NCAA Tourney
Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2005 8:19 pm
Some things I have noticed:
The difference between the major conferences and the smaller confernces has become quite small. It was not too long ago when the 1/16 and 2/15 games were blowouts 90% of the time. It's not the case anymore. 3 of the 4 sixteen seeds were competitive and gave the top seed some trouble and I think all of the 15 seeds hung in well. All the 4/13 matchups were real close or "upsets". Same with 3/14.
Are these wins by the smaller conferences really upsets? I'm not so sure they all are. I don't consider UW Milwaukee's two wins to be upsets. They were the better team in both games. Is their conference underrated? Yes.
I think it's time the power conferences stop getting 5-6 teams and some of these smaller conferences get 2-3. These small conferences can obviously compete. It's a waste to see these teams like LSU, Alabama, and Stanford in the tournament. There are obviously some really good teams in the comferences outside of the tops ones.
The difference between the major conferences and the smaller confernces has become quite small. It was not too long ago when the 1/16 and 2/15 games were blowouts 90% of the time. It's not the case anymore. 3 of the 4 sixteen seeds were competitive and gave the top seed some trouble and I think all of the 15 seeds hung in well. All the 4/13 matchups were real close or "upsets". Same with 3/14.
Are these wins by the smaller conferences really upsets? I'm not so sure they all are. I don't consider UW Milwaukee's two wins to be upsets. They were the better team in both games. Is their conference underrated? Yes.
I think it's time the power conferences stop getting 5-6 teams and some of these smaller conferences get 2-3. These small conferences can obviously compete. It's a waste to see these teams like LSU, Alabama, and Stanford in the tournament. There are obviously some really good teams in the comferences outside of the tops ones.