PDA

View Full Version : Burst Bubbles



downtowndevil
03-13-2011, 06:42 PM
Buffs, Hookies (shocker!said with sarcasm), 'Tide...

who would be out to make room for any of them?

other notables that surprisingly made it or did not make it?

downtowndevil
03-13-2011, 06:44 PM
meant to say "buRst bubbles". mod pls edit.

House G
03-13-2011, 06:44 PM
R.I.P. Seth

Blue KevIL
03-13-2011, 06:45 PM
On the surface, Virginia Commonwealth is a surprise At-Large Selection.

Any of the three you listed would be better picks.

ajgoodfella7
03-13-2011, 06:45 PM
R.I.P. Seth

You haven't heard the last of Seth Greenberg.... I can guarantee you that.

1 24 90
03-13-2011, 06:47 PM
UAB & VCU are both surprising. VCU did beat UCLA and Old Dominion and lost to UAB.

SMO
03-13-2011, 06:47 PM
You haven't heard the last of Seth Greenberg.... I can guarantee you that.

Tough West region not withstanding, call my Sunday complete!

hurleyfor3
03-13-2011, 06:47 PM
Although "Bust Bubbles" works as well.

NO sympathy for you, VPI. Next time try not honking a home game against BC after your signature win.

I would have kicked out either USC or UAB and let in Colorado.

diveonthefloor
03-13-2011, 06:48 PM
Uab didn't deserve

devildeac
03-13-2011, 06:49 PM
Hey vt:

http://crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/21.gif

I guess crime doesn't pay.

mgtr
03-13-2011, 06:50 PM
R.I.P. Seth

See, there is justice in this world. Try playing a better schedule and don't recruit punks.

pfrduke
03-13-2011, 06:50 PM
No at large selection was worse than VCU. That might be the worst at-large pick in the last 5-10 years.

Chitowndevil
03-13-2011, 06:51 PM
VCU is pretty surprising. 84th in the Pomeroy. Wins over George Mason (25), ODU (51), and neutral court vs UCLA (53). Losses to South Florida (131), Northeastern (188), and Georgia St. (230).

UAB is also a surprise. They have no top 50 wins, but no bad losses either. With the exception of the Duke game, their nonconference schedule is pretty bad.

EDIT: Pretty unsatisfying interview with the Selection Committee Chair on CBS. How the heck do you factor in "style of play" when deciding who should be in? I think Bob Knight has a point when he says few, if any, of these guys on the committee have any real, specific basketball expertise and should not be basing their selections on opinions about teams they watched on TV. Ken Pomeroy made this point recently in his blog as well- people talk about committee members being at games as a good thing but it is not necessarily good.

-jk
03-13-2011, 06:52 PM
No at large selection was worse than VCU. That might be the worst at-large pick in the last 5-10 years.

Up there with Air Force.

-jk

Matches
03-13-2011, 06:53 PM
No sympathy for VPI in general but I do feel bad for Delaney who seems like a nice kid. Shame he won't get to play in a NCAAT.

TheMainEvent
03-13-2011, 06:54 PM
Colorado got robbed!!!! They were a lock!

WakeDevil
03-13-2011, 06:54 PM
No at large selection was worse than VCU. That might be the worst at-large pick in the last 5-10 years.

Try New Mexico when Kenny Thomas missed the first half of the season.

Chris Randolph
03-13-2011, 06:55 PM
Colorado got robbed!!!! They were a lock!

Nah, 21-13. Out of conference strength of schedule is ranked #325!!!!!!!!

SMO
03-13-2011, 06:56 PM
Try New Mexico when Kenny Thomas missed the first half of the season.

Bilas is hammering the committee. I've never seen him look so frustrated and it seems he has a good case.

OldPhiKap
03-13-2011, 06:58 PM
No sympathy for VPI in general but I do feel bad for Delaney who seems like a nice kid. Shame he won't get to play in a NCAAT.

Agreed. But, Jeff Allen won't either so i guess it's a wash.

TheMainEvent
03-13-2011, 07:01 PM
Even if Colorado's Non-Conf SOS was weak, they were the best team snubbed (except maybe VT). The were more deserving than more than one team that made it.

DMV2434
03-13-2011, 07:04 PM
VCU and UAB are really surprising. Colorado and VT deserve those spots IMO

burnspbesq
03-13-2011, 07:06 PM
UAB and VCU in, and Harvard out?

Incomprehensible.

Chitowndevil
03-13-2011, 07:09 PM
Is anyone watching ESPN and Dick Vitale right now? Saying that comparing Colorado to VCU and UAB is like Rosanne Barr versus Scarlet Johansson in a beauty contest. Absolutely classic.

hurleyfor3
03-13-2011, 07:11 PM
Jay Bilas is about as upset as he ever gets on teevee about UAB and VCU over Colorado.

Oh well, we're Colorado, we still have spring skiing. :)

MCFinARL
03-13-2011, 07:14 PM
Bilas is awesome--questions whether the committee members know whether the basketball is round.

1 24 90
03-13-2011, 07:16 PM
ESPN's Bracketology is a laugh riot. Dickie V just said Jay was young and you could hear Hubert in the background say "young?"

Uh,oh here comes Gottlieb's opinion.

RoyalBlue08
03-13-2011, 07:24 PM
I think Va Tech got robbed, and while that sucks for the ACC I guess, it really makes me happy. Karma.

gumbomoop
03-13-2011, 07:27 PM
Bilas is awesome--questions whether the committee members know whether the basketball is round.

Bilas refers to inclusion of UAB and VCU as "indefensible." In biggest put-down of all: "People often say a team doesn't pass the eye test. This doesn't pass the laugh test."

4decadedukie
03-13-2011, 07:33 PM
VCU and UAB are horrendous decisions, when Colorado, VPI, and Harvard are excluded; I state this despite my abject disrespect for the always-complaing, always-whinning Seth Greenburg and his band of thugs (not all Virginia Tech "student athletes," but certainly more than a few . . . for example, Jeff Allen, who just yesterday got away with an egregious cheap-shot on Dawkins).

Rogue
03-13-2011, 08:06 PM
Colorado,, 5 wins against the top 50. 3 were against one team, Kansas State. then also beat Tx and Missouri. Their big wins were against teams they had to play, in conference.
OOC RPI was 325, wow.. if you weren't in their conference,, apparently they played the worst schedule in the world.

These preseason tourneys,, are the only way mid majors get to play major conference teams and not have to play them away only.. UCLA won't go to Richmond to play VCU,, but VCU took advantage of playing them on some neutral court.

Jay Bilas was singing the praises of George Mason,, fine,, but it was the same VCU team that he was trashing that beat George Mason 63-79 in their tournament.

Reilly
03-13-2011, 09:03 PM
I like that the 31 conference champs get in.

If we then went to kenpom for the next 37, who would be in and who be out as compared to the current field?

Seems like we could just use kenpom and get rid of the committee. The 31 champs would be in, the computer would pick up the undisputed good teams, and the computer would also just pick up the last X teams objectively.

Reddevil
03-13-2011, 09:56 PM
Seth could schedule the teams in his own backyard: Mason, ODU, VCU, Richmond, and others, but he doesn't and then whines. If you're scared, say your scared. Tough for the ACC, but I would've put BC in before VT.

The thing that bugs me is making Clemson part of the first four. The selection committee seems to be saying, "Hey ACC, we think so little of you this year we're only putting four in, and one of you has to play in." The conference was down, but Clemson should not have to pay for it like that.

anon
03-13-2011, 10:01 PM
Agree re VCU, UAB. I could also do without Tennessee and Georgia, who both did poorly in the SEC.

Reilly
03-13-2011, 10:02 PM
Seth could schedule the teams in his own backyard: Mason, ODU, VCU, Richmond ....

Five teams from Virginia:

1. GMU
2. VCU
3. Richmond
4. ODU
5. Hampton

... and none named "Virginia" or "Virginia Tech" ....

Pam
03-13-2011, 10:05 PM
Bilas is awesome--questions whether the committee members know whether the basketball is round.

One of the best quotes ever. I really did LOL!

hurleyfor3
03-13-2011, 11:28 PM
Nice to see the ACC getting two #1 seeds... in the Nit.

http://www.ncaa.com/sites/default/files/files/2011_NIT_Bracket_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.

Devilsfan
03-13-2011, 11:33 PM
Someone on the commitee has it in for Seth imo. Did he sleep with someone's daughter (I doubt it), does someone hate his beliefs (not possible in 2011), did he once fire someone's son (I also doubt that)? Makes you wonder.

sagegrouse
03-13-2011, 11:59 PM
Someone on the commitee has it in for Seth imo. Did he sleep with someone's daughter (I doubt it), does someone hate his beliefs (not possible in 2011), did he once fire someone's son (I also doubt that)? Makes you wonder.

The TSC has a low regard for the ACC... aside from Duke and UNC. FSU, clearly the third best team, was given a #10, which places them only among the top 37-40th teams in the country. Clemson was [literally] the last team in at a #12.

I think the ACC got screwed. The Big Ten had 7 of 11 members make the Big Dance; the ACC had 4 of 12. Meanwhile, when the two conferences played head-to-head, they were almost even.

Of course, the alternative explanantion is that the TSC hates Seth Greenberg.

sagegrouse

tommy
03-14-2011, 12:54 AM
Bilas is hammering the committee. I've never seen him look so frustrated and it seems he has a good case.

Yes, Bilas did a great job hammering the committee. Unfortunately, the couple of "journalists" (Nantz/Kellogg and then what's-his-name Smith on ESPN) who actually got a chance to question the Chair of the Committee completely wimped out and did not ask any tough follow up questions. His answers were vanilla and totally uninformative. His response to each "why not this team" or "why not that team" was essentially "because they didn't get enough votes."

Would've been great to see Bilas or someone else just go after Smith when he gives an answer like that. You know, something like, "Duh. We get that Gene. Of course they're out because they didn't get enough votes. What the public would like to know is WHY they didn't get enough votes. What factors led the committee to invite this team (like VCU) and not this other team (like VT or Colorado). What specifically did VCU do better this year than those other two teams?" Never happens.

-bdbd
03-14-2011, 03:47 AM
Someone on the commitee has it in for Seth imo. Did he sleep with someone's daughter (I doubt it), does someone hate his beliefs (not possible in 2011), did he once fire someone's son (I also doubt that)? Makes you wonder.

The ESPN analysts - including Digger, Jay Bilas, Hubert Davis, Dick Vitale - on Bracketology (yes, a very entertaining segment!) were railing on about the "outrageous" and "indefensible" VCU selection over VPI and Col. And Seth G. was quoted in a statement that was VERY biting, repeatedly insinuating that "someone on that committee obviously had an agenda... and it didn't include Va Tech." Jay Bilas had the best line of the night: "You know, we talk every year about these (bubble) teams and whether or not they pass the 'eye test.' Well this one (VCU over VPI) doesn't even pass the laugh test!" (to loud chuckles around the analyst table) Ouch!

I actually usually defend the committee b/c I feel that (1) they are often being asked to split hairs with very similar team resumes, (2) very often complainers only gripe about their team's omission, w/o saying at the same time who should have simultaneously been left out - it is, after all, a zero-sum-gain - and (3) it really doesn't matter much to the overall tournament outcome if they get the 68th or 69th teams rightly allocated. But I have to say that they really seem to have done a piss-poor job this year, with at least a couple pretty undeserving teams getting in (and even getting surprising seedings) while a couple teams that virtually everybody had in, such as Va Tech, were omitted. I also have issues with several hard-to-justify seedings.... Arrrgh.

Anybody know if there were ANY ACC representatives on the committee this year? I know that the chairman was from OSU - the AD, I think.

AZLA
03-14-2011, 04:06 AM
Bilas refers to inclusion of UAB and VCU as "indefensible." In biggest put-down of all: "People often say a team doesn't pass the eye test. This doesn't pass the laugh test."

Yah, you have to hand it to Bilas and even Vitale.

They were both en fuego today.

Poor Allen, when VaTech got left out of the dance, must have felt like getting smacked in the face with a baskeball.

While standing out of bands.

dalmatians98
03-14-2011, 06:20 AM
Yes, Bilas did a great job hammering the committee. Unfortunately, the couple of "journalists" (Nantz/Kellogg and then what's-his-name Smith on ESPN) who actually got a chance to question the Chair of the Committee completely wimped out and did not ask any tough follow up questions. His answers were vanilla and totally uninformative. His response to each "why not this team" or "why not that team" was essentially "because they didn't get enough votes."

Would've been great to see Bilas or someone else just go after Smith when he gives an answer like that. You know, something like, "Duh. We get that Gene. Of course they're out because they didn't get enough votes. What the public would like to know is WHY they didn't get enough votes. What factors led the committee to invite this team (like VCU) and not this other team (like VT or Colorado). What specifically did VCU do better this year than those other two teams?" Never happens.

Excellent post. Tougher questions ought to have been asked of Gene Smith.

When questionable (read, ludicrous) choices are made like VCU and UAB over Colorado and VT (sorry, but I believe VT should have been selected this year) the TSC chairman needs to defend them with something more than the load of weak sauce that was dribbled out onto the airwaves this past Sunday.

If the questioning of Gene Smith had been sufficiently brisk, maybe it would have served to encourage future TSCs to think about sticking to the stated selection guidelines. It might even have done something to push the NCAA to think about trying to make the selection process a bit more consistent.

If, as Jay Bilas said at one point during Bracketology, the TSC was making its choices with the idea that a school the size of Colorado was doing what it should be doing with the record it had, while a mid major with a challenging out of conference schedule was doing heavier lifting, okay. But that is not what happened.

Who did VCU beat? UCLA at a neutral site. ODU at ODU (who VCU lost to in the CAA tournament). And George Mason in the CAA tournament. UAB did not even finish second in its conference and beat nobody in the RPI top 50. Odd. Very, very odd.

alteran
03-14-2011, 08:48 AM
EDIT: Pretty unsatisfying interview with the Selection Committee Chair on CBS. How the heck do you factor in "style of play" when deciding who should be in? I think Bob Knight has a point when he says few, if any, of these guys on the committee have any real, specific basketball expertise and should not be basing their selections on opinions about teams they watced on TV. Ken Pomeroy made this point recently in his blog as well- people talk about committee members being at games as a good thing but it is not necessarily good.

Perhaps they're saying that VT's thuggish play in their final game (that was clearly visible to anyone who wasn't a chokie fan or ACC referee) is what earned them their annual ticket on the sidelines.

weezie
03-14-2011, 08:50 AM
Ouch. No NIT soup for md either. Their bowl is empty.

OldPhiKap
03-14-2011, 09:07 AM
Perhaps they're saying that VT's thuggish play in their final game (that was clearly visible to anyone who wasn't a chokie fan or ACC referee) is what earned them their annual ticket on the sidelines.

This. And kudos to the committee for doing it.

A-Tex Devil
03-14-2011, 09:18 AM
Just seeing this thread. No at large will ever be worse than Air Force. That said...

- VCU is unconsionable. Just a horrible selection.

- Georgia over Alabama is close to the height of stupidity

- UAB and USC over Virginia Tech and Colorado is pretty bad too.

1 24 90
03-14-2011, 10:10 AM
The ESPN analysts - including Digger, Jay Bilas, Hubert Davis, Dick Vitale - on Bracketology (yes, a very entertaining segment!) were railing on about the "outrageous" and "indefensible" VCU selection over VPI and Col. And Seth G. was quoted in a statement that was VERY biting, repeatedly insinuating that "someone on that committee obviously had an agenda... and it didn't include Va Tech." Jay Bilas had the best line of the night: "You know, we talk every year about these (bubble) teams and whether or not they pass the 'eye test.' Well this one (VCU over VPI) doesn't even pass the laugh test!" (to loud chuckles around the analyst table) Ouch!

I actually usually defend the committee b/c I feel that (1) they are often being asked to split hairs with very similar team resumes, (2) very often complainers only gripe about their team's omission, w/o saying at the same time who should have simultaneously been left out - it is, after all, a zero-sum-gain - and (3) it really doesn't matter much to the overall tournament outcome if they get the 68th or 69th teams rightly allocated. But I have to say that they really seem to have done a piss-poor job this year, with at least a couple pretty undeserving teams getting in (and even getting surprising seedings) while a couple teams that virtually everybody had in, such as Va Tech, were omitted. I also have issues with several hard-to-justify seedings.... Arrrgh.

Anybody know if there were ANY ACC representatives on the committee this year? I know that the chairman was from OSU - the AD, I think.

Wake's athletic director is on the committee.

OldPhiKap
03-14-2011, 10:12 AM
Wake's athletic director is on the committee.

Isn't Joe Alleva as well?

TampaDuke
03-14-2011, 10:19 AM
Anybody know if there were ANY ACC representatives on the committee this year? I know that the chairman was from OSU - the AD, I think.

Wake's AD.

Edit: Sorry for the redundancy -- didn't see that others responded prior to submitting.

The Gordog
03-14-2011, 10:20 AM
... does someone hate his beliefs (not possible in 2011), ...

I would respectfully disagree with that assessment, but I honestly think it's more likely they just don't like the ACC.

Devil07
03-14-2011, 10:29 AM
And Seth G. was quoted in a statement that was VERY biting, repeatedly insinuating that "someone on that committee obviously had an agenda... and it didn't include Va Tech."

Here's the quote you're talking about:

“Just disappointed. You almost wonder if someone in that room has their own agenda and that agenda doesn’t include Virginia Tech. Just plain and simple. I totally wonder it, if someone in that room has an agenda. The explanation was so inconsistent with the result that it was almost mind-boggling. I guess they even brought up our non-conference schedule. Kansas State, Purdue, Oklahoma State, UNLV, Penn State, St. Bonaventure that was supposed to be big and Mississippi State that was projected to win the SEC. I’d say that’s a pretty significant slate and challenge. So they must not have looked at it very closely. But I guess they did. I feel for these kids. Doesn’t take away from what we accomplished this year ... but it’s extremely disheartening. You would hate to think that politics would be involved, but it makes you wonder.”

Greenberg had a bit more (http://hamptonroads.com/2011/03/vt-hoops-seth-greenberg-reacts-hokies-ncaa-snub) to say before cutting short his presser and leaving. I get that they got snubbed, probably unfairly, but his whole conspiracy theory angle is nonsense. Colorado had a much stronger argument for getting hosed and their coach went on ESPN and while disappointed, didn't resort to any "everyone is out to get us" rhetoric. I thought, unlike Seth, he handled himself with class, but let's be honest here, a lot of the problems we have here with Va Tech's players attitudes start with their coach. No doubt does Va Tech have an argument, but if you're trying to be a leader and a teacher, you're sending the wrong message to your kids when you blame your own failings on conspiracies and on others. The fact is that if Va Tech doesn't drop two home games after beating us then I'm sure they're in, so at the end of the day, they put themselves in the position to possibly not get in by failing to take care of their own business. That's a tough pill to swallow, but sometimes the best lesson you can teach others is how to handle disappointment with class. This was an opportunity for Seth to teach just that, but instead, he chose to point fingers at everyone except for himself.

FerryFor50
03-14-2011, 10:46 AM
Here's the quote you're talking about:


Greenberg had a bit more (http://hamptonroads.com/2011/03/vt-hoops-seth-greenberg-reacts-hokies-ncaa-snub) to say before cutting short his presser and leaving. I get that they got snubbed, probably unfairly, but his whole conspiracy theory angle is nonsense. Colorado had a much stronger argument for getting hosed and their coach went on ESPN and while disappointed, didn't resort to any "everyone is out to get us" rhetoric. I thought, unlike Seth, he handled himself with class, but let's be honest here, a lot of the problems we have here with Va Tech's players attitudes start with their coach. No doubt does Va Tech have an argument, but if you're trying to be a leader and a teacher, you're sending the wrong message to your kids when you blame your own failings on conspiracies and on others. The fact is that if Va Tech doesn't drop two home games after beating us then I'm sure they're in, so at the end of the day, they put themselves in the position to possibly not get in by failing to take care of their own business. That's a tough pill to swallow, but sometimes the best lesson you can teach others is how to handle disappointment with class. This was an opportunity for Seth to teach just that, but instead, he chose to point fingers at everyone except for himself.

That's always VT's mantra - "us against the world."

Cliche', but it works for them... I guess.

Could they have been in? Sure. But honestly, only the win over Duke really gave any credence to their year. They didn't beat anyone of significance out of conference. And they lost to some pretty bad teams.

Lost to UVA twice
Lost to BC twice
Lost to GT

Then they lost to the following NCAA teams:
UNLV
KSU
Purdue

The only tournament bound teams they beat were Duke, FSU (2x) and Penn St

The resume was spotty at best... and definitely not better than Colorado's.

What Seth needs to realize is, if you don't want to be on the bubble, win games. They were in games against Purdue and UNC. Win one or both of those, they're in. And the losses to the bottom dwellers in the ACC were what killed them. Win both against UVA and split against BC, they're in.

Oh, and throw in the thuggery they always play with and the constant whining and prodding of the committee (yea, smart move there, Seth) and they will never get the benefit of the doubt when the call is that close.

SoCalDukeFan
03-14-2011, 10:47 AM
I wanted to hear more discussion of the tournament not the teams not in the tournament or who should not be in the tournament.

The Committee made some mistakes. Play On.

SoCal

FerryFor50
03-14-2011, 10:57 AM
I have a problem with PSU getting in, especially as a 10 seed.

Their only quality wins came in conference.

- A slumping Mich State at PSU
- Illinois at PSU
- Wisconsin twice... one of those wins setting college bball back 50 years

They lost to VT and Maryland, who we all know were either bubble teams or out entirely... and both not in the tourny.

Their final record was 19-14..... Their RPI was 39, but that's mostly due to the Big 10 being overrated outside of OSU IMO. (#2 strength of schedule? please)

I think them being in is more egregious than VCU being in.

SMO
03-14-2011, 11:11 AM
I wanted to hear more discussion of the tournament not the teams not in the tournament or who should not be in the tournament.

The Committee made some mistakes. Play On.

SoCal

That's what the next few days are for. The first 1-2 hours after the brackets come out are always about who's in, who's out, and why.

-jk
03-14-2011, 11:12 AM
Perhaps the ACC's recent horrible Tourney performances - outside Duke and UNC - had something to do with the Committee's decisions.

Let's hope FSU and Clemson can hold their own this year.

-jk

ramdevil
03-14-2011, 11:13 AM
VT lost to UVa twice. And they lost to Georgia Tech. They nearly lost to Florida State in the ACC. Plus, didn't they have a weak schedule out of conference?

Maybe we should question why the Big East gets 11 teams in. 11! And I agree with Penn State - scoring 36 points in a win seems pretty ugly to me.

ramdevil

Mal
03-14-2011, 11:19 AM
While I get everyone's disdain for Seth Greenberg and VT, I think it's pretty forgivable that he would voice his displeasure loudly this year. The analogy to Colorado and their coach's reaction doesn't wash for me - let's see what Colorado's coach says in a presser three years from now when his team is one of the first 3 teams left out of 4 consecutive tourneys. Whatever the criteria at the bottom of the selection pool is, and it seems to generally change every year, it never seems to line up with the relative strengths on Virginia Tech's resume compared to the other teams in similar position each year. My recollection is hazy, but I'm pretty sure that's 2 of the last 4 years where Hokie fans justifiably feel screwed, and in the other 2 they're justifiably disappointed that a bubble that could have gone either way burst in their face. That's got to be really frustrating.

That said, it's probably doubly frustrating this year since it was supposed to be the case that they were going to push up against the big boys in the conference this year and cruise into a 4-6 seed in the big dance. So, the disappointment of getting hosed off the bubble combined with the disappointment that this team was supposed to be so much better than it was has to lead to some recriminations against Greenberg. He may have crescendoed in Blacksburg.

InSpades
03-14-2011, 11:35 AM
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.

PADukeMom
03-14-2011, 11:44 AM
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
03-14-2011, 11:45 AM
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
03-14-2011, 12:09 PM
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
03-14-2011, 12:14 PM
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
03-14-2011, 12:58 PM
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
03-14-2011, 01:29 PM
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
03-14-2011, 01:36 PM
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
03-14-2011, 01:42 PM
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
03-14-2011, 01:45 PM
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
03-14-2011, 01:50 PM
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
03-14-2011, 01:57 PM
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
03-14-2011, 01:59 PM
Any bets on whether they lose their first NIT game?

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

OldPhiKap
03-14-2011, 02:27 PM
Who are they playing? I tend not to follow the NIT, for obvious reasons. :D

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
03-14-2011, 02:31 PM
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
03-14-2011, 02:41 PM
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
03-14-2011, 02:49 PM
VT made "elite eight" of the NIT in 2010:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_National_Invitation_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
03-14-2011, 02:56 PM
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
03-14-2011, 03:14 PM
Nice to see the ACC getting two #1 seeds... in the Nit.

http://www.ncaa.com/sites/default/files/files/2011_NIT_Bracket_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
03-14-2011, 03:25 PM
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
03-14-2011, 04:33 PM
"I wonder if some people on the committee know that the ball is round."

--Jay Bilas

WakeDevil
03-14-2011, 05:06 PM
Every team that fell just short can point to a game that was the difference. In VT's case, it's the home loss to VA. Yes, beating BC probably would have worked, but that VA loss is a lot worse. BC was close to getting in. And again, BC can point to the home loss to Yale.

What was the difference between Clemson and VT? Not much, but looking at the Tigers' results, you'll see that they were in all their games. No one blew them out. That had to help.

Don't get me started on VCU.

dyemeduke
03-14-2011, 07:11 PM
I'm a Colorado (CU) alum, and this was a great season for my team (toss-up b/n which team I love more). This year's seniors were losers for their first two seasons, and last year wasn't all that great, although a huge improvement. I applaud their play this year - it was fun to watch.

However, CU played themselves onto the bubble by losing at Georgia, at USanFran, at Baylor, at home to TAMU. CU had a great season, but they played themselves onto the bubble. I'm disappointed, sure...and I think all BuffNation has a reason to be upset with the committee. However, all the whining from fellow CU fans is getting old and annoying. Stop complaining and get over it - it sucks, yes. But this happens every year to a lot of teams. Instead of playing onto the bubble, play like you deserve to be in the tournament...not the bubble.

For what it's worth, I thought Colorado got the biggest shaft, followed by Alabama and then VTech. It's a joke that USC is in...and I can't believe that Penn State made it either...

HokieEngineer
03-14-2011, 08:33 PM
Every team that fell just short can point to a game that was the difference. In VT's case, it's the home loss to VA. Yes, beating BC probably would have worked, but that VA loss is a lot worse. BC was close to getting in. And again, BC can point to the home loss to Yale.

What was the difference between Clemson and VT? Not much, but looking at the Tigers' results, you'll see that they were in all their games. No one blew them out. That had to help.

Don't get me started on VCU.

Virginia with Mike Scott is a pretty different team than Virginia without Mike Scott. It's still a tough loss--any conference loss at home is--but it's not the horrible loss it is otherwise.

While this snub stings worse than the others from a Virginia Tech point of view, the bigger concern is how the ACC was treated in comparison with the Big East, Big Ten, and CAA. Essentially the committee said that 4th in ACC = 4th in the CAA. This perception hasn't hurt Duke yet, but the day could easily come where it does.

throatybeard
03-15-2011, 02:08 AM
Virginia with Mike Scott is a pretty different team than Virginia without Mike Scott. It's still a tough loss--any conference loss at home is--but it's not the horrible loss it is otherwise.

While this snub stings worse than the others from a Virginia Tech point of view, the bigger concern is how the ACC was treated in comparison with the Big East, Big Ten, and CAA. Essentially the committee said that 4th in ACC = 4th in the CAA. This perception hasn't hurt Duke yet, but the day could easily come where it does.

In general I agree with your assessment here. But the perennial problem--outside of any one injury--is that VT's OOC sked tends to be awful. And I'm not like all these Greenberg haters and expansion Luddities. I love VT the school, and the mountains, and I welcome y'all and I want y'all to do well. But Seth's OOC sked is usually a mess. There's a reason the same things keep happening to the same people.

Duvall
03-15-2011, 02:21 AM
In general I agree with your assessment here. But the perennial problem--outside of any one injury--is that VT's OOC sked tends to be awful. And I'm not like all these Greenberg haters and expansion Luddities. I love VT the school, and the mountains, and I welcome y'all and I want y'all to do well. But Seth's OOC sked is usually a mess. There's a reason the same things keep happening to the same people.

Greenberg has coached for twenty years at three different schools and earned only three NCAA invites. It ain't the schedules; the guy's just not that good.

Matches
03-15-2011, 08:25 AM
In general I agree with your assessment here. But the perennial problem--outside of any one injury--is that VT's OOC sked tends to be awful. And I'm not like all these Greenberg haters and expansion Luddities. I love VT the school, and the mountains, and I welcome y'all and I want y'all to do well. But Seth's OOC sked is usually a mess. There's a reason the same things keep happening to the same people.

That's usually true, but VT did play some people this year. They *lost* most of those games, but they did at least make some effort to play better competition.