4chs Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 1. Wisconsin 2. Arizona 3. Minnesota Can anyone make a strong case for these teams? Is the Big 10 strong enough to warrant 7 teams in the field?
bugatti Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 Because the teams you would replace them with are not that great either and have similar resumes or blemishes.
MountainThunder Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 1. Wisconsin 2. Arizona 3. Minnesota Can anyone make a strong case for these teams? Is the Big 10 strong enough to warrant 7 teams in the field? Minnesota's RPI was the in 35-40 range, so I think they deserve a shot. However, Arizona with the Pac 10 being so weak surprised me. If the PAC 10 and SEC were stronger this year, the Big 10 might not have gotten in 7 teams. But with only 3 SEC teams making it, other spots were open.
coldweatherfan Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 1. Wisconsin 2. Arizona 3. Minnesota Can anyone make a strong case for these teams? Is the Big 10 strong enough to warrant 7 teams in the field? Throw Maryland in there too. IMO... Wisconsin got in because they closed the regular season out by going 7-2 and they were the 4 seed in the Big Ten tournament. Arizona got in because they have been in the tourney 24 straight years and the committee had mercy on them. Minnesota got in because of RPI and win over Louisville. I'm not saying any of them deserve to be in, just why I think they are in.
Pancake Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 1. Wisconsin 2. Arizona 3. Minnesota Can anyone make a strong case for these teams? Is the Big 10 strong enough to warrant 7 teams in the field? They were bubble teams for a reason. For the most part they had better wins than the ones that made it.
Clyde Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 Throw Maryland in there too. IMO... Arizona got in because they have been in the tourney 24 straight years and the committee had mercy on them. . AZ got in because of their OOC schedule and wins.
Pancake Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 Throw Maryland in there too. IMO... Wisconsin got in because they closed the regular season out by going 7-2 and they were the 4 seed in the Big Ten tournament. Arizona got in because they have been in the tourney 24 straight years and the committee had mercy on them. Minnesota got in because of RPI and win over Louisville. I'm not saying any of them deserve to be in, just why I think they are in. I agree with two of your statements, but the bold one is pretty weak.
coldweatherfan Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 AZ got in because of their OOC schedule and wins. I agree with two of your statements, but the bold one is pretty weak. They went 1-5 down the stretch and had an RPI around 58. There were 10 teams with better RPIs that didn't make it. IMO they got a gift.
4chs Posted March 16, 2009 Author Posted March 16, 2009 AZ got in because of their OOC schedule and wins. Arizona had no significant road wins outside the conference, which supposedly was one of the deciding factors in determining the last ones in. They also lost 5 of their last 6 games. I would think that someone such as St. Mary's deserved the bid over Arizona.
4chs Posted March 16, 2009 Author Posted March 16, 2009 Minnesota's RPI was the in 35-40 range, so I think they deserve a shot. However, Arizona with the Pac 10 being so weak surprised me. If the PAC 10 and SEC were stronger this year, the Big 10 might not have gotten in 7 teams. But with only 3 SEC teams making it, other spots were open. I'm glad that Tubby got in, but someone on the selection committee stated that a team's RPI had no bearing, but the teams that they have played against RPI mattered. They beat UL and really no one else good outside the conference, although Pitino's excuse for that showing by the Cards was pretty valid. UNLV also beat UL on the Cards home court.
4chs Posted March 16, 2009 Author Posted March 16, 2009 Throw Maryland in there too. IMO... Wisconsin got in because they closed the regular season out by going 7-2 and they were the 4 seed in the Big Ten tournament. Auburn went 9-2 down the stretch and finished #2 in the western division of the conference. I think Auburn should have got in over Wisconsin.
coldweatherfan Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 Auburn went 9-2 down the stretch and finished #2 in the western division of the conference. I think Auburn should have got in over Wisconsin. I also think Auburn should have gotten in.
Clyde Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 They went 1-5 down the stretch and had an RPI around 58. There were 10 teams with better RPIs that didn't make it. IMO they got a gift. You completely ignored the part about their OOC schedule and wins. The committee seems to be telling teams that you can compensate for a bad conference by stepping up (unlike UK ) and playing a tough OOC schedule. AZ did - beat some high quality teams. That's why they are in.
Clyde Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 I also think Auburn should have gotten in. Auburn's OOC hurt them. Combine that with a bad conference and you get to go to the NIT.
.png.ffa34568722b20f38e3c3ecfcb9a2cd2.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.