In 2011, 9 teams advanced to the round of 32.
Last year, 10 teams were left at this point.
This year, 13 teams advanced to the round of 32. In 9 of the 16 games, the matchup is power conference vs non power conference. Two games have non power conferences facing off (Gonzaga vs Wichita St and Florida Gulf Coast vs San Diego St) so at least two will move on.
Perhaps the tag "power conferences" should be dropped. Personally, I hate the term.
Maybe you should use "also known as BCS".
Be careful though!
"Power Conference" or BCS conferences means little to nothing outside of football.
(03-23-2013 10:30 AM)GreenHornet33 Wrote: [ -> ]"Power Conference" or BCS conferences means little to nothing outside of football.
To us that's true. When you're talking about the average ESPN talking heads though, it is
very meaningful. Every Selection Sunday you hear the debate about how some middling to average power conference team is more deserving of a bid than a 26 game winner from a small school. Even when such a school gets in, they often get hosed on the seeding.
There's even some truth to it. I think the quality of Big 10 teams is very good, very deep, even when their record is no more than middling. I just object to having schools who didn't even make the semifinals of their conference tournament bumping deserving smaller conference schools.
Upsets and near upsets are what drive the drama of the NCAA's, why it is so compelling. Weed out the Cinderellas and you drop the fun factor tremendously.
(03-23-2013 10:30 AM)GreenHornet33 Wrote: [ -> ]"Power Conference" or BCS conferences means little to nothing outside of football.
Very wrong. For the most part, those conferences have more exposure on TV, bigger recruiting budgets, bigger fan bases. In basketball, it is is still the BCS vs the little guy.
(03-23-2013 10:56 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ] (03-23-2013 10:30 AM)GreenHornet33 Wrote: [ -> ]"Power Conference" or BCS conferences means little to nothing outside of football.
Very wrong. For the most part, those conferences have more exposure on TV, bigger recruiting budgets, bigger fan bases. In basketball, it is is still the BCS vs the little guy.
You are VERY CORRECT, MB. In 2010 (the latest complete figures), the median (middle of the pack) SEC school spent $163,931 PER ATHLETE, The ACC spent $103,384, the Big 12 spent $131,286, the Pac 10 spent $102,121, the Big 10 spent $116,667, Big East - $102,032 while the median for all FBS schools spent $91,936 per athlete.
The figures for nonBCS conferences were WAC - $56,180, MWC - $74,264, C-USA - $76,181, MAC - $52,537, Sun Belt - $41,796.
Source: Delta Cost Project of the American Institute for Research
There is a very good reason why the BCS schools can usually get the better athletes for their programs just like rich guys can usually have young & beautiful starlets as their dates.
"There is no BCS in basketball" is one of the Information Ministry's key talking points.
MONEY talks loudly no matter what the conference designation or the specific sport you talk about.
This shows the Media as well as lets just say the conferences with all the money and leverage, think they are great when they are compared with themselves.
Not so when they are compared with other good teams from schools with less money and leverage...
By the way, 13 teams is the most n the past 10 years. 10 last year ties for second most.
Jay Bilas is going to be pissed.
(03-23-2013 05:01 PM)Smaug Wrote: [ -> ]Jay Bilas is going to be pissed.
That's always a good thing. I can't stand that guy. Whoops, that's an unchristian thing to state. I don't care for the guy, at all.
(03-23-2013 09:59 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]In 9 of the 16 games, the matchup is power conference vs non power conference.
Not a good day at all for the little guys
Today Non BCS went up against BCS in six games and came away empty. Gonzaga vs. Wichita State means one will go forward today.
Tomorrow, San Diego State vs. Florida Gulf coast will give us another. Otherwise its Lasalle vs. Ole Miss, Creighton vs. Duke and Temple vs. Indiana.
I'm rooting for the little guys.
(03-23-2013 10:48 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote: [ -> ]I'm rooting for the little guys.
...always. (or almost always)
I was really rooting hard for Southern to beat The Zags. I'm also rooting for Wichita State, and Florida Gulf Coast also.
Wichita St. is a good example of playing in the post season, Wichita won the NIT last year if memory serves me, and the year before that they played in the NIT. So They have experience where it counts in players and coaching...
Give me the Shockers... as the little engine that could...
(03-24-2013 02:44 PM)rebounder2u Wrote: [ -> ]Wichita St. is a good example of playing in the post season, Wichita won the NIT last year if memory serves me, and the year before that they played in the NIT. So They have experience where it counts in players and coaching...
Give me the Shockers... as the little engine that could...
Wichita lost in the second round of the NCAA last year. They won the NIT the year before.
See what I did there, I just remember one year recently, they beat the BAMA team, man time flies...
Still give me the Shockers...