I Think Jay Bilas...

#5
#5
We are having a big time over on the CUSA board. Theyre just making themselves look like goons.
 
#6
#6
Also, FWIW, I dont think UAB deserves to be in the field. However, I think it lacks class for a bunch of sports guys to sit around and bash them like theyre a team full of serial killers.
 
#7
#7
homefry20 said:
Also, FWIW, I dont think UAB deserves to be in the field. However, I think it lacks class for a bunch of sports guys to sit around and bash them like theyre a team full of serial killers.
Click to expand...


It has the distinct feel that they agreed or were told that this year they would harshen up the commentary, generate some controversy.
 
#11
#11
homefry20 said:
Also, FWIW, I dont think UAB deserves to be in the field. However, I think it lacks class for a bunch of sports guys to sit around and bash them like theyre a team full of serial killers.
Click to expand...

It makes some great locker room material. They've spent the last 24 minutes exclusively bashing UAB and VCU.
 
#13
#13
lawgator1 said:
It has the distinct feel that they agreed or were told that this year they would harshen up the commentary, generate some controversy.
Click to expand...
No, they are saying what anyone who actually gives a damn about college basketball should be. UAB and VCU should have been middling seeds in the NIT. Their inclusion in the field is a joke. A bad one.
 
#15
#15
Colorado and Va Tech should be in with UAB and VCU out, and that's the bottom line
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#18
#18
VCU is an absolute joke. You lose ten games overall in a conference like the CAA, get out of here.
 
#19
#19
Colorado should absolutely be in over VCU, UAB, USC, and Clemson.

Strong argument can be made that Va Tech should be in over those four as well. Bama too.

I'm glad the talking heads on espn ripped the committee like they did, and I hope they tear the guy up when he comes on the air with them at 830
 
#20
#20
Colorado had a non con SOS of 325. Who the hell did they play?

Also, Colorado lost to Iowa State, San Francisco, Nebraska, Harvard and Oklahoma.
 
#22
#22
homefry20 said:
Colorado had a non con SOS of 325. Who the hell did they play?

Also, Colorado lost to Iowa State, San Francisco, Nebraska, Harvard and Oklahoma.
Click to expand...
They played nobody, yet have five wins better than anything UAB did all year. Bilas was exactly right. Nobody has ever gotten an at large bid with a resume as flimsy as UAB's.
 
#24
#24
hatvol96 said:
The Committee obviously, per their standards, took into account when Jio Fontan became eligible. That wipes those first four losses off the slate.
Click to expand...

are they supposed to do that?

USC has a stronger case than Clemson, imo. winning in knoxville, and beating ucla, washington, and arizona are all good wins.
 
#25
#25
hat, Im not really defending UAB and feel they were a mistake but its nice to see two CUSA teams in the field. However, Colorado and Va Tech both have a very weak resume too.

Also, its apparent the committee took into account Fontains eligibility as well as Thompkins health. UGA had a few losses early without him and were rewarded with a #10 seed. I dont have a problem with rewarding a team like UGA who had a player with an injury but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth when you reward a team for getting a player back from ineligibility.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top