PonyFans.com

I want to see SMU win every game we play. However, if we win out in the regular season we would at the very least tie Cincinnati for the regular season American Conference Championship. If we do that we would be safely in the field of 65. At that point, we might be better off taking an early loss and resting up of the NCAA tournament.

Booo to all of you who think losing helps us in any way.

smusic 00 wrote:Booo to all of you who think losing helps us in any way.

Amen!

Word twisters. All of you. I said best for our conference. Would be to get 3 in and that looks like the only way. Also recruits in the future are more likely to benefit from the extra scratch from the credits than a tourney conference champ. Just sayin. I would never root against the ponies.

So you are saying if SMU plays UConn in the finals it would be in smu's best interest to lose, but you would root for SMU even though you would be rooting against smu's best interest in you own opinion?

Grant Carter wrote:So you are saying if SMU plays UConn in the finals it would be in smu's best interest to lose, but you would root for SMU even though you would be rooting against smu's best interest in you own opinion?

You win

Being in Hartford and celebrating the AAC tourney championship run with LB, Jank and the team was definitely something I'd like to do again this year. I agree that the deck is stacked but winning would make it even sweeter.

Any other scenario other than a loss in the championship does have some kind of fringe benefit: rest, a third team..... whatever.

But there is no place in this guy's thinking for anything other than 2 wins over Mic from here on out.

If we tie with Cincy at the top of the AAC standings, how is the 1 seed determined? 1 seed could have a big advantage getting the 8/9 winner, especially if UConn ends up 7th since they will be playing at home.

I think that after head to head they would look at record against 3rd place team, 4th place team, etc down the line until one team had a better record. I do not know if they would treat being 2-0 against a team differently than being 1-0 against them. That is my recollection from a couple of years ago anyway.

Good point about the advantage for the 1 seed.

Grant Carter wrote:I think that after head to head they would look at record against 3rd place team, 4th place team, etc down the line until one team had a better record. I do not know if they would treat being 2-0 against a team differently than being 1-0 against them. That is my recollection from a couple of years ago anyway.

Good point about the advantage for the 1 seed.

Interesting if they did it that way, as if we both end up with just one loss (to each other), there isn't really a "fair" way to do it. But looking at teams we only play once, obviously for us it's USF and UCF and for them it's East Carolina and Memphis. In that scenario, we would just need Memphis to finish higher in the standings than UCF.

Found the below in the AAC basketball media guide, so looks like Grant Carter is correct and if we are both tied with just one conference loss (I know, LONG way to go before that happens), then it would be determined by who finishes higher in AAC, Memphis or UCF. Memphis and we would be one seed, UCF and Cincy would be one seed.

Two-Team Tie
1. Regular season head-to-head results (one or two games). If the tied teams split
their two games, then proceed to Step 2.
2. Each team’s record vs. the team or tied teams occupying the highest position in the
standings. Continue down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.
When comparing records against a single team or collective tied teams (before ties
are broken), the following may apply:
a. If the games played against the team or group are equal, winning percentage
prevails.
b. If the games played against the team or group are unequal, the following
scenarios apply:
i. Most wins do prevail only if the team with fewer wins could not equal that
win total if they played the same number of games. Two examples of many
scenarios that do provide an advantage:
1) Team A 2-0 2) Team A 3-0
Team B 0-1 Team B 1-1
ii. Most wins do not prevail if the team with fewer wins could equal or surpass
the win total of the other team. Two examples of many scenarios that do not
provide an advantage:
1) Team A 1-1 2) Team A 2-0
Team B 0-1 Team B 1-0
iii. Fewer losses do not prevail if the teams have the same number of wins and if
the team with fewer games could equal or surpass the loss total of the other
team. Two examples of many scenarios that do not provide an advantage:
1) Team A 1-0 2) Team A 0-1
Team B 1-1 Team B 0-2
c. If an advantage is not determined, proceed to the next team or group in the
standings for comparison.
d. If the tie cannot be broken after continuing down through the last team or
teams in the standings, revert back to comparing records against the top teams
in order and allow winning percentage to prevail even if there is a comparison of
unequal games. Only then, if the percentages are both 1.000, is 2-0 better than
1-0. However, the reverse is not true – no team gains advantage when all have a
.000 winning percentage (0-1 is never better than 0-2).

my head hurts

ebrooks11 wrote:Word twisters. All of you. I said best for our conference. Would be to get 3 in and that looks like the only way. Also recruits in the future are more likely to benefit from the extra scratch from the credits than a tourney conference champ. Just sayin. I would never root against the ponies.

Performance in the tournament by the conference teams will be better than the number that actually get in. I would rather have SMU and Cincy in sweet 16 or Final Four than 3 total teams in. Especially if the 3rd team gets blown out by a 5/6/7 seeded team.

The big east conference rose to prominence when it had 3 teams in the final 4 in 1985.

I want SMU to win. Not that complicated. Stop overthinking this, PFs.