Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="DefenseBB, post: 3445678, member: 7492"] I want to hit like to [USER=6927]@Plebe[/USER] reply but he has Tenn in and that is not what I want to hear, therefore I cannot "Like" his reply! So RPI considers Tenn at #54 and James Madison at #43. Tenn has played Cupcake U in scheduling OOC at #257 while JMU has an OOC of #79. Each have one Top 50 win. While JMU did lose to Towson back on Jan 12 (by a point) they have played the harder schedule and thus were challenged night in, night out. A slip up over a month ago should not be held against them. Meanwhile Tenn has lost 4 IN A ROW (soon to be 5!) and then plays the 3 cupcakes of the SEC in Vandy, Ole Miss and Auburn. How this resume is better than JMU is beyond me but I do believe him that the committee will see it that way! Aaaaarrrrgggghhh. My initial inclusion of UCF and Nebraska had more to do with game thread comments than Charlie Crème statements. Similar to those that think Colorado, Utah, WSU, Oklahoma, Texas Tech all deserve consideration due their "eye test" in those posters eyes. RPI is supposed to be the strong starting point, with latest trend and then good wins lately vs. bad losses lately. What defines "lately"? We have 2+ weeks to go with the Conference Tournaments but I am already irritated over what I definitely perceive to be a lack of logic by the committee. Really, who want to see the 6th or 7th team from the ACC, Big 12 or SEC in the dance from a quality perspective over a plucky JMU, Creighton or Ohio team? Only those who graduated from those schools! "All we are saying, is give the underdog a chance"...;) [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,461

Messages: 4,397,078

Members: 10,209

Latest member: noelle