• 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.

NC***yawn***AA tourny

Who cares? The best four teams in the country are in the Final Four. No one can argue that these four teams deserve to be there. Just because a cinderella didn't complete a run doesn't mean anything. These were the best teams. They beat everyone else. End of story.
 
J Money said:
Who cares? The best four teams in the country are in the Final Four. No one can argue that these four teams deserve to be there. Just because a cinderella didn't complete a run doesn't mean anything. These were the best teams. They beat everyone else. End of story.
Click to expand...

Well, based on the ratings and over 250 views here apparently quite a few people care and would prefer to see more of these match-ups. I agree, in the end "it is what it is" and the 4 best teams are where they should be -- in The Final 4. But, I think most people would prefer to watch games with a little more intrigue.
 
Braves4Life said:
Well, based on the ratings and over 250 views here apparently quite a few people care and would prefer to see more of these match-ups. I agree, in the end "it is what it is" and the 4 best teams are where they should be -- in The Final 4. But, I think most people would prefer to watch games with a little more intrigue.
Click to expand...

So now we're coming full circle. We've called into question the bias against the mid-majors leads to them drawing poor seeds and being early exits. Now we're saying that since games with mid-majors draw more intrigue the seeding should be skewed the other way. That makes a lot of sense. If these are the four best teams in the country then it doesn't matter what people want to see they deserve to be there. They beat everyone.
 
tornado said:
sorry....what I meant to say was of the bubble teams that got bids, only 2 were mid-majors...
and if you don't believe there is an anti-mid attitude among the elite in the NCAA and in the media, then you are entitled to your opinion,
but......please allow us to have our opinion which appears to be self-evident, that such a bias clearly exists.
Click to expand...

:-o

First of all, tell me where I said ANYTHING in my post about whether I feel there is an "anti-mid" attitude. All I stated were the FACTS, and you still don't have your story straight because UAB remains nowhere to be found in my bracket. I'm going to go ahead and assume you mean South Alabama.

I do think there is some bias towards the major conference, but this year I only saw it in the seedings (Butler got screwed big time and the amount of mid vs. mid matchups was ridiculous). If you wanted to make an argument about selection, the last two years with Missouri St. are examples to point to, but I just don't see it this year.

On the mid-major side, USA and St. Joe's got in. I'd say Dayton, ISU, and maybe VCU are the mids I would consider bubble teams left out. Two in, three out. Seems reasonable to me. The ones left out had major flaws in their resumes, and the two that got in didn't look particularly good in first-round exits.

For the majors, I'd say the bubble teams in were Villanova, Kentucky, and Arizona. Ohio State, Arizona State, and Virginia Tech are probably the only three left out you could make any kind of case for. Three in, three out. Again, seems reasonable. 'Nova clearly justified their selection, and Kentucky and Arizona also took their opponents to the wire, more than USA or St. Joe's can say.

Yup, looks biased to me. Don't facts suck? :roll:
 
and then don't let the facts that I have been presenting in the other thread get in the way about how the refs being hired appear to have a suspicious "regional" bias....ahem....
 
Some of you seem to be missing a fundamental idea:

The idea of this tournament is not necessarily to make the most money.

THE POINT OF IT IS TO DETERMINE A NATIONAL CHAMPION. Decisions about the tournament and the field should be made with this in mind. Not what's best for the ratings. And if we the fans don't like it, too bad. The national championship isn't a popularity contest.

Now, as far as mid majors getting their fair shot at the title....that's another story :)
 
pfunk880 said:
:-o

First of all, tell me where I said ANYTHING in my post about whether I feel there is an "anti-mid" attitude. All I stated were the FACTS, and you still don't have your story straight because UAB remains nowhere to be found in my bracket. I'm going to go ahead and assume you mean South Alabama.

I do think there is some bias towards the major conference, but this year I only saw it in the seedings (Butler got screwed big time and the amount of mid vs. mid matchups was ridiculous). If you wanted to make an argument about selection, the last two years with Missouri St. are examples to point to, but I just don't see it this year.

On the mid-major side, USA and St. Joe's got in. I'd say Dayton, ISU, and maybe VCU are the mids I would consider bubble teams left out. Two in, three out. Seems reasonable to me. The ones left out had major flaws in their resumes, and the two that got in didn't look particularly good in first-round exits.

For the majors, I'd say the bubble teams in were Villanova, Kentucky, and Arizona. Ohio State, Arizona State, and Virginia Tech are probably the only three left out you could make any kind of case for. Three in, three out. Again, seems reasonable. 'Nova clearly justified their selection, and Kentucky and Arizona also took their opponents to the wire, more than USA or St. Joe's can say.

Yup, looks biased to me. Don't facts suck? :roll:
Click to expand...


Pfunk let me be the first to say that this is about the best analysis of the selections that I have seen yet. I agree with every example you gave.....If I were to pick a mid that should have been in it was VCU (won their conference I believe). My major that got screwed was ASU (only because Arizona was chsen ahead of them, though I'm not sure either ASU or Arizona should have been in).
 
TheAsianSensation said:
Some of you seem to be missing a fundamental idea:

The idea of this tournament is not necessarily to make the most money.

THE POINT OF IT IS TO DETERMINE A NATIONAL CHAMPION. Decisions about the tournament and the field should be made with this in mind. Not what's best for the ratings. And if we the fans don't like it, too bad. The national championship isn't a popularity contest.

Now, as far as mid majors getting their fair shot at the title....that's another story :)
Click to expand...

Wrong. Perhaps when the NCAA Tournament first began way back when that was the goal. The NCAA's only motivator nowadays is cold, hard cash. One needs to look no further than the current system in crowning a football champion to clearly see this.
 
Braves4Life said:
Pfunk let me be the first to say that this is about the best analysis of the selections that I have seen yet. I agree with every example you gave.....If I were to pick a mid that should have been in it was VCU (won their conference I believe). My major that got screwed was ASU (only because Arizona was chsen ahead of them, though I'm not sure either ASU or Arizona should have been in).
Click to expand...

Thanks.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with you on VCU and Arizona. I actually don't think Arizona or ASU should have in and might have put VCU there.

Still waiting to hear a real response from Tornado, rather than a referral to more inaccurate facts in a different thread...
 
funk, name for me the 15 or 17 best RPI teams who have been left out of the NCAA over the past 3 years......
Let's just pick the past 3 years since that's the era I have been arguing the mid-major bias as proven to Barry Hinson a couple years ago...
Now, recall the RPI was the invention of the NCAA in order to be sure the best teams got in...right?
Since I strongly suspect you don't know, I will give you a big hint.


#21 - Missouri State-2006
#30 - Hofstra-2006
#30 - Air Force-2007
#32 - Dayton- 2008
#33 - Illinois State- 2008
#36 - Missouri State-2007
#38 - Bradley- 2007
#39 - Creighton-2006
#40 - Cincinnati-2006
#41 - Florida State- 2007
#42 - UMass- 2008
#43 - Miami-Ohio-2005
#43 - St. Joseph's-2006
#43 - Drexel- 2007
#45 - Wichita State-2005
#45 - Utah State- 2007
#46 - Buffalo-2005

OK...whattya think............? Feel free to correct any errors...but......
all but two are mid-majors....just chance, you say.........?
Yeah...........right....no bias here??
Case pretty much closed I say
 
tornado said:
funk, name for me the 15 or 17 best RPI teams who have been left out of the NCAA over the past 3 years......
Let's just pick the past 3 years since that's the era I have been arguing the mid-major bias as proven to Barry Hinson a couple years ago...
Now, recall the RPI was the invention of the NCAA in order to be sure the best teams got in...right?
Since I strongly suspect you don't know, I will give you a big hint.


#21 - Missouri State-2006
#30 - Hofstra-2006
#30 - Air Force-2007
#32 - Dayton- 2008
#33 - Illinois State- 2008
#36 - Missouri State-2007
#38 - Bradley- 2007
#39 - Creighton-2006
#40 - Cincinnati-2006
#41 - Florida State- 2007
#42 - UMass- 2008
#43 - Miami-Ohio-2005
#43 - St. Joseph's-2006
#43 - Drexel- 2007
#45 - Wichita State-2005
#45 - Utah State- 2007
#46 - Buffalo-2005

OK...whattya think............? Feel free to correct any errors...but......
all but two are mid-majors....just chance, you say.........?
Yeah...........right....no bias here??
Case pretty much closed I say
Click to expand...

Thanks for the subtle stab at my intelligence, but I was well aware of this information. And I'd like to point out that the majority of the teams you list are from 2006 and 2007. Like I said earlier, those are great years to use if you want to cite bias against mid-majors. But the point you made that I originally responded to was the fact that more major than mid-major bubble teams got in this year... which simply isn't true.

Case pretty much closed I say
 
Last edited:
I apologize as no insult was intended, only to point out that what the bubble teams that are left out ARE.......
They are the best/highest RPI teams that were left out, and it is clear that over the past 3 years there is a huge change from before, and now it seems almost exclusively the mm's are being left out with RPI's under 40......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top