Dear AAC and it's fans

[The Viking]

Maybe less time crying about seeding and more time not embarrassing yourselves on the court.

Congratulations on causing the conference to focus more on winning. Ville, Memphis and UConn must read the BY.

 

[The Viking]

Maybe the teams just aren't as good as the crybabies think.

Whoops.

If Memphis wins today you may want to take a long drive somewhere where there is no internet access.

 

[BlueMAB]

The mojo is strong in this thread. It takes giant balls to say it's all about the quality of play and then ignore the quality of play.

 

[noeynox]

[e="Marty Jackson, post: 892378, member: 2291"]the bigger damage was actually putting 3 of the teams in the same bracket.[/quote]

I Really Think This Was Deliberately Done To Prevent A Repeat Of The Big East Sending Three Teams To Final Four In 85.

the bigger damage was actually putting 3 of the teams in the same bracket.

I re

 

[David 76]

So, how does that AAC-Big East comparison look now?

 

[AZHuskiePop]

Some of you guys are seriously brain dead.

Most of the complains from Vegas are wrongheaded - as the loudest voices don't seem to understand the tourney is seeded on resumes - not current form power ratings. Alan Boston was one of the loudest and spent all week saying Dayton shouldn't even have been a candidate.

As for the AAC being 5-1...

A: You see that you get the chance to play the games

B: WHO YOU PLAY MATTERS A HELL OF A LOT MORE THAN WHAT YOUR SEED IS

So in conclusion since this seems to be difficult for people obsessed with 'respect' and the little number next to the team names in the bracket:

A couple of AAC teams were underseeded. It was never worth hundreds of posts crying about it because as you now can see in this very tournament - who you play matters a hell of a lot more than the little number next to your name.

Whaler you still don't get it.
Most of the complaints were based on how difficult the future will be for UConn in the AAC. This is after all a a UConn board. More portents of future doom and gloom. They actually are somewhat correct. You certainly had more margin for error in the Old Big East . I don't think even you dispute that reality. Some here (who are unnamed)are using this issue to further their CR agenda. Thats fine with me,its part of the discourse.
I don't think people here were bothered by St Joe's and a second round match up with Nova was much anticipated. Let's see Nova or Louisville who would you pick?
Louisville and Wichita State arguably is a p5 conference set up.
They possibly didn't want two lesser conferences represented in the FF.
The exception would be Creighton who star has assumed the Larry Bird mantle.

 

[whaler11]

Whaler you still don't get it.
Most of the complaints were based on how difficult the future will be for UConn in the AAC. This is after all a a UConn board. More portents of future doom and gloom. They actually are somewhat correct. You certainly had more margin for error in the Old Big East . I don't think even you dispute that reality. Some here (who are unnamed)are using this issue to further their CR agenda. Thats fine with me,its part of the discourse.
I don't think people here were bothered by St Joe's and a second round match up with Nova was much anticipated. Let's see Nova or Louisville who would you pick?
Louisville and Wichita State arguably is a p5 conference set up.
They possibly didn't want two lesser conferences represented in the FF.
The exception would be Creighton who star has assumed the Larry Bird mantle.

Oh I get it don't worry.

What one committee does isn't the end of the world. The membership is constantly evolving and how they bracket this field doesn't tell you how they will bracket future fields.

Unless you are getting screwed out of 1 or 2 seeds - the seeding is less important every year. The tournament has become so flat that between the 5-12 lines it comes down to where you play and who you play. Your current form is a lot more important than if you have a 5 or a 7 or a 9 next to your name.

Just look at Stamford and Dayton. Double digits seeds who caught teams with good resumes who had injuries and peaked early. If Dayton was a 9 they probably don't go to the Sweet 16. Same with Stamford if they were an 8.

So this committe slightly screwed the AAC. SMU had a better resume than NC State. UConn and Louisville both either got underseeded by a line or two. They both caught second round opponents who peaked in January and beat them up pretty good.

I guess I'd wait until I really got screwed before I cried so much and not do it on spec.

 

[whaler11]

not sure what's more frustrating, your original post which was simply being 'douchey' for attention, or this post in which you really think that you alone get it, while the entire BY (and Vegas) doesn't.

What exactly is Vegas getting than I'm not?

I said what three times that UConn and Louisville were underseeded. I just don't think it matters if you get good geography and good matchups.

 

[whaler11]

I was really embarrassed by Louisville beating Saint Louis by 15 and UConn beating 'Nova by 12 today.

AAC now 5-1 in the tournament. The one loss was by four points to a team that just played one of the tournament favorites to the wire. If the AAC wanted to prove that their teams got under-seeded, they're doing a pretty damn good job right now.

Well I made the orginal post on Thursday night. Since Thursday, Louisville and UConn played much better and Memphis played pretty well in their game. I seriously question how many people watched Louisville and Cinci on Thursday that have piled on. They both played awful.

UConn and Louisville have proved they were underseeded. That was really the way to handle it instead of crying about the seeding even though favorable matchups existed.

The complaints remind me of some dopes who have worked for me the past. They would cry about their scorecard rating realtive to others ignoring that financially they did better. Just focused on the wrong things.

 

[Robertelamin]

Go away.

 

[champs99and04]

Well I made the orginal post on Thursday night. Since Thursday, Louisville and UConn played much better and Memphis played pretty well in their game. I seriously question how many people watched Louisville and Cinci on Thursday that have piled on. They both played awful.

UConn and Louisville have proved they were underseeded. That was really the way to handle it instead of crying about the seeding even though favorable matchups existed.

The complaints remind me of some dopes who have worked for me the past. They would cry about their scorecard rating realtive to others ignoring that financially they did better. Just focused on the wrong things.

I think most of us were pretty happy with our draw. I don't think it's unreasonable, though, to be simultaneously happy with our draw and unhappy with the way our conference was treated. You can say, "handle it on the court...", and that's fine, but that doesn't do SMU much good, does it? They were left out in favor of N.C. State, a team that had no business being in the field of 68. It worked out for us this year, but that was purely coincidental. It just as easily could have been Michigan State we were playing last night instead of Villanova, and then the seven seed really would have effed us over. FWIW, I think Cincinnati and Memphis were seeded fairly. I wouldn't have been overly outraged if SMU had been left out had N.C. State not gotten in ahead of them. You could make the argument that Louisville deserved a four purely based on their resume, but if you're going to grade Louisville on "their overall body of work", do the same for Virginia, a team with an NIT quality OOC profile.

The major takeaway, I think, was that the ACC was over-seeded and the AAC was under-seeded. I think the results have pretty much corresponded with those beliefs so far. Regardless, it's all water under the bridge now. Hopefully Memphis beats Virgnia tonight.