I Think Jay Bilas...

#26
#26
GoBigOrangeVols said:
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.
Click to expand...
Yes, they've always taken injuries and eligibility issues into account. USC also blew Texas out.
 
#27
#27
I'm pretty sure my ears just heard Bilas say Pearl is a good coach and Tennessee could challenge Duke in the 2nd Round!
 
#28
#28
homefry20 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Why wouldn't the Committee take into account a transfer becoming eligible? It's not like Fontan missed the first semester because of academics.
 
#30
#30
UAB and VCU in the field is a big mistake but as a whole the tournament is solid, especially the 1-4 seeds, although Pittsburgh's bracket is weak. The other 3 brackets are great, although Texas got shafted with a 4 seed. Colorado/Bama, feel sorry for them, but very happy Va Tech is out.
 
#32
#32
Clemson is a solid team, they should have beat UNC yesterday and gave Duke a really tough game at Cameron. They were probably the third best team in the ACC and are definitely playing like the third best team right now. Clemson would beat Tennessee if they played us, it's not a joke they are in the tournament by any means.
 
#33
#33
atxvol2010 said:
Clemson is a solid team, they should have beat UNC yesterday and gave Duke a really tough game at Cameron. They were probably the third best team in the ACC and are definitely playing like the third best team right now. Clemson would beat Tennessee if they played us, it's not a joke they are in the tournament by any means.
Click to expand...
Except for the pesky fact that they beat exactly zero Top 50 teams.
 
#36
#36
I was pleasantly surprised to see a C-USA at large, but I still can't fathom UAB>UTEP. I was really looking forward to seeing how Cullpepper would perform against the big boys.
 
#38
#38
hatvol96 said:
Why wouldn't the Committee take into account a transfer becoming eligible? It's not like Fontan missed the first semester because of academics.
Click to expand...

wow, completely overlooked that. thats a very good win and ends any discussion on whether or not they should be in.

Clemson, UAB, and VCU should be replaced by Colorado, Va Tech and either bama or st. mary's
 
#39
#39
Regarding UAB, I am pretty sure their RPI is low-30s. So, ESPN rammed the RPI down our throats all season and is now complaining that a team in the low-30s is getting in over teams in the 60s. If anyone should be out, it's USC.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#41
#41
There were probably about a dozen teams contending for about the last five bids. We probably would have fallen into that group had we lost to Arkansas. As for the teams in that group, they may as well have been turning over one card at a table in Vegas. If you're asking the Committee for one of the last few bids, then you're asking them for a gift.
 
#42
#42
ukvols said:
Regarding UAB, I am pretty sure their RPI is low-30s. So, ESPN rammed the RPI down our throats all season and is now complaining that a team in the low-30s is getting in over teams in the 60s. If anyone should be out, it's USC.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

UAB's RPI is 31
St Mary's - 46
VCU - 49
Clemson - 56
V Tech - 60
Colorado - 65
USC - 69
Bama - 81
(bold teams in the tourney / RPI from Rivals)

If they went strictly by RPI, then St Mary's should have been in especially over USC. USC had 3 losses to teams with an RPI over 200 (St Mary's had one). It is funny to watch ESPN backtrack on the RPI though.
 
#43
#43
l3rewski said:
I was pleasantly surprised to see a C-USA at large, but I still can't fathom UAB>UTEP. I was really looking forward to seeing how Cullpepper would perform against the big boys.
Click to expand...

+1. I would have liked to see Tim Floyd and his guys play in the tourney no doubt.
 
#44
#44
They played NOBODY all year. They did beat VCU--at home--by 2 points--but what a weak schedule....No way do they deserve to be in before colorado or va. tech. I think there is a bit of a committee bias toward smaller schools when it comes to comparing them against middle-pack schools from bigger conferences....

I know it's not easy, but I am never really impressed by the committee's work...Colorado beat k.state three times and had a good year besides; va. tech won two conference tourney games before losing to duke. I do not like va. tech--but they have been boned by the committee three or four years straight.
 
#45
#45
VolsFan-TX said:
UAB's RPI is 31
St Mary's - 46
VCU - 49
Clemson - 56
V Tech - 60
Colorado - 65
USC - 69
Bama - 81
(bold teams in the tourney / RPI from Rivals)

If they went strictly by RPI, then St Mary's should have been in especially over USC. USC had 3 losses to teams with an RPI over 200 (St Mary's had one). It is funny to watch ESPN backtrack on the RPI though.
Click to expand...

how their rpi can be so high--their best victory of the year was a two-point home win over vcu. But then I admit I don't exactly understand rpi....What is UAB's SOS?
 
#48
#48
The Big 12 Commissioner is a member of the selection committee. With Colorado leaving the Big 12 for the Pac 12 do you think he had any part of the decision into leaving them out of the tournament?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top