Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="FfldCntyFan, post: 4931683, member: 71"] My issue with Ackerman is her response to the committee's overlooking all but the top three schools in her conference. It came across as appeasement and cut the legs out from under the coaches that publicly criticized the committee. My interpretation was that her response basically said “please forgive us for comments some of our coaches made”. It sounds like she is so worried that those in charge will marginalize us even further, she feels she needs to demonstrate gratitude for the few crumbs that they left us. I did hear the comment on “No team that won thirteen games in a major conference was excluded” and I also heard one yesterday on how “Creighton has been a quality program for a mid-major”. My only gripe on a school being excluded was Seton Hall as not only did they have a very good record in a conference where six games were against schools that are still playing (and the selection committee saw fit to seed one, two and three), the only games they lost out of conference were to power conference schools. St John’s, Providence and maybe Villanova can throw a few complaints out about not being selected but I imagine if each did a bit better out of conference it would have helped not only their chances, but it would have improved the overall image of the conference as a whole. If her comment on working with member schools to prevent repeating what happened this year is based on demanding legitimate improvement, great. That is what is needed. If it leads schools to try to start [B][I]gaming[/I][/B] the NET, thinking that will help, it will be a waste of time as the goalposts will always be moving in a manner that will favor other conferences. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach