Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
Thanks for a great season of MBB!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MtnWasp" data-source="post: 699450" data-attributes="member: 4110"><p>Defining standard by which we define a successful season, where we place that bar, is an interesting topic for discussion.</p><p></p><p>Reaching the NCAAT is a simple, strait-forward standard to set.</p><p></p><p>I imprinted on the game in the eighties, with GT reaching the NCAAT for 9 strait seasons. To be honest, I grew to assume that GT would be an NCAAT team.</p><p></p><p>But there have been substantial changes in the arena since then that has significantly raised the bar in terms of reaching the Tournament:</p><p></p><p>First, there are more eligible teams. There are now 353 eligible programs. There are more conferences and more automatic bids that are only partially compensated by play-in addendums. </p><p></p><p>Second, and probably most significant is the rise of the Mid-Major programs. There has developed substantial parity in budget and quality of play by Mid-major programs. Gonzaga may be the poster-boy for this movement, but it is only representative of a greater general trend. Mid Major programs can now budget to keep good coaches and the days where the mid-majors were a coaching farm system for the High Majors is a thing of the past.</p><p></p><p>ACC conference expansion to 15 teams and parity within the ACC is also problematic in terms of getting an NCAAT bid. What we saw this season in conference was a dramatic compression of the standings with teams at the top moving down and teams at the bottom moving up. The records of all 15 teams gravitated toward .500 due to parity,which makes getting an at-large bid out of conference more difficult. </p><p></p><p>Fourth, the AAU system and the international scene are producing more college ready talent that is being spread more evenly throughout the ranks. We still have a few blue-blood programs that monopolize the Blue Chips, but other than that, there is a lot of jockeying for talent deeper into the ranks. </p><p></p><p>The result is parity. Quality of play is spreading down the food-chain. there are more programs playing good, competitive basketball. </p><p></p><p>The present NCAAT field includes less than 20% of eligible teams, and there are more competitive teams. The situation is not like it was in the eighties. </p><p></p><p>I went back to look at those 9 strait NCAAT bids that Cremins' teams received from 1985-1993. I don't think that three of those nine teams make the NCAAT field today. The 1987 team was 7-7 (5th out of 8) in conference and 16-13 overall. The 1991 team was 6-8 in conference (5th) and 17-13 overall, The 1993 team was 8-8 in conference (6th) and 19-11 overall. That might have been a bubble team. Those were the "glory days"</p><p></p><p>Using an NCAAT bid as the bar of "acceptable" is pretty tough, statistically speaking. I know that fans of the Blue Blood programs can think that way, but not sure about GT. </p><p></p><p>I tend to think that Being .500 in conference, winning 20 games and being "bubbly" is a good year. I think under the currently climate, getting an NCAAT bid out of the ACC is a fine season, indeed. Even if a roster is set up to look promising, pretty much everything has to go right for that to translate to a bid. Maybe the NCAAT shouldn't be a hard and fast expectation because so many things have to go just right to make it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MtnWasp, post: 699450, member: 4110"] Defining standard by which we define a successful season, where we place that bar, is an interesting topic for discussion. Reaching the NCAAT is a simple, strait-forward standard to set. I imprinted on the game in the eighties, with GT reaching the NCAAT for 9 strait seasons. To be honest, I grew to assume that GT would be an NCAAT team. But there have been substantial changes in the arena since then that has significantly raised the bar in terms of reaching the Tournament: First, there are more eligible teams. There are now 353 eligible programs. There are more conferences and more automatic bids that are only partially compensated by play-in addendums. Second, and probably most significant is the rise of the Mid-Major programs. There has developed substantial parity in budget and quality of play by Mid-major programs. Gonzaga may be the poster-boy for this movement, but it is only representative of a greater general trend. Mid Major programs can now budget to keep good coaches and the days where the mid-majors were a coaching farm system for the High Majors is a thing of the past. ACC conference expansion to 15 teams and parity within the ACC is also problematic in terms of getting an NCAAT bid. What we saw this season in conference was a dramatic compression of the standings with teams at the top moving down and teams at the bottom moving up. The records of all 15 teams gravitated toward .500 due to parity,which makes getting an at-large bid out of conference more difficult. Fourth, the AAU system and the international scene are producing more college ready talent that is being spread more evenly throughout the ranks. We still have a few blue-blood programs that monopolize the Blue Chips, but other than that, there is a lot of jockeying for talent deeper into the ranks. The result is parity. Quality of play is spreading down the food-chain. there are more programs playing good, competitive basketball. The present NCAAT field includes less than 20% of eligible teams, and there are more competitive teams. The situation is not like it was in the eighties. I went back to look at those 9 strait NCAAT bids that Cremins' teams received from 1985-1993. I don't think that three of those nine teams make the NCAAT field today. The 1987 team was 7-7 (5th out of 8) in conference and 16-13 overall. The 1991 team was 6-8 in conference (5th) and 17-13 overall, The 1993 team was 8-8 in conference (6th) and 19-11 overall. That might have been a bubble team. Those were the "glory days" Using an NCAAT bid as the bar of "acceptable" is pretty tough, statistically speaking. I know that fans of the Blue Blood programs can think that way, but not sure about GT. I tend to think that Being .500 in conference, winning 20 games and being "bubbly" is a good year. I think under the currently climate, getting an NCAAT bid out of the ACC is a fine season, indeed. Even if a roster is set up to look promising, pretty much everything has to go right for that to translate to a bid. Maybe the NCAAT shouldn't be a hard and fast expectation because so many things have to go just right to make it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who won the ACC Coach of the Year Award in 2014?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
Thanks for a great season of MBB!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top