Mid-Majors

[sportstalent]

Or that you picked them in your bracket.

True

 

[PalmettoHawkFan]

I would have rather seen North Mexico get a proper seed like say a 4 at best and Iowa get the spot Boise had at 13 and for the Hawks to have knocked North Mexico out of the tourney.

until his next post

i am in complete man love with ok4p

 

[Johnnyhawkeye]

I would have rather seen North Mexico get a proper seed like say a 4 at best and Iowa get the spot Boise had at 13 and for the Hawks to have knocked North Mexico out of the tourney.

The group who put the brackets together from the enquirer didn't think that was a good enough story...Eustachy the Columbia party animal was much better..rockstar story. Cry baby Roy Williams vs his old school makes for much better theater then little ol' Iowa vs their former "greased back" coach. I could have sworn a gossip columnist put this crappy field together.

 

[okeefe4prez]

The group who put the brackets together from the enquirer didn't think that was a good enough story...Eustachy the Columbia party animal was much better..rockstar story. Cry baby Roy Williams vs his old school makes for much better theater then little ol' Iowa vs their former "greased back" coach. I could have sworn a gossip columnist put this crappy field together.

There have been like 3 or 4 good games that came down to the wire so far. It seems like in year's past, you would get that many games in just one of the first two days.

 

[hawkfarmer]

I have nothing against mid majors and getting in the tournament, however Gonzaga should never be a 1 seed. They play nobody the second half of the year. It's not fair to put them on the same playing field for seeding as a team as a B1G conference team for example. I mean they are not as good as any of the top 4 B1G teams in the tourney.

I like having mid majors because the upset stories are fun, but when a few teams make a run like Butler, VCU, Gonzaga then all mid majors start to get too much respect and the issue is when they start taking at large bids away from teams like Iowa. St. Mary's did not deserve it. The upsets are flukey type things that get too much credit and then we have overcompensation with too many mid majors making it in on at large bids. Any team can win because it only takes one great game or a bad game by a good team. It's the tournament style, but I think the power conference teams get screwed a bit by the deal. There are only a handful of mid majors that deserve at large bids regularly.

 

[RocknRollface]

Yep, Iowa and Virgina were both clearly better more deserving than boise or stmarry.

The only rational for those teams is some theoretical number (rpi) that means nothing in real life.

 

[sportstalent]

I have nothing against mid majors and getting in the tournament, however Gonzaga should never be a 1 seed. They play nobody the second half of the year. It's not fair to put them on the same playing field for seeding as a team as a B1G conference team for example. I mean they are not as good as any of the top 4 B1G teams in the tourney.

I like having mid majors because the upset stories are fun, but when a few teams make a run like Butler, VCU, Gonzaga then all mid majors start to get too much respect and the issue is when they start taking at large bids away from teams like Iowa. St. Mary's did not deserve it. The upsets are flukey type things that get too much credit and then we have overcompensation with too many mid majors making it in on at large bids. Any team can win because it only takes one great game or a bad game by a good team. It's the tournament style, but I think the power conference teams get screwed a bit by the deal. There are only a handful of mid majors that deserve at large bids regularly.

This is where I disagree, power conference teams get the chances to control their own destiny's. In the one bid only conferences, that isn't always the case. That said, if a team like MTSU wins 28 games and is left out people will complain, but if they get put in the committee looks like heros for putting them in weather they deserve it or not.

Bottom line this year, with the bubble as soft as it was, it was easy for the committee to put in teams based on their criteria of RPI and road wins, no matter who you actually played. This is one of those years that some teams that were let in confuses me from the power conferences and some that were let out confuses me and it goes the mid-major teams. The committee this year totally screwed everything up from the No. 1 seeds on down to the last four in because they took RPI and road wins as the gospel for a good team.

 

[kicker22]

I don't root for upsets past the first round because I want the best teams in the final four. I don't want to watch a ****** Butler team struggle to score 40 points in the title game. I like watching future NBA players and decent teams in the finals.

While I get what your saying, I'm a firm believer that any team that makes it to the championship deserves to be there. If they weren't a quality team or wothy or being in the championship wouldn't one of your "decent teams with future NBA players" have knocked them off when they had the chance. While I believe there's luck involved and teams can get hot at the right time, I have a hard time believing that a team could get to the championship if they weren't a decent team that earned it. I get the argument that some teams don't belong in the tournament, and others do, but to use a team that made it to the championship does very little for your argument, IMO.

 

[WayzataHawkeye]

So you were upset Wisconsin, G-Town and New Mexico lost because they are the more talented teams?

Seeing Alford become the first coach to ever lose twice to a #14 seed was the highlight of the tournament for me.

 

[sioux34]

Seeing Alford become the first coach to ever lose twice to a #14 seed was the highlight of the tournament for me.

Alf has achieved so much at such a young age. This is just another example.