• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

TAS Bracketology 2009

TheAsianSensation said:
Yea.

Really, there's a few other teams that can sneak in as well. The NIT bubble isn't that well defined.

The other thing to take away from it is that Bradley's profile doesn't quite match up with those final teams listed. Washington St and Cincy were showing up on NCAA bubble watches a week or two weeks ago. A .500 Big 12 team. Tom Penders' smug face. If the NIT field were extended back to 40 teams, Bradley could be right there. It's sort of a shame the NIT reduced their field AND gave out autobids - it's just too restricting. This restriction led to both the CIT and CBI being formed - in reality, we only need one of those to exist.



A suggestion to make the NIT field 64 teams was brought up somewhere. It actually seems like a great idea - gets rid of the messy lower tournaments, and can cover the deserving teams. Remember, massive D-1 expansion means more postseason spots need to be created.
Click to expand...

The answer is an 80 team NCAA Tournament where the top 2 seeds in each region get to play teams that 'play in' for seeds 15 and 16 (the MEACS, Big West's, etc). A 32 team NIT after that would be about as many teams as anyone needed to see play past their conference tournament.
 
BradleyBrave said:
The answer is an 80 team NCAA Tournament where the top 2 seeds in each region get to play teams that 'play in' for seeds 15 and 16 (the MEACS, Big West's, etc). A 32 team NIT after that would be about as many teams as anyone needed to see play past their conference tournament.
Click to expand...

That would actually be 72 teams, if there were play-ins for the 15s and 16s only.

I would lean towards 68 myself, but as long as there's some form of minor expansion.

This is sort of an arbitrary number, but 112 postseason teams sounds right to me. 68 in the NCAAs and 48 in the NIT would be that breakdown.
 
I'd also be in favor of a 72 team NCAA. It would be a slight enough expansion to keep things reasonable, and it would give the play-in games more legitimacy.
 
TheAsianSensation said:
That would actually be 72 teams, if there were play-ins for the 15s and 16s only.

I would lean towards 68 myself, but as long as there's some form of minor expansion.

This is sort of an arbitrary number, but 112 postseason teams sounds right to me. 68 in the NCAAs and 48 in the NIT would be that breakdown.
Click to expand...

You are correct. 72 it is. It was late and I was watching a bad Big West game. Clearly I wasn't thinking straight.
 
Digger and Bilas are talking about why Penn State deserves a bid over Creighton. I want to throw up. And just so you all know, 9-9 in a major conference is not mediocrity...
 
Oh, and now Digger wants to boil Creighton's candidacy to their last two games. And that the decision should come to "Who would win the game between Arizona or Creighton?"
 
Digger looked like he wanted to punch somebody in the face.

At least Bilas admits he thinks Arizona and Penn St and that he's using the eye test. The way he's deciding against Creighton is OK.

Digger is just spewing nonsense and contradicting himself over and over. What a moron.
 
And Hubert Davis thinks we need one standard to evaluate all the teams the same... but, he doesn't like the RPI. *shakes head*

How much are these stooges getting paid?
 
pfunk880 said:
Digger and Bilas are talking about why Penn State deserves a bid over Creighton. I want to throw up. And just so you all know, 9-9 in a major conference is not mediocrity...
Click to expand...

9-9 isn't mediocrity in a major conference if that conference is the Big East, Pac-10, or ACC. But, it was extremely annoying seeing Digger and Bilas attacking Joe Lunardi about Creighton's validity. Here we go ESPN...
 
TheAsianSensation said:
Digger looked like he wanted to punch somebody in the face.

At least Bilas admits he thinks Arizona and Penn St and that he's using the eye test. The way he's deciding against Creighton is OK.

Digger is just spewing nonsense and contradicting himself over and over. What a moron.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I loved when Lunardi was talking and Digger just gets this disgusted look, starts shaking his head, and tries to call a timeout.
 
pfunk880 said:
And Hubert Davis thinks we need one standard to evaluate all the teams the same... but, he doesn't like the BCS. *shakes head*

How much are these stooges getting paid?
Click to expand...

I'd put Hubert Davis in the same category as Digger in terms of bias, but I'm pretty sure even Hubert has no idea what he's talking about.
 
Now I really really hope Creighton gets in. And I wish they would have just made it to the MVC final so this stupid argument would end.
 
Digger Phelps is an *****. Just the nonsense he's spewing. Personnel....past years....how many bids a conference should get.....ALL OF THAT IS WRONG YOU GOD**** PIECE OF **** MORON. YOU'RE COMPLETELY IGNORING THE PROCESS THE COMMITTEE SAYS THEY HAVE IN PLACE. You're an *****.
 
TheAsianSensation said:
I'd put Hubert Davis in the same category as Digger in terms of bias, but I'm pretty sure even Hubert has no idea what he's talking about.
Click to expand...

Yeah. By the way, I meant RPI and not BCS, too many acronyms. I went back and fixed my post.

Hubert "doesn't like the numbers." He must not have been very good at math. :lol:

And Digger compares teams by playing out imaginary games between them in his head. It's a real brain trust.
 
TheAsianSensation said:
Digger Phelps is an *****. Just the nonsense he's spewing. Personnel....past years....how many bids a conference should get.....ALL OF THAT IS WRONG YOU GOD**** PIECE OF **** MORON. YOU'RE COMPLETELY IGNORING THE PROCESS THE COMMITTEE SAYS THEY HAVE IN PLACE. You're an *****.
Click to expand...

That's because the process is wrong. :lol:

Arizona is in the top 34 teams, Arizona is in the top 34 teams, if you say it enough times it must be true.
 
Yeah this is painful to watch. They really don't like CU getting in....they actually get disgusted.

It's funny how they openly disregard a loss to a low major such as Morgan St. for the BCS teams, but not for CU.
 
bluedevils1 said:
9-9 isn't mediocrity in a major conference if that conference is the Big East, Pac-10, or ACC. But, it was extremely annoying seeing Digger and Bilas attacking Joe Lunardi about Creighton's validity. Here we go ESPN...
Click to expand...

I'm watching this too. This is hysterical! And they don't believe the Big Ten deserves so many teams because they play.......GASP.....DEFENSE!

That is insulting! Since win did the best become restricted to only those that the general public would like watching more because of their offense? Ridiculous! :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top