I think St Mary's got the shaft. So if they only lose to the Zags by 10 does that make a difference?

Conference standings have little to do with it. Minnesota has better wins than Penn State, as is evident from their victory over the #1 overall seed in the tournament.

 

You make that argument about Minnesota but the win for Arizona over Gonzaga is not important when St. Mary's got beat by them 3 times. :confused:

You make that argument about Minnesota but the win for Arizona over Gonzaga is not important when St. Mary's got beat by them 3 times. :confused:

 

2 of which were without their best player, thus meaningless as far as I'm concerned.

2 of which were without their best player, thus meaningless as far as I'm concerned.

 

Of course not it does not go with your argument. Your arguement is not holding any water.

Of course not it does not go with your argument. Your arguement is not holding any water.

 

So you don't think the fact that St. Mary's best player wasn't there for 2 of the games should be factored in at all?

So you don't think the fact that St. Mary's best player wasn't there for 2 of the games should be factored in at all?

 

It should have some but they still lost to them with him and Arizona beat them plus they beat Kansas that is two wins that St. Mary's can not put on there resume.

Did St. Mary's beat a single tourney team???

Did St. Mary's beat a single tourney team???

 

Pacific?

I think the decision comm. did a great job. Morehead St. should not be in the play in game and East Tenn. ST should be better than a 16 seed...

St. Mary's has three very good players in Mills, Samhan and Simpson but they really had no signature wins to speak of, and the drubbing by Gonzaga didn't help their cause. They were beaten by Gonzaga with a healthy Mills, they were leading when he was hurt in the 2nd matchup but I didn't think they had any chance after the waxing they took in Vegas.

Which is complete crap. How can they expect him to be 100% in his 2nd game back after missing over a month?

 

Because the tournament is here. They had the chance to show they belonged in a game everyone was watching and got smacked around...

I think Wisconsin has a pretty weak case. They did play a good non-conference schedule, but they lost to every top 50 non-conference opponent they faced. They are 4-10 against the top 50. They do not have a good win outside of conference. The only one that is close is against a NIT team in Virginia Tech. Half of their wins are against teams rated 121 and worse (121, 134, 157, 195, 213, 214, 214, 221, and 237). They also have a bad loss to Iowa.

I say St. Mary's got it pretty bad and I think Auburn should have been in as well.

 

U.K. was HOSED!!!! :madman::madman:.........O.K., I just had to add that, even I cannot be that big of a homer.

 

I disagree with you on St. Mary's and agree on Auburn.

St. Mary's even though they were playing great before Mills was hurt and they got Mills back but if you saw him play after returning he clearly is not the same. Gonzaga waxed them in their conference tourney and he was not a factor at all.

Auburn won something like 8 out of their last 9 ending the season and were as hot as anyone. I feel pretty sure in saying that Miss St. took their bid but imo Auburn should have been in as well.

 

I do believe overall the committie did a pretty good job. I don't have any major complaints at all.

Edited March 16, 200917 yr by oldrambler

Got to love the arguments for who got left out. If St. Mary's took care of business when they had the chance it wouldn't matter.

I think LSU got shafted in the seeding. They are the regular season SEC champs and were ranked in the top 20....they get an 8 seed?

 

I know there is the perception that the SEC is bad, but it seems to me the committee is trying to make sure that impression stays by making 2 SEC teams play 1 seeds in the second game. I'm cheering big time for Tennessee(they deserve an 8) and LSU to pull the upsets and screw up all the brackets.