The idiots on ESPN are talking about Georgia Tech still being on the bubble tonight.

The Yellow Jackets are 15-13, #96 in the RPI, 2-9 away from home, and have lost 3-4. They have one good out of conference win (VCU). Their other 7 out of conference wins came against an average rpi of 263.

yeah, they've beaten some ACC teams at home, but so has every other ACC team including Boston College.

(02-25-2017 11:51 PM)rtaylor Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 11:00 PM)Tech Savy Wrote:  Wrong OP. They will get an at-large bid provided their loss in the conference tournament is not to the 8 seed...

Idiot. There you go with that Nostradamus crap again.

There you go sports fans. From one idiot to another.

(02-27-2017 09:55 PM)payday Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 11:51 PM)rtaylor Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 11:00 PM)Tech Savy Wrote:  Wrong OP. They will get an at-large bid provided their loss in the conference tournament is not to the 8 seed...

Idiot. There you go with that Nostradamus crap again.

There you go sports fans. From one idiot to another.

Says the biggest homer clown show on the board. Always entertaining watching you make an azz out of yourself. Never stop being you Pay.

Happy to be a homer. How do you like being the idiot?

(02-25-2017 11:51 PM)rtaylor Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 11:00 PM)Tech Savy Wrote:  Wrong OP. They will get an at-large bid provided their loss in the conference tournament is not to the 8 seed...

Idiot. There you go with that Nostradamus crap again.

How? Do you follow college basketball at all? Bracket Matrix has Middle Tennessee as an 11 seed (so they are above several at-large teams). As long as they don't lose to the 8 seed, I feel confident that they will get in....especially if that loss were to UAB (since the conference tournament is in Birmingham). You don't get to name call just because you are upset...it's not a good look...

You two should be good buddies. You have so much in common. You both spend your time in here trashing Cincinnati.

(02-27-2017 11:51 PM)payday Wrote:  You two should be good buddies. You have so much in common. You both spend your time in here trashing Cincinnati.

Pull up one post of mine trashing UC. Just one. You are so delusional its scary.

(02-27-2017 11:43 PM)Tech Savy Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 11:51 PM)rtaylor Wrote:  

(02-25-2017 11:00 PM)Tech Savy Wrote:  Wrong OP. They will get an at-large bid provided their loss in the conference tournament is not to the 8 seed...

Idiot. There you go with that Nostradamus crap again.

How? Do you follow college basketball at all? Bracket Matrix has Middle Tennessee as an 11 seed (so they are above several at-large teams).

They're an 11 seed right now, so #45-48. If they lose to a non-RPI top 50 team, they probably drop five or six spots, to an NIT #1 seed. They'll be losing to, say, UAB, who is #183 in KenPom--that looks bad.

EDIT: Stupid math error. 11x4 = 44.

(02-28-2017 07:12 AM)rtaylor Wrote:  

(02-27-2017 11:51 PM)payday Wrote:  You two should be good buddies. You have so much in common. You both spend your time in here trashing Cincinnati.

Pull up one post of mine trashing UC. Just one. You are so delusional its scary.

Hater.

Lunardi had GT as the first out at 16-13 and 7-9 in the ACC. A team should NEVER get an at large with a below 500 conference record.

(02-27-2017 09:52 PM)CornellCoog Wrote:  The idiots on ESPN are talking about Georgia Tech still being on the bubble tonight.

The Yellow Jackets are 15-13, #96 in the RPI, 2-9 away from home, and have lost 3-4. They have one good out of conference win (VCU). Their other 7 out of conference wins came against an average rpi of 263.

yeah, they've beaten some ACC teams at home, but so has every other ACC team including Boston College.

Sorry didn't see this post.

(02-28-2017 09:44 AM)VinnieVegas Wrote:  Lunardi had GT as the first out at 16-13 and 7-9 in the ACC. A team should NEVER get an at large with a below 500 conference record.

SMH. You realize instituting a .500 record requirement wouldn't help the American at all? It would cause very mediocre teams from weak P5 leagues to get in like Ole Miss (9-7), Alabama (9-7), or Utah (9-7)...

(02-28-2017 11:33 AM)Tech Savy Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 09:44 AM)VinnieVegas Wrote:  Lunardi had GT as the first out at 16-13 and 7-9 in the ACC. A team should NEVER get an at large with a below 500 conference record.

SMH. You realize instituting a .500 record requirement wouldn't help the American at all? It would cause very mediocre teams from weak P5 leagues to get in like Ole Miss (9-7), Alabama (9-7), or Utah (9-7)...

Still better than a 7-9 team. I'm sorry but if you can't even pull a .500 record in your own conference what makes you think you deserve a shot at the national title? I don't care how tough their conference is.

(02-28-2017 12:03 PM)TUCandoit Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 11:33 AM)Tech Savy Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 09:44 AM)VinnieVegas Wrote:  Lunardi had GT as the first out at 16-13 and 7-9 in the ACC. A team should NEVER get an at large with a below 500 conference record.

SMH. You realize instituting a .500 record requirement wouldn't help the American at all? It would cause very mediocre teams from weak P5 leagues to get in like Ole Miss (9-7), Alabama (9-7), or Utah (9-7)...

Still better than a 7-9 team. I'm sorry but if you can't even pull a .500 record in your own conference what makes you think you deserve a shot at the national title? I don't care how tough their conference is.

Have some nuance in your thinking. Seriously, try it...

(02-28-2017 09:20 AM)payday Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 07:12 AM)rtaylor Wrote:  

(02-27-2017 11:51 PM)payday Wrote:  You two should be good buddies. You have so much in common. You both spend your time in here trashing Cincinnati.

Pull up one post of mine trashing UC. Just one. You are so delusional its scary.

Hater.

Only you.

(02-28-2017 12:03 PM)TUCandoit Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 11:33 AM)Tech Savy Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 09:44 AM)VinnieVegas Wrote:  Lunardi had GT as the first out at 16-13 and 7-9 in the ACC. A team should NEVER get an at large with a below 500 conference record.

SMH. You realize instituting a .500 record requirement wouldn't help the American at all? It would cause very mediocre teams from weak P5 leagues to get in like Ole Miss (9-7), Alabama (9-7), or Utah (9-7)...

Still better than a 7-9 team. I'm sorry but if you can't even pull a .500 record in your own conference what makes you think you deserve a shot at the national title? I don't care how tough their conference is.

Spot on...
If a team can't finish at least .500 in their conference, they shouldn't get an invite, its that simple. Someone can say, well a Big 10 or ACC team at 7-9 or 6-10 is still better than xyz team from the AAC or A10, or etc. but that's not a good argument. The Big 10 or ACC teams are programs in Power conferences, they get 20x more resources than AAC teams or A10 teams, they have better exposure, etc. which means she should be able to afford better coaches, and recruit better, etc. and so they should be held accountable for how they do RELATIVE to their conference. If you can't finish .500 in your conference, you don't deserve an invite. Case closed.

Really, there is a much better reason for sub .500 teams to not be invited. The entire point of the tournament is to determine which team is the best in the land. If you are a mediocre team in your conference, then it is simply not feasible that you are the best team in college basketball.

(03-01-2017 07:10 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 12:03 PM)TUCandoit Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 11:33 AM)Tech Savy Wrote:  

(02-28-2017 09:44 AM)VinnieVegas Wrote:  Lunardi had GT as the first out at 16-13 and 7-9 in the ACC. A team should NEVER get an at large with a below 500 conference record.

SMH. You realize instituting a .500 record requirement wouldn't help the American at all? It would cause very mediocre teams from weak P5 leagues to get in like Ole Miss (9-7), Alabama (9-7), or Utah (9-7)...

Still better than a 7-9 team. I'm sorry but if you can't even pull a .500 record in your own conference what makes you think you deserve a shot at the national title? I don't care how tough their conference is.

Spot on...
If a team can't finish at least .500 in their conference, they shouldn't get an invite, its that simple. Someone can say, well a Big 10 or ACC team at 7-9 or 6-10 is still better than xyz team from the AAC or A10, or etc. but that's not a good argument. The Big 10 or ACC teams are programs in Power conferences, they get 20x more resources than AAC teams or A10 teams, they have better exposure, etc. which means she should be able to afford better coaches, and recruit better, etc. and so they should be held accountable for how they do RELATIVE to their conference. If you can't finish .500 in your conference, you don't deserve an invite. Case closed.

LMAO!!! Such caveman thinking! Nuance...try it...

(03-01-2017 10:13 AM)IULurker Wrote:  Really, there is a much better reason for sub .500 teams to not be invited. The entire point of the tournament is to determine which team is the best in the land. If you are a mediocre team in your conference, then it is simply not feasible that you are the best team in college basketball.

WRONG. Connecticut was a "mediocre" team in the Big East finishing 9-9 in league play. They went on to WIN THE NATIONAL TITLE. Fans of small conference schools will not be helped by a rule like that. It would just allow for more mediocre Big 10, PAC 12 and SEC schools to get bids!

(03-01-2017 01:16 PM)Tech Savy Wrote:  

(03-01-2017 10:13 AM)IULurker Wrote:  Really, there is a much better reason for sub .500 teams to not be invited. The entire point of the tournament is to determine which team is the best in the land. If you are a mediocre team in your conference, then it is simply not feasible that you are the best team in college basketball.

WRONG. Connecticut was a "mediocre" team in the Big East finishing 9-9 in league play. They went on to WIN THE NATIONAL TITLE. Fans of small conference schools will not be helped by a rule like that. It would just allow for more mediocre Big 10, PAC 12 and SEC schools to get bids!

Wrong? Which part - that the NCAA tournament is designed to determine the best basketball team? Or that a mediocre team cannot be the best team in college Bball? I assume the later. How many times has a team which is 0.500 in conference won the tournament, other than UConn (which, by the way, was considered by many the worst title game ever)? A blind pig and all...