I think the same argument that we have for the best 12 football playoff teams, applies to the best 68 teams in the NCAA tournament. I congratulate Miami of Ohio for the accomplishment of winning 29 straight games, but I am not convinced they are one of the best 68 teams in America and apparently Bruce Pearl, who has forgot more basketball than I will ever know, thinks the same thing.   

17 minutes ago, DragonFire said:

I think we’re giving out earned honors. If you are after a tournament that only let's in teams that will go all the way, I’m sorry to break it to you that there are way, way too many teams in it.

Then win your conference tournament.

23 hours ago, 4 Quarters said:

Really Bruce, so if Miami goes 35/0 and wins the MAC tourney that makes them a better team than if they were to finish 34/1?

Reread what Bruce said, if they lose, they are not one of the best at-large teams, which if they lose in the MAC tourney that is what they would have to be is an at-large team.

9 minutes ago, Big East Zebra said:

Reread what Bruce said, if they lose, they are not one of the best at-large teams, which if they lose in the MAC tourney that is what they would have to be is an at-large team.

I understand what he was saying, but it still doesn't hold water.  They could still be a better team than some of the smaller conference winners.  Yes, they would then be an at large team, but at the same time they could be one of the best 68 teams.

Since some on here are so high on Miami of Ohio, let me pose this question to you. Joe Lunardi, in his Bracketology has Miami as an 11 seed.  Let's say they finish running the table and are 34-0 going into Selection Sunday. Is an 11 seed too low for them since they are undefeated?

4 hours ago, Big East Zebra said:

I'm sorry are we giving out participation trophies?

There given every year to plenty 12 and more loss teams from the power conferences who don’t make it out of the first round. 

Currently at #52 in the NCAA Net Rankings. That puts them in the top 68. Sorry Bruce Pearl. 

Usually a team needs to be top 40 in net rankings to get an at large bid. Teams lower than 40 have quality quad 1 wins. Miami will have none. But I think undefeated regular season and top 50 in net rankings gets them in.

Edited March 3Mar 3 by Voice of Reason

10 hours ago, Big East Zebra said:

Then win your conference tournament.

I think I’d make the same argument for the various power conference teams that are on the bubble that you seem to be favoring. 

6 minutes ago, DragonFire said:

I think I’d make the same argument for the various power conference teams that are on the bubble that you seem to be favoring. 

Should Miami (OH) get in over Texas?

8 hours ago, Big East Zebra said:

Since some on here are so high on Miami of Ohio, let me pose this question to you. Joe Lunardi, in his Bracketology has Miami as an 11 seed.  Let's say they finish running the table and are 34-0 going into Selection Sunday. Is an 11 seed too low for them since they are undefeated?

Actually, I feel an 11 seed is to high.  I would likely have them a 14/16 seed.

The reality is, we have no historical precedence with this. With the sudden shifting landscape of power conferences and quad-based scoring system, it is next to impossible to capture any type of traction as a mid-major like you once could.

2 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

Should Miami (OH) get in over Texas?

No, probably not, and I'm not making that argument.  I feel Miami (OH) belongs somewhere in the field.  But if my advocacy of that is tantamount to "a participation trophy" simply because I said I didn't think Miami (OH) was a threat to go far, then I would also note that teams like yes, Texas, are not likely a threat to go far.  And if "well just win your conference tournament" applies to Miami (OH), then it applies to the others as well.

Now, as it pertains to Auburn, who has a NET 38 that is above Miami (OH)? Yes, I think Miami (OH) should get in over them.  Bruce Pearl's advocacy against Miami (OH) means nothing to me when he's pushing for his son's team to get into the field with a 15-14 record.  

2 hours ago, DragonFire said:

I think I’d make the same argument for the various power conference teams that are on the bubble that you seem to be favoring. 

 

2 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

Should Miami (OH) get in over Texas?

Here's my thing. For every random "Last 4 In" type team to make a deep run, there are 100 that do not. I would much rather see a team like Miami (OH) be rewarded for their efforts than team #68 or whoever be given a seat at the table. I am much more concerned with fairness at the top of the bracket with regionality, than I am with the 9th-place team in the Big 12. 

I think some of you all are overselling some of the at large teams they would be going against to get in at that point. 

Just using Joe Lunardi's latest bracketology. Here is who he has as the last 8 in, and the first 8 out. 

Last 8 in: (In order)

SMU

TCU

UCLA

Texas AM

Santa Clara

Ohio State

New Mexico

Indiana

First 8 out: (In order)

Auburn

San Diego State

VCU

Virginia Tech

USC

California

West Virginia

Cincinnati

He has TCU being in and TCU is a team who has one Quad 3 loss and a Quad 4 loss.

He has Santa Clara being in and they have a bad Quad 4 loss.

New Mexico is in currently and they have a Quad 3 loss.

Auburn has a Quad 3 loss

San Diego State has a Quad 3 loss

Virginia Tech a Quad 3 loss

USC a Quad 3 loss

California a Quad 3 loss

West Virginia a Quad 3 loss

Cincinnati a Quad 4 loss

Miami may not have had any top wins, but they also have not faltered against any bad teams either. Which all the team they would be competing for an at Large spot with had loss a type of game that Miami has beaten all year. So if Miami finally does suffer a Quad 3 loss in the conference tournament, after being undefeated all year. I just don't see them dropping them out for one of these other teams. So as to me when trying to choose one of those last few at large teams, and would be similar to each other in NET rankings. You give the team that went undefeated all year long in the regular season, and didn't have any slip ups against those Quad 3 or Quad 4 teams in the regular season like the teams they are competing against for the last at large spots. 

 

15 minutes ago, futurecoach said:

I think some of you all are overselling some of the at large teams they would be going against to get in at that point. 

Just using Joe Lunardi's latest bracketology. Here is who he has as the last 8 in, and the first 8 out. 

Last 8 in: (In order)

SMU

TCU

UCLA

Texas AM

Santa Clara

Ohio State

New Mexico

Indiana

First 8 out: (In order)

Auburn

San Diego State

VCU

Virginia Tech

USC

California

West Virginia

Cincinnati

He has TCU being in and TCU is a team who has one Quad 3 loss and a Quad 4 loss.

He has Santa Clara being in and they have a bad Quad 4 loss.

New Mexico is in currently and they have a Quad 3 loss.

Auburn has a Quad 3 loss

San Diego State has a Quad 3 loss

Virginia Tech a Quad 3 loss

USC a Quad 3 loss

California a Quad 3 loss

West Virginia a Quad 3 loss

Cincinnati a Quad 4 loss

Miami may not have had any top wins, but they also have not faltered against any bad teams either. Which all the team they would be competing for an at Large spot with had loss a type of game that Miami has beaten all year. So if Miami finally does suffer a Quad 3 loss in the conference tournament, after being undefeated all year. I just don't see them dropping them out for one of these other teams. So as to me when trying to choose one of those last few at large teams, and would be similar to each other in NET rankings. You give the team that went undefeated all year long in the regular season, and didn't have any slip ups against those Quad 3 or Quad 4 teams in the regular season like the teams they are competing against for the last at large spots. 

 

The argument that will be made at that time is that Miami (OH) doesn't have any good wins to offset the bad loss.  With no consideration of any other factors, it's a sound argument.  Where it fails to me is that just because a team had a couple Quad 1 wins doesn't erase from my memory that they also lost 12-13 of those games too.