Burst Bubbles

[PADukeMom]

I can understand where VaTech is coming from & feel for them. IMHO they have got to step up their non-conference play plain & simple. Play teams like Kansas, Kentucky or Pitt in November & December. Sure you take the risk of losing but the experience is priceless which ypu can take into conference play.
You can't have your sole criteria being your play in the ACC especially if the ACC is in a down year.

[FerryFor50]

How does USC get ranked ahead of Clemson and VA Tech?

In non-conference they beat Texas and Tennessee (very impressive) but lost to Rider, Bradley and Texas Christian (who went 2-16 in the Mountain West). They also lost to Kansas by 2 which I guess is impressive but still, it's a loss.

They went 10-8 in a Pac-10 that isn't really all that good. They split with Arizona, Washington and UCLA. But they also lost to Oregon (twice), Oregon St. and Washington St.

Is that really better than VA Tech? Who's worst loss is Virginia or GA Tech. They have no stinkers like the 3 awful non-conference losses put up by USC. And if you want to count close losses... they lost to Purdue in OT and UNC by 3 at UNC.

Yea but big out of conference wins factor in more than bad out of conference losses, I think.

And

Rider - 105
Bradley - 233
TCU - 208

Average RPI of "bad" losses: 182

GT - 168
UVA - 141

Average RPI of "bad" losses: 155

VT was 62 in RPI; USC was 67

I think it came down to SOS where VT had 77th and USC had 39th, and the big wins over Texas, Tenn.

Plus, the ACC got no respect this year.

[oldnavy]

For those folks that think the NCAA should expand to include all the teams (I think that is silly), it in a sense it already does allow for that with automatic bids for conf tourny champs... so if you are VT for instance and are perenially on the bubble, just consider the ACCT the beginning of the NCAAT and win... very simple...

[InSpades]

Yea but big out of conference wins factor in more than bad out of conference losses, I think.

And

Rider - 105
Bradley - 233
TCU - 208

Average RPI of "bad" losses: 182

GT - 168
UVA - 141

Average RPI of "bad" losses: 155

VT was 62 in RPI; USC was 67

I think it came down to SOS where VT had 77th and USC had 39th, and the big wins over Texas, Tenn.

Plus, the ACC got no respect this year.

You left out Oregon (135) twice and Oregon St. (219). If you consider those all bad losses then USC has 6 of them vs. VA Tech's 3. VA Tech beat Duke, Fla. St. twice and Penn State. USC beat Texas, Tennessee, UCLA, Arizona and Washington. So USC has 1 more "good" win and 3 more "bad" losses. Plus VA Tech has the better win and USC has the worst loss.

VA Tech got the short end of the ACC scheduling, they only got to play the top 4 teams once each. They went 2-2 (winning the 2 home games and losing the 2 road games). They played 2 more in the tourney and split.

[AtlBluRew]

Everyone acknowledges that Va Tech needs to beef up its schedule. However, if I'm a coach of a powerhouse team and I see that Va Tech's tendency (if not game plan) includes jabbing, elbows to the face, basketballs to the face, etc., ... I don't return Seth's call to put me on his schedule.

[SMO]

Everyone acknowledges that Va Tech needs to beef up its schedule. However, if I'm a coach of a powerhouse team and I see that Va Tech's tendency (if not game plan) includes jabbing, elbows to the face, basketballs to the face, etc., ... I don't return Seth's call to put me on his schedule.

GREAT point. I had never considered this and perhaps Greenberg hadn't either. I wonder if he has trouble getting good games out of conference due to that fact and because his team is perennially on the bubble.

[FerryFor50]

GREAT point. I had never considered this and perhaps Greenberg hadn't either. I wonder if he has trouble getting good games out of conference due to that fact and because his team is perennially on the bubble.

Very true. What benefit is there to playing VT when there are plenty of other ACC schools one could choose from to play against that would leave your team with a better resume' and fewer bruises.

[oldnavy]

I can understand where VaTech is coming from & feel for them. IMHO they have got to step up their non-conference play plain & simple. Play teams like Kansas, Kentucky or Pitt in November & December. Sure you take the risk of losing but the experience is priceless which ypu can take into conference play.
You can't have your sole criteria being your play in the ACC especially if the ACC is in a down year.

PAMom, not meaning to sound snarky, but VT could get in by winning the games against VA (x2), BC, Clemson, UNC, etc... the formula for them to get in the NCAAT is already there, they just need to win more.

I have no sympathy for them. They get up for us and play very good ball, then lose twice the next week to Clemson and BC, two teams they should beat.

Greenberg, then has the nerve to whine about some conspiracy against him, hey Seth maybe you should do a better job of coaching as in prepare your teams for ALL the games not just Duke... think about it... it may work.

[oldnavy]

GREAT point. I had never considered this and perhaps Greenberg hadn't either. I wonder if he has trouble getting good games out of conference due to that fact and because his team is perennially on the bubble.

According to Greenberg, he has adapted the schedule. He rattled off a bunch of teams that they played, so he doesn't think it is the schedule...

Like I said before, there is no secret or magic, win the games you already play Seth and quite whinning you big baby, and tell your players to quit being punks while you are at it.
p.s. can you tell I am a little hacked off by the way VT plays? That ball to the face of AD was the last straw in my book.

[FerryFor50]

According to Greenberg, he has adapted the schedule. He rattled off a bunch of teams that they played, so he doesn't think it is the schedule...

Like I said before, there is no secret or magic, win the games you already play Seth and quite whinning you big baby, and tell your players to quit being punks while you are at it.
p.s. can you tell I am a little hacked off by the way VT plays? That ball to the face of AD was the last straw in my book.

Of course he doesn't think it's the schedule. He's made it abundantly clear that he thinks it's the committee screwing him.

Sure they had a decent non-conference schedule. But they didn't win any of those games outside of Penn St, who also didn't deserve to be in.

Again, it's the "us vs the world" mentality. Maybe they should start looking at the common factor in each season... the coach.

[OldPhiKap]

Of course he doesn't think it's the schedule. He's made it abundantly clear that he thinks it's the committee screwing him.

Sure they had a decent non-conference schedule. But they didn't win any of those games outside of Penn St, who also didn't deserve to be in.

Again, it's the "us vs the world" mentality. Maybe they should start looking at the common factor in each season... the coach.

Any bets on whether they lose their first NIT game?

[FerryFor50]

Any bets on whether they lose their first NIT game?

Who are they playing? I tend not to follow the NIT, for obvious reasons.

[OldPhiKap]

Who are they playing? I tend not to follow the NIT, for obvious reasons.

No idea, but those who crab about being slighted often get whacked early in the NIT -- proving that they didn't belong in the first place.

[FerryFor50]

No idea, but those who crab about being slighted often get whacked early in the NIT -- proving that they didn't belong in the first place.

Very true. I think VT got whacked early last year, too.

[OldPhiKap]

Very true. I think VT got whacked early last year, too.

In the "Right Bracket":

"No. 1 Virginia Tech Hokies vs. No. 8 Bethune-Cookman Wildcats, Wednesday at 8 pm, ESPNU"

[Reilly]

VT made "elite eight" of the NIT in 2010:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Na...ion_Tournament

I follow the NIT. It's basketball. I also like Quinnipiac over Buffalo in tonight's CIT, and will go with JMU and Creighton in tomorrow's opening CBI action.

[Mal]

No idea, but those who crab about being slighted often get whacked early in the NIT -- proving that they didn't belong in the first place.

I don't know about this - it's putting a lot of significance in a single transaction. A high seed losing early in the NCAA's doesn't necessarily mean they didn't deserve their seed after the season they put together. Similarly, if some apparently undeserving 11 or 12 seed gets a good matchup and makes a game of their first round appearance, I don't tend to think they've proved the doubters wrong. Likewise here. A team feeling snubbed is subject to a letdown - it doesn't excuse it, and a coach worth his salt doesn't let that happen - but it happens, and to me, at least, it doesn't mean the resume they had was a mirage.

[ACCBBallFan]

Nice to see the ACC getting two #1 seeds... in the Nit.

http://www.ncaa.com/sites/default/fi...et_3_13_11.pdf

Serious disrespect for Harvard there, only a 6 seed. I guess they though they could sell more tickets at Oklahoma State. Kinda surprised Maryland's not in it; maybe Gary turned the bid down.

BC and Harvard in same bracket for a rematch in NIT not so elite 8.

Toughest NIT matchup seems to be New Mexico vs UTEP

[SoCalDukeFan]

I am not sure how you tell that USC was ranked ahead of Clemson.

If they had stuck with 65 teams and not selected USC, VCU or UAB then some might feel sorry for the Va Tech's and Colorado's of the world but there would be much less controversy. Going to 68 just makes the Committee try to chose between fairly weak teams.

USC beat some good teams and played some good teams close. They beat Texas and Tennessee out of conference and lost at Kansas by 2 points. They also beat UCLA, Arizona and Washington.

Dick

[throatybeard]

"I wonder if some people on the committee know that the ball is round."

--Jay Bilas