VCU, TCU in

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:46 pm

And Minny takes the last bid. Hate to say I told you so.

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:46 pm

No dice.

Now lets host an NIT game!

bgsufalcon24 · Post by **bgsufalcon24** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:47 pm

Georgia and Minnesota make it in. There are no words for the amount of disgust meant for that final regional.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:47 pm

TG1996 wrote:No dice.

Now lets host an NIT game!

I guess there's only one thing left to do:

Win the whole. F**kin'. Thing.

moneymaker02 · Post by **moneymaker02** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:48 pm

snubbed, minny and georgia take the last spots.

Dukefann9er · Post by **Dukefann9er** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:49 pm

What a JOKE..

!!! F$CK

HoustonFalcon · Post by **HoustonFalcon** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 8:01 pm

Well, it looks like the committee hasn't changed. Georgia was given a spot based on past experience. San Diego St. gets in I think because they beat Texas earlier in the year, when Texas hit a rough stretch, out in San Diego. Kind of disappointed to see Villanova in also. They lost to LaSalle and St. Joe's which were both under .500. They also lost to GW and Wisc. The only reason they get in I think is because of their wins over Depaul and Temple. I have a very big problem with Rutgers also. They beat Nova and Temple, but had no key wins in conference. They are 19-12 and 9-7 in conference. Because they are Rutgers and Vivian Stringer is the coach is the reason they are in. I didn't even look up UGA because I didn't think they had a chance. But as much as we hate was happened, It looks like our weak OOC schedule is what hurt us. We needed to beat Temple in order for us to get better consideration.

Dukefann9er · Post by **Dukefann9er** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 8:12 pm

HoustonFalcon wrote:Well, it looks like the committee hasn't changed. Georgia was given a spot based on past experience. San Diego St. gets in I think because they beat Texas earlier in the year, when Texas hit a rough stretch, out in San Diego. Kind of disappointed to see Villanova in also. They lost to LaSalle and St. Joe's which were both under .500. They also lost to GW and Wisc. The only reason they get in I think is because of their wins over Depaul and Temple. I have a very big problem with Rutgers also. They beat Nova and Temple, but had no key wins in conference. They are 19-12 and 9-7 in conference. Because they are Rutgers and Vivian Stringer is the coach is the reason they are in. I didn't even look up UGA because I didn't think they had a chance. But as much as we hate was happened, It looks like our weak OOC schedule is what hurt us. We needed to beat Temple in order for us to get better consideration.

No Team should get an at large with 12 loses. .. Its like giving a Major team a black eye .. Like Mid Majors get for not playing anyone..

We beat Temple we get in.. 28-4.. Seems good enough for an At Large.. 28 of 30.. seems good...

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 8:39 pm

The number 1 thing the committee on both sides looks at is - who did you play, and who did you beat. We didn't beat anybody this year, save Ball State. The bigger conference teams have an advantage because they have the conference schedule to build a resume. If we don't schedule up in the OOC, we have no room for error in the conf. tournament. We missed about 15 layups against ball state, and we're in the NIT as a result.

KeyWestParrot · Post by **KeyWestParrot** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:02 pm

I have always believed that when the selection committee gets down to the last few teams they might as well pick a good mid-major over a mid to lower level team from the major conferences.

My feeling is that a mid to lower level major conference team doesn't have any better chance of winning the tournament than a mid-major does so why not let the mid-majors have a couple extra slots.

This goes for men's selection as well.

murphdogg · Post by **murphdogg** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:15 pm

KeyWestParrot wrote:I have always believed that when the selection committee gets down to the last few teams they might as well pick a good mid-major over a mid to lower level team from the major conferences.

My feeling is that a mid to lower level major conference team doesn't have any better chance of winning the tournament than a mid-major does so why not let the mid-majors have a couple extra slots.

This goes for men's selection as well.

Not as many fans. Not to sound too cynical, but cash rules all in college sports

bgsufalcon24 · Post by **bgsufalcon24** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:17 pm

murphdogg wrote:
KeyWestParrot wrote:I have always believed that when the selection committee gets down to the last few teams they might as well pick a good mid-major over a mid to lower level team from the major conferences.

My feeling is that a mid to lower level major conference team doesn't have any better chance of winning the tournament than a mid-major does so why not let the mid-majors have a couple extra slots.

This goes for men's selection as well.
Not as many fans. Not to sound too cynical, but cash rules all in college sports

Murphdogg, you're absolutely right. It just so happens that Georgia, that 18-13 powerhouse Georgia, is hosting a subregional this year. They were basically the last team to make the field, beating us out. Coincidence? Probably not.

Redwingtom · Post by **Redwingtom** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 7:57 am

We need to e-mail GC to get him to resign from this committee. What a disgrace of an organization.

There is no way in creation that South Dakota State can be ranked 15th in the last Coaches poll and only get a 7 seed.

And to have a team with a record several losses below .500 not get a 16th seed?

WTF???

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:00 am

Redwingtom wrote:We need to e-mail GC to get him to resign from this committee. What a disgrace of an organization.

There is no way in creation that South Dakota State can be ranked 15th in the last Coaches poll and only get a 7 seed.

And to have a team with a record several losses below .500 not get a 16th seed?

WTF???

All this outrage is cute and all, but also pretty unfounded. Rankings have absolutely nothing to do with seeding. Nothing nothing nothing.

How does getting GC to resign help anything? Just makes us look like sore losers, which many around here are acting like.

Redwingtom · Post by **Redwingtom** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:36 am

Jacobs4Heisman wrote:
Redwingtom wrote:We need to e-mail GC to get him to resign from this committee. What a disgrace of an organization.

There is no way in creation that South Dakota State can be ranked 15th in the last Coaches poll and only get a 7 seed.

And to have a team with a record several losses below .500 not get a 16th seed?

WTF???
All this outrage is cute and all, but also pretty unfounded. Rankings have absolutely nothing to do with seeding. Nothing nothing nothing.

How does getting GC to resign help anything? Just makes us look like sore losers, which many around here are acting like.

Exactly! Seeding is designed so that the power conferences wind up with the most teams going the farthest. What a noble organization to be a part of.

The NCAA should be about fair play...not money and power.