Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="GamecockFam, post: 5044764, member: 10934"] I'm trying to decide in my head which is more valuable: consistently making the NCAA tournament but not having much to show for it. OR A flash in the pan program which has a couple of years of success where they make it far into the tournament and/or win it all but struggle to make the tournament in the years surrounding that success (Mississippi State, Arizona, etc.) I would argue the second is more valuable since it helps programs get their name out there. I would also say that anything below final four tends to not get remembered in the history books (unless your a hardcore fan). But we do tend to have a soft spot for those programs which are consistent sweet 16 teams (Louisville, etc.) so I think there is also something valuable to moderate success over a long period of time. All in all, I would probably add a little more weight to teams that make sweet 16s and beyond if I were making a ranking system. [/QUOTE]