Page 1 of 1

The NCAA committee picked it right

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:17 am
by George S. Patton
If you heard the fallout, there really weren't too many complaints about who was picked and who was left out. I guess the only issue was Baylor over Arizona St. or Virginia Tech. But that was about it.

But really, I think the committee is going to be doing a better job getting this right and for the future. With the information overload, games on TV, there are more opporunities for the committee to get a handle on this and really scrutinize who is worthy of the field.

I liked the brackets. At first glance, the one game I see that I like is USC getting to the Sweet 16.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:10 pm
by MustangStealth
I don't think Kentucky should have been in. If you looked at this resume and changed the name at the top from "Kentucky(SEC)" to "Southern Illinois(MVC)" (or any other mid-major type team) there's no way they get in.

18-12
12-4 in conference
RPI 57
Lost in 1st round of the conference tournament
Home non-conference losses to San Diego, UAB, Gardner Webb
Best non-conference win is over RPI 256 Liberty
41 point loss at Vanderbilt
4-8 away from home
6-7 non-conference
Non-conference RPI 210, SOS 100

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:19 pm
by MustangStealth
And the same can pretty much be said for Oregon.

Re: The NCAA committee picked it right

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:52 pm
by jkflamebo
George S. Patton wrote:If you heard the fallout, there really weren't too many complaints about who was picked and who was left out. I guess the only issue was Baylor over Arizona St. or Virginia Tech. But that was about it.

But really, I think the committee is going to be doing a better job getting this right and for the future. With the information overload, games on TV, there are more opporunities for the committee to get a handle on this and really scrutinize who is worthy of the field.

I liked the brackets. At first glance, the one game I see that I like is USC getting to the Sweet 16.

i like usc over wisconsin a lot. wisconsin is overrated

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:03 pm
by SMUtrojanFAN
SC is decent this year, however, their main problem is that they lack true leadership on the court. That and turnovers as well. Their strength seems to be defense where they can contain their opponents. Defense was key in their win over UCLA at Pauley in January.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:21 pm
by CA Mustang
SMUtrojanFAN wrote:SC is decent this year, however, their main problem is that they lack true leadership on the court. That and turnovers as well. Their strength seems to be defense where they can contain their opponents. Defense was key in their win over UCLA at Pauley in January.

I'd attribute the leadership issue more to the fact they integrated new players in key positions this year. As the season wore on, Gibson, Hackett and Mayo asserted themselves. While the turnovers were a problem, I thought their biggest weakness was the lack of a smoothly operating offense (again probably due to all the new players). They didn't reach 60 points during either game in the Pac-10 tournament. With their talent, they should be scoring 75-80 points a game.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:28 pm
by CA Mustang
MustangStealth wrote:And the same can pretty much be said for Oregon.

Hardly. Oregon won at KSU, swept Arizona and beat Stanford.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:39 pm
by EastStang
I heard that VT and VCU were the last two bubble teams left. VCU probably a little higher than VT. UGA messed up any chance for them.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:14 pm
by mustangxc
I think Kentucky should have been left out after Georgia stole a bid. When a weak conference steals a bid the bubble teams in that conference should be the ones to suffer. Arizona State, VCU, Dayton, or Virginia Tech should have made it in ahead of UK. The SEC should have been at most a 4 bid league this season.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:28 pm
by EastStang
Note that last year's finals teams Ohio State and Florida didn't make the tournament.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:58 pm
by Harry0569
mustangxc wrote:I think Kentucky should have been left out after Georgia stole a bid. When a weak conference steals a bid the bubble teams in that conference should be the ones to suffer. Arizona State, VCU, Dayton, or Virginia Tech should have made it in ahead of UK. The SEC should have been at most a 4 bid league this season.



When you win 12 games in a top notch conference you are going to get into the tournament. I want to preface this with that I hate UK, but looking at their quality wins, they deserve to be in. They beat Tenn at home and lost by 3 in Knoxville, beat Vandy, and 4 games on the road in the SEC which is a tough feat.

My biggest problem is Arizona getting in over Az. state.

Re: The NCAA committee picked it right

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:08 pm
by J.T.supporta
George S. Patton wrote:If you heard the fallout, there really weren't too many complaints about who was picked and who was left out. I guess the only issue was Baylor over Arizona St. or Virginia Tech. But that was about it.

But really, I think the committee is going to be doing a better job getting this right and for the future. With the information overload, games on TV, there are more opporunities for the committee to get a handle on this and really scrutinize who is worthy of the field.

I liked the brackets. At first glance, the one game I see that I like is USC getting to the Sweet 16.


it wasnt Baylor over those teams...it was mainly Arizona over Arizona State...dont forget about Butler being screwed in the tourney draw. and wheres the Flyers? dayton should have made it. BU deserved a bid. im sure Arizona was one of the last teams in.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:49 pm
by Pony_Fan
Bobby wants 128 teams in the tourney. What a joke. Leave it the way it is. Otherwise, the regular season doesnt mean a whole lot.

Knight added nothing to the ESPN bracket show IMO.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:11 pm
by SMUtrojanFAN
CA Mustang wrote:
SMUtrojanFAN wrote:SC is decent this year, however, their main problem is that they lack true leadership on the court. That and turnovers as well. Their strength seems to be defense where they can contain their opponents. Defense was key in their win over UCLA at Pauley in January.

I'd attribute the leadership issue more to the fact they integrated new players in key positions this year. As the season wore on, Gibson, Hackett and Mayo asserted themselves. While the turnovers were a problem, I thought their biggest weakness was the lack of a smoothly operating offense (again probably due to all the new players). They didn't reach 60 points during either game in the Pac-10 tournament. With their talent, they should be scoring 75-80 points a game.

This is probably the reason for the turnovers. The offense improved during the regular season, but they hung tough with some good opponents early on, losing to KU and Memphis both on the road by 4.