Comments on: NCAA Tournament Bubble Watch: 2/6/08

By: John

John — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 01:33:46 +0000

@ Dex. It’s about BOTH the non-conference and conference play. UMass has a better overall profile, despite the fact St. Joseph’s defeated them twice. And call me old fashioned, but it’s the full name, not just an abbreviation(much like the Southern Conference is called the SoCon.) It’s not that long of a name, is it?

By: Dex

Dex — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:45:05 +0000

I disagree. I think if St. Joe’s wins 2 out of 3 (convincingly or barely) then they have a good chance at making the tournament as an at-large. And if they were to beat Xavier, and it came down to either UMass or St. Joe’s, I believe St. Joe’s would get the bid. One reason is that they’ve beaten the Minutemen twice. Another is that they’d have more quality wins in conference, although UMass has a better non-conference resume. But that all depends on whether or not they beat Xavier and either Rhode Island or Dayton, otherwise, I think UMass would get the bid. And what’s wrong with calling it the A 10?

By: John

John — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:19:14 +0000

@ Ryan Burrows. The only way they can win 2 of the 3 games and make it is if it is in convincing fashion, otherwise the Atlantic 10(not the A-10 a many people have called it.) will send Xavier, Rhode Island, Dayton and Massachusetts.

By: Ryan Burrows

Ryan Burrows — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:46:24 +0000

@ John

Saint Joseph’s just lost another nail biter to Xavier. I think this season they might just be the team that was good enough to take ranked teams to the last minute but no better. Then add in a loss to the Dukes (who just lost to St. Bon). With 3 competitive games left, @ URI, Xavier, and @Dayton, do you think theres a bid for SJU without winning all three?

By: David Mihm

David Mihm — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 18:33:31 +0000

Brett, the important thing for the projection at this time of the year is that Sacred Heart has a half-game lead in the NEC, as you point out, and also beat RMC at their place last month. Thanks for your comment.

By: Brett

Brett — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 18:30:26 +0000

I just wanted to give you alittle more insite on the NEC. You have Sacred Heart as the team from this conferance, and I understand they have an extra win then Robert Morris however. Robert Morris is still the class of the conference this year. Robert Morris has Beaten an A10 school this year (Fordam), and an ACC team this year (Boston College). They also took Seton Hall to overtime. If you look at the Kenpom.com and look at his rankings they are ranked. 137 over all and the next closest is C. Conn. St at 189. And if you check the RPI they are ranked 154 with Sacred heart ranked 169.

Just some more thought for your smaller conference picks.

By: Dex

Dex — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:33:33 +0000

I realize South Alabama/Providence was a bad example but I was just picking a mid-major and a major team. I wasn’t saying either was more deserving. My bad.

By: John

John — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:29:40 +0000

@ David Mihm. I understand the purpose of this site and I understand the reason you don’t put more mid-majors in your projected field, but it becomes frustrating to know that a team that finishes 26-5 at worst and loses in the conference final gets snubbed in favor of a team that goes 18-11, 19-10 etc. I know that it is extremely unlikely committee members find their way to this site, but if they did, maybe they could do what is right. I don’t know if you know who Chris Russo and Mike Francesa are, but they were the most outspoken on the whole George Mason/Hofstra issue.

@ Dex. South Alabama/Providence was a bad example because USA probably deserves to make it over the Friars.

@ either one. I tend to root for the team that has gone longer between NCAA appearences provided my team is not it or I have no rooting interest in the game. A example is if Stephen F. Austin and Sam Houston State play in the Southland final, I would root for SFA for that reason. Have you ever found yourself doing that?

By: Dex

Dex — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:11:11 +0000

I think most people agree that they would like to see mid-majors given more credit. But since the purpose of this website is to predict what probably will happen instead of what should happen, I don’t think that you could include teams just to break the trend. As much as an influence this site may have on readers and other analysts, I really doubt that it is going to make any difference to a member of the committee that you place a South Alabama in your bracket instead of a Providence, for example.

By: David Mihm

David Mihm — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:33:47 +0000

John, as much as I appreciate the credit you give this site, I doubt very much that any Committee members have found their way here. If I try to prove a subjective point by projecting more mid-majors than anyone, I lose credibility as a leading objective analyst.

I think that the positive coverage we give mid-majors throughout the rest of the site does enough to convey our sensibilities here (see Chris Mackinder’s unsolicited comment earlier in the discussion as proof!).

I also agree that GMU didn’t deserve to get into the field ahead of Hofstra (although I projected both teams out; note the order of Last Four Out, however).

The entire 2006 Tournament is tainted for me. Tony Skinn should have been suspended for a minimum of three games & was allowed to play a critical role on Mason’s miracle run after they made it past the Spartans in the first round. Jim Larranaga is a media darling for a lot of good reasons, but I feel strongly he should have been a much stronger disciplinarian in that instance.