Jump to content

Conference tourneys thread


Sports Guy

Recommended Posts

The last few picks are so subjective. I really don't doubt that there is some anti Greenberg sentiment that hurt VT this year. They definitely had a better resume than 2 or 3 of the at large teams that got bids. Still, four straight bubble bursts on Selection Sunday. That's pretty funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply
The last few picks are so subjective. I really don't doubt that there is some anti Greenberg sentiment that hurt VT this year. They definitely had a better resume than 2 or 3 of the at large teams that got bids. Still, four straight bubble bursts on Selection Sunday. That's pretty funny.

Yea, funny like Jeffrey Maier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Win games - they won 21 games. Sure, they had some bad losses, but they played as well as you can expect a 6-man team to play. They played their frickin' hearts out, going back-to-back-to-back days with literally half a team.

Schedule good teams outside of conference? Kansas State, Oklahoma State, UNLV, Purdue, Penn State, Mississippi State, and they went 3-3 in those games including an OT loss to Purdue.

I could live with this if it was a one time thing, or maybe they play and schedule like this and get in one year, don't get in the next. But four straight years as a so-called bubble team, and four straight years sitting at home listening to the excuses why Penn State and UAB and VCU are more deserving.

I'm wondering why we even went to the ACC. If you can win 10 or 11 games in conference all the time and never make the tourney I think they might have been better off in some crap conference going 27-3 while playing UNC Greensboro or Savannah State six times.

It just galls me that Tech is a consensus top-50 team in the country, but it doesn't matter because 15, 20 spots in the tourney are reserved for 15 or 16 seeds who won some little Metro Atlantic type conference. How many teams have to make it while they're ranked 125th by Sagarin?

This is what they're talking about getting rid of the bowl system in football for? At least the bowls are honest and upfront about them being 100% about the money.

VT was 2-5 against top 50 teams. Penn State was 5-7.

VT's SOS was 74th. Penn State's was 6th.

VT went 21-11 (9-7). PSU went 19-14 (9-9).

VT was 13-3 against teams not in the top 100 RPI, including 8-0 against teams ranked 200 or worse. PSU was 9-1 against teams not in the top 100, including 2-1 against teams ranked 200 or worse.

There's no way VT is more deserving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VT was 2-5 against top 50 teams. Penn State was 5-7.

VT's SOS was 74th. Penn State's was 6th.

VT went 21-11 (9-7). PSU went 19-14 (9-9).

VT was 13-3 against teams not in the top 100 RPI, including 8-0 against teams ranked 200 or worse. PSU was 9-1 against teams not in the top 100, including 2-1 against teams ranked 200 or worse.

There's no way VT is more deserving.

Numbers don't lie.

On top of that, in a weak ACC year, they lost to UNC and Duke. They also had bad losses to Boston College (TWICE), Virginia (TWICE), Georgia Tech, and Clemson.

That's not gonna cut it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Numbers don't lie.

On top of that, in a weak ACC year, they lost to UNC and Duke. They also had bad losses to Boston College (TWICE), Virginia (TWICE), Georgia Tech, and Clemson.

That's not gonna cut it.

I thought VT should be in and should have been in over UAB and VCU..You can't really argue those 2 teams over VT.

That being said, you can not lost at home to UVA. You can not go to GaTech and lose by 15. You can't get swept by BC.

They only had 1 good road/neutral court win and that was against a mediocre OK St team.

They should be in...But there are also reasons why they shouldn't be and their snub is no where as bad as Colorado's snub.

And Drungo, this year is different than before. Before, VT would have terrible losses and play no one OOC. that's why they didn't get in.

This year is a little different. They played a little better OOC schedule and didn't have any of those poor OOC losses.

However, in conference, they lost too many bad games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VT was 2-5 against top 50 teams. Penn State was 5-7.

VT's SOS was 74th. Penn State's was 6th.

VT went 21-11 (9-7). PSU went 19-14 (9-9).

VT was 13-3 against teams not in the top 100 RPI, including 8-0 against teams ranked 200 or worse. PSU was 9-1 against teams not in the top 100, including 2-1 against teams ranked 200 or worse.

There's no way VT is more deserving.

That's all good, except that Penn State was 0-1 against Virginia Tech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe VT fans should channel some anger towards Clemson...0 wins against top 50 RPI and they get in.

Oh, I got enough anger for a whole conference worth of teams. UAB's biggest win of the year was over Southern Miss. VCU's only out of conference win worth anything was UCLA. And don't even get me started on automatic bids like Morehead State, whose biggest win on the year was over Sagarin's 84th ranked team, the College of Charleston. There are teams in the tourney who didn't play any top-100 teams in 2011.

I hope they implement a tournament like this in NCAA football. It'll be fun seeing a first round Auburn - Troy matchup (you have to have the Sun Belt champ get in), while Nebraska or Florida State sits home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's all good, except that Penn State was 0-1 against Virginia Tech.

I'm not going to argue with you, I think VT should have been in. Also, Alabama and Colorado should have too. But, VT does this to themselves every year. I haven't heard Greenberg yet, but I'm sure he'll say something bad about the committee and the next time it's close he won't get the call again.

I'd take out UAB, VCU and USC. The biggest injustice, IMO, is Alabama (though I'm laughing about it on the inside). 12-4 in the SEC and they don't get in. I don't care that their non-conference isn't as good, they turned into a completely different team in the second half of the season (apparently, since I didn't watch much of them). VT should have got in, but they don't have as big of a complaint as Bama and Colorado.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't heard Greenberg yet, but I'm sure he'll say something bad about the committee and the next time it's close he won't get the call again.

This is the thing I really hate. Everyone just assumes that the committee gives the benefit of the doubt to the good little campers who keep their mouths shut, not necessarily the best teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the thing I really hate. Everyone just assumes that the committee gives the benefit of the doubt to the good little campers who keep their mouths shut, not necessarily the best teams.

I think it's just human nature. If all things are equal, and basically when you're looking at these kind of teams they usually are, then the person making the decision isn't going to give it to the guy who has been bad-mouthing him. The committee people are stubborn and proud, and they're not going to look at themselves as having been bullied into giving VT a bubble bid. If Greenberg will shut his mouth this time, or say something about how the committee has a very tough job, then maybe next time VT gets the benefit of the doubt.

It's not right, but it certainly does exist and Greenberg needs to figure it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I got enough anger for a whole conference worth of teams. UAB's biggest win of the year was over Southern Miss. VCU's only out of conference win worth anything was UCLA. And don't even get me started on automatic bids like Morehead State, whose biggest win on the year was over Sagarin's 84th ranked team, the College of Charleston. There are teams in the tourney who didn't play any top-100 teams in 2011.

I hope they implement a tournament like this in NCAA football. It'll be fun seeing a first round Auburn - Troy matchup (you have to have the Sun Belt champ get in), while Nebraska or Florida State sits home.

That's just how it is with the automatic bids. No need to be mad at a team like Morehead State who did everything required of them to get in to the field.

People want to preach RPI all year. Well VCU has a better RPI than Colorado, Tech, and Alabama. Out of 13 OOC games for Colorado, 3 of those were against top 50 RPI teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought VT should be in and should have been in over UAB and VCU..You can't really argue those 2 teams over VT.

That being said, you can not lost at home to UVA. You can not go to GaTech and lose by 15. You can't get swept by BC.

They only had 1 good road/neutral court win and that was against a mediocre OK St team.

They should be in...But there are also reasons why they shouldn't be and their snub is no where as bad as Colorado's snub.

And Drungo, this year is different than before. Before, VT would have terrible losses and play no one OOC. that's why they didn't get in.

This year is a little different. They played a little better OOC schedule and didn't have any of those poor OOC losses.

However, in conference, they lost too many bad games.

Oh, I definitely agree. UAB and VCU have no place in the tournament. Colorado is most deserving of the bubble-bursted teams. I just think it's a really weak year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...