of shooters in big arenas with average coaching and no defense. That's not a recipe for success on the national scene.

[LanceShock]

Excluding the 1 at large invite, wonder how many more CU would have received had they not won the MoVal tournament.

As much as I hate to defend Creighton, only in 2002 did the Bluejays get a 12 seed or lower that would indicate that only got in because of winning the tournament. Here are the years, seed, and record for Creighton:

Year(Seed) Record
1999(10) 1-1
2000(10) 0-1
2001(10) 0-1
2002(12) 1-1
2003(6) 0-1
2005(10) 0-1
2007(10) 0-1
2012(8) 1-1
2013(7) 1-1

[Stickboy46]

Excluding the 1 at large invite, wonder how many more CU would have received had they not won the MoVal tournament.

As much as I hate to defend Creighton, only in 2002 did the Bluejays get a 12 seed or lower that would indicate that only got in because of winning the tournament. Here are the years, seed, and record for Creighton:

Year(Seed) Record
1999(10) 1-1
2000(10) 0-1
2001(10) 0-1
2002(12) 1-1
2003(6) 0-1
2005(10) 0-1
2007(10) 0-1
2012(8) 1-1
2013(7) 1-1

Is that binary? because that's a lot of Zero's and Ones ... no Twos

[Veritas]

Excluding the 1 at large invite, wonder how many more CU would have received had they not won the MoVal tournament.

As much as I hate to defend Creighton, only in 2002 did the Bluejays get a 12 seed or lower that would indicate that only got in because of winning the tournament. Here are the years, seed, and record for Creighton:

Year(Seed) Record
1999(10) 1-1
2000(10) 0-1
2001(10) 0-1
2002(12) 1-1
2003(6) 0-1
2005(10) 0-1
2007(10) 0-1
2012(8) 1-1
2013(7) 1-1

Is that binary? because that's a lot of Zero's and Ones ... no Twos

Lol... so true. That tournament record pretty much sums it up. Pretty sad results.
Back to the poster who said WSU took the place of CU. I think you're badly misinformed.
CU=Consistently Underwhelming