POTWs for the week of Feb 28th:
POTWs for the week of Feb 28th:
Itās almost like if you hire the right coach, they donāt need four five six years to turn things around!
McCascland took over in 2017. The year before UNT went 8-22. The year before that, 12-20. The year before that, 14-17.
In his first year, he went 20-18 and won the CBI.
Second year he went 21-12.
Third year he went 20-11 and finished first in CUSA.
Fourth year he went 18-10, won the CUSA tournament, went dancing, and won a first round game.
This year UNT Is 22-4 and 15-1 in conference.
UNT hired a guy who went to two D-II Elite 8s. Then he did a one year stop off at a Sunbelt school, where he took a team that was 10-20 the year prior, 11-18 the year before that, and took them to 20-12 in his lone year there.
This is what a quality coaching hire looks like. This is what a turnaround looks like. This is what progress looks like. Funny enough, UNT also seems to be playing the type basketball we masquerade around trying to convince other people we play.
Anyone who is convinced āwe canāt get those guys to come hereā just doesnāt understand what you should be looking for. Same group of people thatās probably happy to keep ole Ronny around for a few more years because heās āmaking progress.ā
You are correctā¦and we jokingly say this a lot but itās true. This basketball league is horrid. Horrid. A good (not great) coach with good (not great) talent can win this league quickly.
Like most years, there are 2 decent teams in the league this yearā¦UAB & North Texas and they are not worldbeaters.
The other 12 teams are basically 100+ in the NET rankings (MTSU is at 98)ā¦8 of them over 173 (edited per Runās post). Trash. You only really have 4 teams that are considered decentā¦the other 2/3 of your schedule here is a cake walkā¦or should be.
A 4-5 year time frame may be needed to turn a team into a NCAA at large type quality teamā¦but not to compete to win in this trash league. As the North Texas coach proves.
1 Like
Conference NET rankings as of Feb 28th:
38 North Texas
54 UAB
98 Middle Tennessee
103 LA Tech
124 WKU
136 FAU
173 UTEP
181 CHARLOTTE
199 ODU
207 Rice
240 Marshall
246 FIU
332 UTSA
342 Southern Miss
Does todays CUSA net rankings look significantly different than the AAC with teams we will actually be in the league with? I dont think AAC basketball is as much of a step up as its been made out to be on this boardā¦are ECU, USF, Tulane, and Tulsa sub 100 net rankings teams? I would be willing to bet the A10 as we played in was a stronger league than the future AAC we are joining.
AAC rankings per NET. Of course, UHās top 5 placement elevates UM and SMU, both of which have wins over the Cougars (24-4, 13-2 AAC).
NOTE: teams listed in italics leaving AAC for the Big XII in 2023.
3 Houston
42 Memphis
47 SMU
84 Wichita State
88 UCF
99 Cincy
101 Tulane
113 Temple
177 ECU
182 Tulsa
241 USF
No sub 300 teams??? AAC is NEXT level!
None yet. Subtract #3 UH and add #332 UTSA in 2023.
Conference NET rankings as of Mar 6th:
44 North Texas
54 UAB
104 LA Tech
105 Middle Tennessee
121 WKU
125 FAU
167 UTEP
179 CHARLOTTE
193 ODU
222 Rice
241 Marshall
259 FIU
321 UTSA
342 Southern Miss
Looking over the box score for the Middle Tennessee @ ODU game and see that MT was again without leading scorer Josh Jefferson. Most likely would have beaten both the Niners and Monarchs if he had been available, but those are the breaks!
Maybe but you play who is in front of you. This time of year every team, including ours, is banged up and missing people.
1 Like
How can one loss kick UNT out?
Their resume is still really strong.
Best case for scenario is that UNT loses the CUSA final to whichever team has the 2nd best RPI. I can see them still getting in then, though their seeding would suffer.
I think the biggest issue for UNT is they have only one Q1 win and that was against UAB. Not saying thatās right but when the committee is crunching numbers, going to be a factor.
Youāre right, Iām sure. But the NET is just the RPI recreated with the power conference bias preserved after the RPI finally removed it. So the quad 1 stuff is just a reinforcement of that bias. What is their quad 2 record? Iām guessing itās really good. And the only difference is that the teams in quad 1 played more home games on average.
NTās NET quadrant W-L numbers:
Q1 = 1-1
Q2 = 5-2
Q3 = 4-2
Q4 = 11-0
2 Likes
By comparisonā¦letās see our NET quadrant numbers!