PonyFans.com

Look, we got screwed out of our chance to answer this question. Don't be assuming Baylor, Texas, Stephen F. or anyone is better than SMU. It's funny how some SMU fans are accepting that somehow we are no longer tourney worthy and wouldn't have a made a run ourselves if given the chance we earned.

Are 2 wins in the NIT regarded as better than 1 win in the NCAA tournament?

We got screwed.

fans by definition are not the most objective people on the planet

I just hope we prove to be worthy of the #1 seed in the NIT. I want that trophy for SMU and especially for the seniors who can say they provided the foundation for the rebuilding of SMU hoops

No one knows. It is all subjective at this time. Only way to find out is if they played
each other this year and that is not going to happen.

I am enjoying the benefits of NIT this year - 2 or 3 more games at Moody - and if we win
game 2, game 3 would be another sell out. It gives our players more experience for next
year, it gives us more exciting exposure for Moody and for out players. And it might possibly
give our team a trip to the Big Apple and MSG.

If we got to New York, would that get more press and publicity than the teams making the Sweet 16?

in a word, no.

ponyboy wrote:It's funny how some SMU fans are accepting that somehow we are no longer tourney worthy and wouldn't have a made a run ourselves if given the chance we earned.

I don't think that's what people are saying. We deserved to be in the tournament this year, yes, but we were solidly on the bubble. There's no guarantee we would've done anything. If we played the way we did at home versus UConn, Memphis, and Cincinnati or away versus UConn, we could hang with just about anyone. If we played the way we did away versus USF and Temple or in the AAC tournament versus Houston, we could lose to just about anyone.

Rankings like this are so subjective, and college basketball teams are so inconsistent, that you could make an argument for just about any order but I don't think anyone is saying we weren't tournament-worthy or wouldn't have had a chance to get at least a couple of wins.

According to Sagarin it is:
Baylor
SMU
Texas
and SFA a distant fourth

Quick question:

I know most teams high profile teams don't want to come to Moody, but why don't we play these teams on their court?

Would UT, OU, Baylor, or OSU be up for taking us on at their place?

This would help our chances of making the NCAA tournament next year since the committee hated our non-conference schedule

SMU Section F wrote:We deserved to be in the tournament this year, yes, but we were solidly on the bubble.

The only bubble we were on, apparently, is the Committee's bubble. Everybody else had us as a lock. Everybody.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ponyboy wrote:

SMU Section F wrote:We deserved to be in the tournament this year, yes, but we were solidly on the bubble.

The only bubble we were on, apparently, is the Committee's bubble. Everybody else had us as a lock. Everybody.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

so you are saying we were only on the bubble of the people who mattered?

I think the issue is we didn't have enough "name brand" programs on our non conference schedule.

That is why I would love to play at OU, Baylor, and UT...but would they let us play them at their place?

Why is everyone trying to raise the top bar. We are fine there. We need to raise the bottom bar.

How are we fine on the top bar when we lose 2 games against the best team in our conference?