Statements like this simply undercut your argument.
You certainly must be aware that no matter who won only the winner was going to be invited. The only thing having Gonzaga win over St. Mary’s does for the conference is…oh let me see…nothing…;.
The “statement” does quite the opposite. You see, this is what I am talking about “not understanding”. The answer to this statement is simple… IT WOULD HAVE ENDED GONZAGA’S STREAK OF NCAA TOURNAMENT INVITES. So you would be wrong that it does nothing. The fact that you don’t realize this or even understand the significance of it demonstrates my assertion in the first place. You don’t have to believe it, but if you don’t understand it…
I mean it’s kind of cool that you have the education and ability to use some impressive vocabulary words like “preponderance”, “marshal” and “bloviating”. I’m sure this helps you, and hopefully others (that is the intent, correct?) to see that your opinions and beliefs are more valuable, if not superior, to mine.
The problem with the wcc tournament is that Gonzaga didn’t finish first in the league because they were swept by St. Mary’s in the regular season. Any explanation for why Sabonis and Wiltjer were given more latitude and freedom to do what they wanted in the tournament games? Maybe the tournament games were called differently? Sabonis was a fouling machine during the season, but not in the wcc tourney? How convenient… in fact the way the games were called was very convenient for “america’s team”. By the way, I predicted with confidence that Gonzaga would win the tourney and they did.
If you would check your facts sometimes it would help your argument. Gonzaga finished first in the conference and the post-season conference tournament. SMC finished first in the conference regular season but second in the tournament.
SMC and Gonzaga tied for the regular season championship. See http://www.wccsports.com/standings/#/m-baskbl/2015 for the official end of conference standings.
SMC got the higher seed in the tournament because of the wins you refer to. That is they won the seeding tie-breaker between the regular season champs, SMC and Gonzaga.
And Gonzaga’s streak ending or continuing does nothing for the conference. Your repeating that it does too matter–does not change the facts. Any more than my restating that is doesn’t. It is a cardinal plank in your conspiracy argument. But you’ve not a smidgen of evidence for it–repetition is not evidence. The conference gets exactly the same amount of money whether BYU, or Gonzaga, or SMC goes one and done or makes the Sweet 16 or even the Elite 8. The economics of the conference budgets only improves when more teams go dancing. BYU and SMC’s unusually weak OOC results combined with the normally week lower tier teams OOC results combined with Gonzaga’s unusual ability to lose close games meant that only one team was dancing. Not because of a conspiracy but because the teams who usually go dancing BYU, Gonzaga, and to a lesser extent SMC failed to win on the court.
If not money then prestige must be your conspiracies motivation, though frankly prestige and money most of the time do go hand in hand. But prestige comes to the conference when it either has a team do unusually well in the dance, see Gonzaga’s results the last two years, or gets multiple teams dancing, see the WCC most years, as in 5 of the last 7.
Yes I like to have fun with words; though preponderance and marshal are pretty commonplace words when assessing arguments. Preponderance of the evidence is a common civil case standard of proof in a court of law. Marshalling evidence is such a cliché I almost used a different one but I like militaria so I decided to keep the phrase. Probably I’ve just spent too much time living on military posts. Bloviating is just such a fun word that though I debated not using it, the onomatopoeic nature of the word itself won me over…and yes…I love prosody too.
And it doesn’t take a conspiracy theory to explain Gonzaga winning a WCC tournament even this year. They made the Sweet 16 for Pete’s sake. They were that good.
And the WCC at least according to conspiracies you’ve espoused doesn’t have the goods for that to be part of the pro-Gonzaga conspirators–after all they were playing the mighty PAC12 Utes with their conspiracy driven and unwarranted dance tickets.
SMC couldn’t even manage to win a single NIT game away from home. They were at best lackluster away from home. And guess what? The WCC tournament wasn’t at their home. Just like Pepperdine they managed to beat a superior team twice by close scores but couldn’t manage it a third time. For Pepperdine, the team they couldn’t beat a third time, was SMC. For SMC, it was Gonzaga. It is nearly proverbial if not truly proverbial that its impossible to beat a team three times in the same year in NCAA basketball. Like BYU Gonzaga’s losses were too many to make the tournament without the WCC tourney title. Like BYU most, in the Zags case–all-- of the losses were less than ten points.
That Mark Few is a better tournament coach than SMC’s Bennett also hardly needs stating. Compare their non-WCC post season or for that matter pre-conference tournament numbers and it is not even close. And those games do not remotely involve your chimera that the WCC wants Gonzaga to win.
Yes chimera is a fun word too; both its mythological meaning that seems to fit here as well as its more prosaic illusory meaning. No intent to be more persuasive or superior or valuable just simply decided to have fun and not edit myself the way I usually do on this board. After all isn’t that what sports and talking about it is supposed to be? Fun?
The great thing about this argument is that, in reality, neither one of us has enough proof or “preponderance of evidence” to make an argument that would be able to convict the accused. I can’t convince you that they get special treatment and you certainly won’t be able to convince me they don’t. But then again, our justice system is a complete joke anyway. We incarcerate the poor and downtrodden at the same time we applaud and empower the real criminals. But that is another topic altogether… or is it? Is it that much different than what we do in other aspects of our society? How much different is it than the P-5 way of major college sports?
Let’s wait and see if Gonzaga goes from being a team that barely squeaks into the ncaa tournament for the umpteenth time again next year because they go from being an average, on the bubble long shot to “making the sweet 16 for pete’s sake”. I’m sure it is just coincidental that they have won it every year since BYU and Jimmer ruined them in the ncaa tournament… except of course the season immediately after that when Delavedova ruined every team in the conference and single handedly overcame the Gonzaga favoritism (I told you that it can be done on rare occasions) to beat them (albeit in OT) in 2012.
Regardless… we will just have to be content with disagreeing on this particular topic. Keep using your big words and I will use my simple language… and perhaps we can revisit this topic next season or better yet the season after that. After all, 2017-18 is the one that everyone is convinced will be the magical year that BYU finally wins the regular season or wcc tournament (most fans would be happy with either one at this point) title and makes that run to the final four, right?
It probably won’t matter because Gonzaga will make it to the ncaa tournament (both years regardless) and BYU fans will be chanting “wait until next year” once again! Oh… and do some deeper research, beating a team 3 times in the same season isn’t that difficult or rare as you claim it is. You should watch more than just the wcc, in particular conferences that get a lot of ncaa tourney invites.
This is the one claim that I just had to respond to specifically. You are being WAY too narrow minded on this one. This is one of the reasons you and grasshopper have difficulty understanding the bigger picture. Try to convince fish or Larimer or other more astute basketball analysts of this belief. If you think it is only about the money from year to year you are wrong. I have discussed this point ad nauseum… because of comments like the one above.
Gonzaga has been the poster child for the wcc for 20 years now. They have literally carried the league… as Mark Few so vocally stated. How can you honestly claim that anything Gonzaga does or does not do “does nothing for the conference”. That is ridiculous. What do you think would happen to the wcc if they left? Sometimes we need to think a bit longer about the things we post before we post them. I know this from my own personal experience as I have done it as well.
I believe you are trying to use the statement to reinforce your position, but it is simply not true. They are “america’s team”… they are the wcc’s team.
Your arguments are weak. That’s what Fish pointed out and he’s right. Recruiting is always #1 for college. The top teams recruit 5 star athletes every year and go far into the NCAA tournament. Of course there are are other factors like who the coach is and how he gets the players to play. What else???
Gonzaga still had great talent at 3 of the positions and solid recruits at the rest. Much deeper than BYU. They recruit overseas and they get excellent big men and shooters. St. Mary’s does too. And, we get mediocre Mormons and ocassional good non-mormons.
Until we can consistantly recruit and keep 4 and 5 star athletes, we will struggle to win the WCC tournament. Harold is spot on 
Jim, you are right…I said it myself on several occasions. But that was early on the year and Gonzaga’s guards “grew up”. By the end of the season, the zag guards, who were a liability early in the year, carried the team in stats.
That is the reason why I have said that Few is a cut above Rose and just about every coach out there. He never plays in the moment but evaluates his talent early on and plays them through thick and thin whereas Rose tends to play his best players (veterans) and has to make crazy lineup changes late in the year when the cream rises to the top. That is the single reason why Few wins late in the season while Few is winning championships and beyond.
As for Bennett? He is a smart dude…he would recruit on Mars if he knew the talent was there. 1st, he had no team after Waldo so he goes to Australia and gets 5 new players. Then Bennett keeps all his games at home to boost wins and young egos. He is one cagey guy and really should be coaching in the ACC…and he gets caught cheating, like I said, “ACC baby”.
I want to make a prediction about next year. The WCC gets 3 teams to the dance, something that has never happened before.
You predicted 2 this year…
Though I am confused now. The hype machine is in beast mode so what does that mean for the next couple of years? I know Blaine Fowler is riding it big time as he is claiming that BYU will make the ncaa tourney and then a year or two after that they can make a final four run… AND he says they have the coaching to do it.
I don’t care how great a coach Mark Few or Randy Bennett is… if there are claims of a final four run, how in the world can Gonzaga win the wcc regular season and/or tournament? It isn’t possible if BYU is good enough to play in the final four. So while I’d love to agree with and jump on to the hype machine, these two scenarios contradict each other and when it doesn’t happen I don’t want to hear a bunch of excuses and a “wait until next year”… because there are no excuses anymore. There is nothing left… and when Gonzaga wins again, I will point out the reasons why once again and everyone will say it isn’t true, there is no reason for Gonzaga to be the favored team or they never have been, etc. That BYU was just “outplayed” or “outcoached”… and the rhetoric will continue.
It has happened before…
2012
Gonzaga 7 seed
SMC 7 seed
BYU 12 seed
2008
Gonzaga 7 seed
SMC 10 seed
San Diego 13 seed
Before BYU joined the WCC it got multiple bids a bit more frequently than every other year. Since BYU joined this has been the first year without multiple bids.
Next year and the following are both years that look like possibilities for 3 bids because of the Zags strength and normal strength of schedule. BYU’s strength and Rose’s expectations he will likely get a more normal ooc sos. SMC will also have a better OOC SOS because Bennett will not schedule for a transition year.
That the new coaching hires are solid will also likely play into better overall conference SOS as the coaches try to make their mark/match their previous success.
Fowler and I would be on the same page. Holmoe is also of the mind that BYU will have sweet 16s and final 4s down the road.
BYU is going to beat Gonzaga with the Lone Peak boys, it is just a matter of them, the Lone Peak boys getting up to their potential.
Childs, Dahstrup, Kaufusi and the Lone Peak boys will be formidable.
add Sitaki, Detmer, Hill and Mangum and I am swimming in the thick blue goo.
and Bronco was of the mind that BYU would win a national championship in football…
BYU has beaten Gonzaga several times without the Lone Peak boys, but never when it mattered or something important was on the line, like a conference title, wcc tourney championship or ncaa tournament invite. I’ll remind everyone that the last time BYU beat Gonzaga in an important game was five years ago in the ncaa tournament with Jimmer. I hope it is “just a matter of them getting up to their potential”. I just don’t want any excuses if it doesn’t happen when something is on the line… like Gonzaga possibly not getting a ncaa invite or something.