Dear AAC and it's fans | Page 4 | The Boneyard

Dear AAC and it's fans

Status
Not open for further replies.
tzznandrew said:
Eh. They do two different things. The AP poll is a flawed look at who the press thinks are the best teams right now.

The tournament committee is supposed to seed teams based on body of work.
Expand ...

Fine, then don't publish the AP or Coaches polls anymore. Publish only those polls and rankings that count.

I don't see why the Committee wouldn't at least use the Polls as a guide. The press is more in tune with the teams across the rest of the country. The Committee is made up of bureaucrats and ADs who only have their own school's best interest in mind.
 
UConn defense could have been better, but Galloway hit some tough shots with a hand in the face.
 
itgoeslike said:
UConn defense could have been better, but Galloway hit some tough shots with a hand in the face.
Expand ...
St. Joes shot 61% in the first half. It's fair to say that there were more defensive breakdowns than just a few S.W.A.S. by Galloway.
 
Husky25 said:
Fine, then don't publish the AP or Coaches polls anymore. Publish only those polls and rankings that count.

I don't see why the Committee wouldn't at least use the Polls as a guide. The press is more in tune with the teams across the rest of the country. The Committee is made up of bureaucrats and ADs who only have their own school's best interest in mind.
Expand ...
Why? They do different things. Nothing wrong with taking vitals, but that doesn't tell you overall health.
 
...and UMass getting their collective heads beat in is why we complained about our seeding. Are you really going to tell me this team deserved a 6 seed over UConn?
 
.-.
aceboon said:
...and UMass getting their collective heads beat in is why we complained about our seeding. Are you really going to tell me this team deserved a 6 seed over UConn?
Expand ...

Yes, I believe he is.
 
They underseeded the tournament champions - Louisville, Michigan State, St Joseph's.

Doesn't matter. We moved on.
 
whaler11 said:
When you cry for a week about seeding and the three teams play like that, it's embarassing by definition. The league was a Brimah rebound and a Hancock three from being swept out the door today.
Expand ...

You know who else complained about the seeding? Vegas. You know, the guys who actually know how to evaluate teams... And they thought some of the seedings - in particular Louisville were a joke.

But hey, maybe you know more about college hoops than Vegas.
 
tzznandrew said:
I like that the kid got some time. I hope he gets vhis confidence back, because he can be dynamite. But on a personal level...he deserved it! He came to UConn despite not being able to play in the NCAAs his freshman year. The kid has heart and devotion to the team. You get him minutes when you can, and hope he can come through. He's shown he's not afraid of the big moments.
Expand ...

the thing that kills me about Omar is that lately it seems like he's been getting good looks and the shots look good but then they just barely rim out.
He needs a couple 3's in a 2 minute span to get his brain clicked and ready to go again
Don't forget the Cuse upset last year, he had some huge 3's in that game as well.
 
.-.
Doing different things doesn't mean they are unrelated.

Project this system on to the CFP next January. Kingsbury has Texas Tech running on all cylinders. They are taking advantage of coaching changes and player attrition in the Big 12. They have no losses and ranked #2 in the country. All indications are that they should be in the playoffs and seeded #2. Are you okay if the Committee picks a #5 Alabama team with two losses as the #2 seed and drop TTU to #4 or even out of the playoff for whatever reason? I don't.
 
If Memphis can win 2 in a row, they will have the testiculos going into MSG.
 
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.
 
Yeah. I think Villanova might start complaining about how underseeded a certain AAC team was.
 
.-.
Waquoit said:
Yeah they do. They are the 1st round games.
Expand ...

I've run many tournaments, and have never heard of feed-in games referred to as 1st round, until this tournament.

EDIT: I guess my real problem is calling the round of 64 the 2nd round of the tournament. It's not - it's the first game for 60 teams.
 
Last edited:
1) 1st round games are def. tourney games. Winners get the same units everyone else does.
2) Maybe I had blinders on, but how much of the "whining" this self-important blowhard is complaining about actually came from the schools/fanbases? I heard a great deal of noise from the ESPN talking heads and whatnot, but not much else of substance.
 
The Viking said:
You know who else complained about the seeding? Vegas. You know, the guys who actually know how to evaluate teams... And they thought some of the seedings - in particular Louisville were a joke.

But hey, maybe you know more about college hoops than Vegas.
Expand ...

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.
 
whaler11 said:
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.
Expand ...

Welcome to the spin zone!
 
whaler11 said:
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.
Expand ...


You just don't get it. Seeding matters, not only for the quality of opponents that you will meet, but also for economic reasons. Economically, the ACC and A-10 benefitted by having their conferences overrated as they got more teams in the tournament which gives the conference a greater possibility of NCAA credits which = money! By SMU not making the tournament, the AAC lost the opportunity to make more money and by lowering the seeds of the AAC teams, the ability to earn credits got harder.

The top 5 in the AAC this year were very good teams, but the conference was not respected. Hopefully, the AAC is gaining respect with each tournament win as this will help the conference in the future.
 
.-.
pepband99 said:
1) 1st round games are def. tourney games. Winners get the same units everyone else does.
Expand ...

Do winners of the feed in games get more or less than the teams that lose in the round of 64?

What about the losers of those first four feed in game?
 
whaler11 said:
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.
Expand ...
Hey Whaler, guess what???? UConn won last night, we are in our 15th sweet 16......And how did your team do???
 
whaler11 said:
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.
Expand ...

Don't leave skidmarks backtracking so hard.
 
i'll bet these "losers" weren't feeling "special" about being the higher seeds
as many college coaches say, survive and advance...style points go out the window

5VCU75----12Stephen F. Austin77
5Oklahoma75----12North Dakota State80
3Duke71----14Mercer78
6Ohio State59----11Dayton60
11Dayton55----3Syracuse53
 
pepband99 said:
Don't leave skidmarks backtracking so hard.
Expand ...

Good Lord, that poor fool is trying to double down?? Who is the Whaler and who does he root for? (I am fully prepared to LMAO at the answer) :)

It turns out, 'the eye test" doesn't mean diddly squat once the games take place because the tournament itself is all about match ups. And not only that, defensive-specialist ballgames seem abhorrent to basketball fans whose only take on abilities are what a team looks like on offense. Turns out, as proven last season, good defense wins championships because it is always there. Watching Brimah and Nolan and Daniels make Pinkston eat leather was thrilling to this defense fan - as was watching St Louis go a record 0-15 from beyond the arc because Louisville focused on not allowing that.

Does anyone here believe that UConn or Louisville would not thrive against a team like Oregon who wants to run and gun? I can see it now, if one of them won 98-92. "They're back!!" would be the expert opinion. Too bad because they missed the real games where teams grind out wins and advance.

The AAC was criminally underseeded and the very deserving SMU left out. The freaking A-10 got their 6th seed in their tournament - UMass - into a 6th seed in the NCAA tourney, only to be butt-slapped brutally, which we all could have called easily.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,207
Messages
4,556,895
Members
10,442
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom