America East and Colonial have it right

[whaler11]

You won't see Boston University in Albany.

You won't see Old Dominion or Georgia State in Richmond.

You see those leagues actually had the sense to penalize the schools leaving their leagues instead of the schools staying. A novel concept for sure.

 

[zls44]

Totally disagree. Unfair to punish the coaches/players/fans.

Imagine being a senior at BU. Devastating.

 

[Alum86]

You won't see us in NYC because of the chance we may have won it.
Though provisions could have been made to take the runner up.

 

[whaler11]

You won't see us in NYC because of the chance we may have won it.
Though provisions could have been made to take the runner up.

LOL on both. First fair? Second they changed the Big East rule prior to the APR sanction.

This UConn team has been embraced by our fans but it's led to delusions about their quality. The idea that they are some special kind of scary in the Big East or NCAA tourney is based on nothing. It's a good team. No different than any other 8/9 seed.

 

[zls44]

So because UConn gets shafted by an unfair rule, you think other conferences should follow suit?

 

[Vuce]

Totally disagree. Unfair to punish the coaches/players/fans.

Imagine being a senior at BU. Devastating.

Too bad for them - they should go complain to the President of their school, not the conference. It's "unfair" to punish THESE Uconn kids who had nothing to do with any of the APR scores - devastating.

 

[Adios]

The remaining Big East schools have no ground to stand on in this conference and we certainly don't want to burn (more) bridges.

 

[Santini35]

LOL on both. First fair? Second they changed the Big East rule prior to the APR sanction.

That's a whole lot of twisting the truth there. You seem to want to make it look like the BE prez's decided on that rule on a whim independent of UConn's situation. And while the NCAA ban wasn't 100% in March last year when the prez's voted on it, they made that rule because UConn was likely to get hit and you know it.

 

[zls44]

Too bad for them - they should go complain to the President of their school, not the conference. It's "unfair" to punish THESE Uconn kids who had nothing to do with any of the APR scores - devastating.

The two situations are completely different.

You're trying to take out an unfortunate situation for UConn out on other teams in completely different scenarios. It's like watching the "leave Britney alone" video.

Your theory is that because UConn is getting shafted over the APR, other schools should get shafted because of their presidents. What? Nobody should get shafted, everyone should get to play in their conference tournaments- but for different reasons, as the scenarios are different.

 

[Vuce]

It's not "unfortunate" - it's downright WRONG

 

[whaler11]

That's a whole lot of twisting the truth there. You seem to want to make it look like the BE prez's decided on that rule on a whim independent of UConn's situation. And while the NCAA ban wasn't 100% in March last year when the prez's voted on it, they made that rule because UConn was likely to get hit and you know it.

Maybe, I'm not trying to twist the truth though. My overall point is that the Big East should have favored UConn over say Syracuse and Pittsburgh like other leagues did.

I get the concept of leaving teams banned from the NCAA tourney out of one bid leagues. Doesn't make much sense for a league that gets 7-9 bids.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

Gee Wiz Beaver !
You mean are former conference mates are a bunch of sleazy hippocrites.
I'm shocked.

 

[zls44]

It's not "unfortunate" - it's downright WRONG

It's not wrong. It's unfair. Difference.

The conference cares about saving face. They don't want to have an ineligible team win the autobid scenario.

I don't like it, I don't agree with it- but I can completely understand why they're doing it.

 

[whaler11]

The two situations are completely different.

You're trying to take out an unfortunate situation for UConn out on other teams in completely different scenarios. It's like watching the "leave Britney alone" video.

Your theory is that because UConn is getting shafted over the APR, other schools should get shafted because of their presidents. What? Nobody should get shafted, everyone should get to play in their conference tournaments- but for different reasons, as the scenarios are different.

I'm really saying one makes sense and the other doesn't. It makes sense to penalize teams that are leaving and doesn't make sense to penalize teams that are staying.

The 'fair' thing would to let everyone compete - but nothing about this is fair so it's a silly standard.

 

[zls44]

I'm really saying one makes sense and the other doesn't. It makes sense to penalize teams that are leaving and doesn't make sense to penalize teams that are staying.

Why does it make sense to punish DePaul's seniors?

 

[upstater]

LOL on both. First fair? Second they changed the Big East rule prior to the APR sanction.

This UConn team has been embraced by our fans but it's led to delusions about their quality. The idea that they are some special kind of scary in the Big East or NCAA tourney is based on nothing. It's a good team. No different than any other 8/9 seed.

They would be higher than a 8 seed.

AND, they are just as good as any team in the BE.

AND, the rule was changed in May 2012.

 

[Vuce]

Funny how the conference didn't care when Syracuse was ineligible for the NCAA tourney in the 90's. There was a precedent for this - it's wrong.

 

[Alum86]

Not an answer, Whaler. We're punished by the NCAA and the BigEast? I don't think the NCAA would care if the conference said iur champion is the winner of our tourney except if UConn wins it. Then our auto champion is no. 2.
Still fuzzy on why we cannot play

 

[whaler11]

Why does it make sense to punish DePaul's seniors?

Well throwing out the lateness of the C-7 decision why should a league who owns an automatic bid share it with a school who has chosen to disassociate themselves from the entity.

 

[whaler11]

They would be higher than a 8 seed.

AND, they are just as good as any team in the BE.

AND, the rule was changed in May 2012.

UConn would be higher than an 8 seed? If you say so. Lunardi had them as a 10 last night. Does he miss by 3 seed lines often?

 

[zls44]

The Big East would forefit the auto-bid if UConn won. They can't just give it to the other team in the title game.

Precedent this year is Texas Southern winning the SWAC Regular-Season title but being on APR ban from the SWAC/NCAA tournaments. The NCAA has stated that the NIT auto-bid for the regular-season champ is forefited, and cannot be transferred to Southern (who finished 2nd).

 

[whaler11]

As for DePaul's seniors there are dozens of at-large bids. Go earn one.

 

[Alum86]

Yes, Vuce. Agree. I accept we ain't going to NYC. But still think we should be going.
I want no part of anything BgEast/C7 etc.
Allegiance to Storrs only. Whaler: 8 or 9 or 10 seed, we would be dangerous this year. Acknowledge that. Much moreso than last year. If you're the no.1 west Zags, wanna play no. 9 UConn in 2nd round? ....

 

[whaler11]

No more dangerous than any other 7, 8,9 or 10 seed.

Lunardi has NCSU as an 8. He has Cincinnati as a 9. North Carolina and VCU as 7s.

There are plenty of 7-10 seeds who are dangerous.

 

[Vuce]

Switching topics for a sec - VCU is going to be very dangerous in the NCAA Tourney. I think Butler doesn't make it past the second round.