(03-28-2016 08:44 AM)stever20 Wrote: sorry but the WCC and MWC were absolute garbage this season. There was nothing moderately tough about it.
Absolute garbage is stretching it greatly. As I say with the WCC, there were 2 good teams, maybe a couple below average teams and then a sharp dropoff.
(03-28-2016 08:40 AM)bullet Wrote: Valparaiso is the only #1 seed left in the NIT. SDSU is still alive-they were a 2 seed.
As with my continued criticism of Syracuse's selection, results once the event starts is irrelevant. If you hired me for a job that I didn't deserve to be hired for, the fact that I excel after being given the gig doesn't mean I deserved the shot. In this case, they were demoted to the NIT but like high seeds knocked off in the NCAA's, fell short of fulfilling that seed. That speaks nothing of their accomplishment and credentials and more of the 1-off nature of a single elimination tournament. Plus, some teams lower in the bracket are actually more talented and perhaps more motivated.
(03-28-2016 09:35 AM)nzmorange Wrote: Yes, all losses count, but not all losses count the same, nor should they. SU losing to STJ and GU on the road isn't the same as a random team losing to them in a random location. It's just like Texas vs. OU in football, only in this case, the game wasn't played on a neutral site and one school didn't have a coach.
If you walk around making up excuses like that, then every team can make up some rationale about why certain losses are okay.
"We lost because they were pumped and it was their senior night."
"We lost because their arena was extremely loud."
"We lost because their coach used to be one of our assistants and scouted us well."
"We lost because their hardwood floor and rims are slightly different than others."
You only get one, maybe two exceptions, especially if injuries are a factor. Otherwise, if you use that rationale for one, it must be used for all or you must be held accountable. How do you know Pepperdine doesn't just love playing SMC?