re: Annual LOL at Big 12 March Meltdown

Okay, if Cuse and Texas weren't in, then you'd have a mid-major v mid-major no one wants to watch.

People like to watch the mid-major take down the national brands if even they are in a down year. That's why the 12-5s and 11-6s get a lot of the uosets. It's usually a strong mid-major against a mid pack P5.

Again, if it was UNI vs. Dayton, then they're meeting the winner of St. Joe's vs. Yale? No ones gonna want to watch that. They may be good games, but they don't really have much appeal.

percentages, more teams and higher seeds for big conferences, this isn't college football, but the committee treats it like it is

quote:

---

really, the SEC was the only major conference that got the treatment it should have, you can shave 1-2 teams off of each of them and replace them with some md-majors and have a better tourney

---

ACC did, too.

I think it's pretty clear the ACC was the best conference in the country this year.

ACC went 6 - 1 in the first round (most being pretty easy wins), with the lone loss being that Pitt choke to a 7 seeded Wisconsin. ACC is without its 3rd or 4th best team as well.

ACC's last two in were 10 seeds. One dominated and one was extremely competitive and choked its game away.

quote:

---

The problem with the SEC is that LSU and UF flopped which degraded the conference's image even further and took away what was once considered to be good wins for teams like SC. Hell, Vandy got into the dance but they didn't have nearly as good a season as expected either.

---

Yeah, SC, Florida, Alabama and LSU were all looking pretty good for bids late in the season and not only beat up on each other but also sprinkled in a few bad losses to the bottom of the league.

Like you said, that snowballed into all of those teams also losing "quality wins".



That said, it's not mutually exclusive to say both:

1. The SEC teams that didn't get bids mainly have themselves to blame

2. The league didn't "suck" at all. It was actually pretty deep considering the amount of bubble quality teams (SC, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Ole Miss and LSU).

Tourney results don't mean these teams deserved bids. They do suggest that this group isn't really as different from the middle of the PAC12, BIG12 etc as most "experts" kept harping on.

quote:

---

Let's not forget how the refs gave duke a win in the 1st round. The acc has unc as their best team. The rest are pretenders. Virginia is good but will lose before the final four so will Norte dame and Syracuse. Miami may not get out of this game.

---

Ok, they still had, by far, the best record and performance of the power conferences. And that's without what would have been a 4 seed or so. No one else was close.

Considering your prediction record, it looks like you just guaranteed UVA, ND, and Miami into the Final Four.

The ACC was definitely the best conference in the country this year, and anyone paying attention to that before the tournament knew that.

I am not saying they weren't. They always have the best conference. I just hate they way the refs gave the game to fricking duke. It happens way to often. This years duke team has guts and plays hard but they aren't that good. It's a shame that Yale has zero chance of winning today. It's the lock of the tourney. I call it the refs and ratings mafia....

You Kansas fans had better worry about uconn before anything else.

Kinda like what everyone does during the bowl season

quote:

---

You Kansas fans had better worry about uconn before anything else.

---

Trust me, I'm worried sick about today. But the great thing about being a fan is whatever I feel or think doesn't mean shite because the players are the ones who play the game.

quote:

---

hey are not even remotely close to be being bad enough for these conferences to get 4 more teams than them

---

sorry, but yes they are. The SEC was hot garbage. You can't judge these other conferences based on the first round of the tourney. The BigXII was what 7-3? vs the SEC on that SECvBigXII Saturday.