Got this from the Big East thread... I think 7-8 should make it, but probably only 6 will KU, OU, UT, TTU, OSU, Mizzou, CU all SHOULD make it, CU might get left out though.
I don't think CU will make it either unless they have a real strong showing in the big12 tournament...tech could falter if they look bad as well.
KU, OU, UT, OSU, & TT are locks. Mizzou is on the bubble & probably needs to split their last 4 (at TT & CU, home for OSU & KU) plus win at least 1 game in the conf tourney. Please tell me you're kidding about Colorado! They're 13-10 overall & 4-8 IN THEIR CONFERENCE. They may not make the NIT.
Why do you point out Tech as possibly faltering instead of mentioning MU, OSU, or UT? Texas Tech has a higher RPI ranking (the ranking the selection committee looks at) than any of these teams. Just curious.
No, I'm not kidding. I said they SHOULD make it, not they will. 4-8 in the best conference in America...hmm... They are much more deserving than some of the other teams at 14-15 seeds that make it though...
The real question is, how many Big 12 teams will do anything in the tourney? Probably 0, maybe 1 team will surprise.
Colorado is: 0-5 vs. top 25 teams 110th in RPI The 3 highest-rated teams CU has victories over are: Nebraska (RPI 89th) Baylor (118th) Iowa St. (170th) When your 2nd most impressive win is over freakin' Baylor, you & the NCAA tourney have no right to be mentioned in the same sentence. You are right, however, that CU is probably better than most of the low-seeded teams from the "one bid" conferences. Do you think that the tourney would be better if they eliminated the 15 automatic bids to the weaker conferences, and increased the at-large bids from 34 to 49?
Great Point. I heard something on the radio today that was a great idea. have a play-in game for each bracket. There you have your conference winners playing some teams from big conferences that have losing records, like Colorado.
The Big 12 fans always boast about how their the best conference in every imaginable sport, yet they rarely have a national champion.
National Champions in men's Basketball & Football since the Big 12 was formed in '96: SEC: 4 Big 12: 2 Big East: 2 ACC: 2 Big 10: 2 PAC 10: 1 Schools in the Big 12 have won 15 total national championships (in team sports) since the conference was formed. Never let something so insignificant as factual evidence get in the way of a good rant.
"The Big 12 fans always boast about how their the best conference in every imaginable sport, yet they rarely have a national champion." Kidrock8 "We're talking about basketball so let's exclude the football and see where the Big 12 stands." Lil Pun Uhhhh, no Lil Pun, we're not just talking about basketball (re-read the words "every imaginable sport").
Personally, I like the tourney the way it is. I'd much rather see the 1 or 2 huge 1st round upsets each year by low-seeded small schools (Richmond, Coppin St, Valpo, Weber St. etc...) than see more mediocre big conference Colorado-esque teams. Face it, no matter how you structure the tourney field, someone is going to be left out. One change I would consider, though, is making the automatic bids for the smaller conferences go to the regular season champion instead of the conf tourney champ.
I agree with Buck. In all probablity 6 make it. It would take a complete collapse by MU for 6 not to go as I think the other 5 are locks and MU is solid right now. I believe the SEC and Pac 10 have 6 almost definetely in as well. ACC only 5 I think, I am not sure how the Big 10 or Big East grade out--less than impressive nonconference wins if I recall.
Give me a break. They lose a close game to the 14th ranked team in the country, albeit at home, & they're out of the tourney?
Everyone uses the 20 wins to benchmark as the number of wins it takes to get in..texas would have to sweep the final three which are all tough games or do well in the tournament.
That may be the perception among fans, but it couldn't be more wrong. Lee Fowler, chair of the NCAA Selection Committee, has this to say: "A lot of teams don’t get in that win 20, it’s not a magic number. Playing a strong schedule is important. Georgia got in [last year, w/ 16 wins] by playing the No. 1 schedule, not with 20 wins. That’s the emphasis the last two to three committees have done. We want you to play people." Texas played an extremely tough non-conference schedule (Arizona, Gonzaga, Indiana, Stanford, Utah, UNLV); they're 27th in RPI & their schedule strength is 20th (as of 2/16...it'll go up after games w/ OSU, OU & TT). Unless they totally crater & lose out, they're in the tourney; they're playing for seeding now. Here's the link (from espn.com today): http://espn.go.com/ncb/s/2002/0220/1337681.html
