Lunardi continues to say WSU deserves a bid for their "special circumstances", even though he admits their resume isn't good.

He's a total clown and ESPN is just painful to watch these days.

Someone's gonna get a royal rogering. I was listening to ESPN radio on my way to work and they were interviewing (i think it was) the selection committee chairman. Although he didn't come right out and say they were in, he did say the nine games that Boeheim was suspended (Cuse went 4-5 in that stretch) will be taken into consideration when deciding if 19-win Syracuse should get in. Screw city.

No mid-major would get that kind of treatment.

(03-10-2016 11:16 AM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  

(03-09-2016 09:19 AM)uccheese Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 12:01 PM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 11:41 AM)nepats288 Wrote:  Monmouth lost to THREE 200+ rpi teams..I'm sorry, that just doesn't cut it...and they also lost to Iona twice. no way. Valpo also doesn't any case to be in.

They also beat what? 2-3 ranked teams when they played.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No?

What are you even talking about here. The only team they beat that's even close to ranked is Notre Dame.

I'm confident Monmouth is going to miss.

Notice the wording "when they played" I know for a fact UCLA was ranked when they played. That's two right there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Notre Dame was the Only ranked team they played. ND was #17 at the time they played. Pull up Monmouth's schedule on ESPN. ESPN shows the ranking of the opponent at the time of the game. CBSSports shows current ranking.

(03-10-2016 01:39 PM)THUNDERGround Wrote:  Someone's gonna get a royal rogering. I was listening to ESPN radio on my way to work and they were interviewing (i think it was) the selection committee chairman. Although he didn't come right out and say they were in, he did say the nine games that Boeheim was suspended (Cuse went 4-5 in that stretch) will be taken into consideration when deciding if 19-win Syracuse should get in. Screw city.

No mid-major would get that kind of treatment.

Yes they would, Kyle Van Vleet's injury is the main reason Wichita's non-Tournament profile is being considered.

Did Wichita State lose 5 of 6 to end the season?

Syracuse is a joke. THREE total road wins. Big losing streak to end the year. A terrible loss to a sub 230 rpi team. An rpi around 70. The Orange are only being considered because they are a brand.

(03-10-2016 01:39 PM)THUNDERGround Wrote:  Someone's gonna get a royal rogering. I was listening to ESPN radio on my way to work and they were interviewing (i think it was) the selection committee chairman. Although he didn't come right out and say they were in, he did say the nine games that Boeheim was suspended (Cuse went 4-5 in that stretch) will be taken into consideration when deciding if 19-win Syracuse should get in. Screw city.

No mid-major would get that kind of treatment.

I just don't get this. The man was suspended for CHEATING. His suspension and inabilyt to coach the team and the losses that came from this were the PENALTY. You can't take that and now throw it out. IF so, what was the point of suspending him????????????

(03-10-2016 02:54 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(03-10-2016 01:39 PM)THUNDERGround Wrote:  Someone's gonna get a royal rogering. I was listening to ESPN radio on my way to work and they were interviewing (i think it was) the selection committee chairman. Although he didn't come right out and say they were in, he did say the nine games that Boeheim was suspended (Cuse went 4-5 in that stretch) will be taken into consideration when deciding if 19-win Syracuse should get in. Screw city.

No mid-major would get that kind of treatment.

Yes they would, Kyle Van Vleet's injury is the main reason Wichita's non-Tournament profile is being considered.

Can we take into consideration when the leading scorer of the AAC was out?

That's what I threw out on the realignment board when people replied to me questioning Wichita State. You have to apply those standards to everyone, not just the brand name teams.

And again, no on MU, they have bad losses and in recent weeks lost to a team twice that if they hadn't beaten MC, would not be in the field. They had their shot...win at least once over Iona and I'd have zero problem with them getting in over a UConn or Cincy. And those wins over Georgetown and UCLA mean diddly at this point.

(03-08-2016 11:32 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  They should be in imho. They'd a really good team. Same with Valpo. What sucks for mid majors like this is that their conference RPI can really hamper them. Kind of like how the bottom half of the AAC is hurting the top half.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

But "the bottom" of the AAC isn't hurting them the top that much. Despite the bottom of the league, we STILL have 5 teams with credible tournament-quality RPI ratings (counting SMU, because no reason not to for this point).

The fact is, Monmouth sucks. I've watched several of their games. They caught some teams napping over the beginning of the season, but they don't pass the eye test. They disappear for large stretches of the game and rely on turnovers -- if a decent team takes care of the ball, they have no shot. They're undisciplined in shot selection and jack up horrendous 3 pt tries early in the shot clock. Their all-league point guard is all over the place. Look, Iona had an RPI of 80 and took 2/3 against them. They lost to Army and Cannisius.

They'd finish 6th in the AAC. Sorry, they don't belong. Tulsa and UConn both are better teams.

Amen to that. Monmouth is a cute story in many ways but they're not great. We'll have to settle for seeing their bench hurrah during the NIT if the committee is just.