Virginia Tech...

[Masterofreality]

Loses.....NIT.....at home......to Wichita State.

Yeah, they deserved an NCAA bid. Can't even get out of the second NIT round......errrr....at home.

[xavierj]

Loses.....NIT.....at home......to Wichita State.

Yeah, they deserved an NCAA bid. Can't even get out of the second NIT round......errrr....at home.

I have always wondered what the infatuation is with old Seth and wonder how he keeps his job.

[GoMuskies]

Go Shockers!

[Tardy Turtle]

http://sflchronicle.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/shocker.jpg

[94GRAD]

444The Spocker!

It's a little one

[xubrew]

i'm sure espn has no comment.

[DoubleD86]

I know this won't be popular, but postseason results have no bearing on the validity, or lack there of, of a teams inclusion or exclusion in the tournament or of a teams seeding.

Using that logic, you would then have to claim that Morehead St. deserved a higher seed than Louisville, or that UNI deserved to be a 1 seed last year (or that Kansas didn't). Or that George Mason in 2006 or Butler last year deserved to be a 1 seed. Heck, you would then have to argue that X didn't deserve a 6 seed or Marquette deserved a higher seed than us.

This same logic brought the board up in arms when that NBC Sports writer, incorrectly, claimed that Marquette's win over Xavier proved that X wouldn't do better than 12th in the Big East and that 11 BE teams would win the A-10. That logic was claimed to be ridiculous and wrong. It was, as is using one or two games to claim VCU deserved to be in or VaTech didn't deserve to be in.

One or two games depend so much on luck, confidence, desire, matchups, if ones shots are falling, personal issues, how one slept, how one handles the pressure of that game, etc, etc, etc. You can't use one game or a couple games to claim something about an entire season, it just doesn't work.

[xubrew]

doubled, you have a point, but over the course of the entire season vcu was better than virginia tech. people were making that claim before the tournament even started. there was no basis whatsoever to claim virginia tech was better than vcu either on the court or on paper. none. that's why espn sounded so stupid. had vcu lost their first game, and had virginia tech won the nit, that would still be the case.

[ConfusedBulldog]

I know this won't be popular, but postseason results have no bearing on the validity, or lack there of, of a teams inclusion or exclusion in the tournament or of a teams seeding.

I agree with this. I doubt many of the teams who had aspirations to play in the Big Dance will be driven to excel in the NIT (or CBI.) Much like when Alabama played Utah in the Sugar Bowl after squandering the chance to play in the bcs championship game following a loss in the SEC championship, the Tide came into the post-season with no motivation to beat an "inferior" opponent in a lesser bowl. In the same light, I doubt many tournament "snubs" feel like playing in a lesser tournament.
Unless, of course, you're Dayton and you love the opportunity to be relevant!

[madness31]

DoubleD, you are right that the results have no bearing on who deserved to make the tourney and that a bad game can easily send a superior team home early. Expanding on that logic a bit you have to wonder why teams that consistently lose to top level talent get an invite over teams that blow their one or two only chances at key wins. Witchita St for example lost by 4 on a neutral court to UCON, to SDSU and then to VCU as their only big non conference games. Marquette on the other hand won 5 games out of 18 attempts against strong competition. Given that a team will have a few bad games throughout the year and other teams will have a few great games it seems odd to favor a team that lost 13 out of 18 tries over someone who lost their few chances while have an otherwise strong year.

I do think Witchita St was a victory short of deserving a bid but they seem to have the talent to compete. Missouri St however had the RPI and two wins over Witchita St that should have put them in. Harvard is another with a legit argument and Cleveland St when you account for match-up issues.

[xubrew]

DoubleD, you are right that the results have no bearing on who deserved to make the tourney and that a bad game can easily send a superior team home early. Expanding on that logic a bit you have to wonder why teams that consistently lose to top level talent get an invite over teams that blow their one or two only chances at key wins. Witchita St for example lost by 4 on a neutral court to UCON, to SDSU and then to VCU as their only big non conference games. Marquette on the other hand won 5 games out of 18 attempts against strong competition. Given that a team will have a few bad games throughout the year and other teams will have a few great games it seems odd to favor a team that lost 13 out of 18 tries over someone who lost their few chances while have an otherwise strong year.

I do think Witchita St was a victory short of deserving a bid but they seem to have the talent to compete. Missouri St however had the RPI and two wins over Witchita St that should have put them in. Harvard is another with a legit argument and Cleveland St when you account for match-up issues.

missouri state also beat northern iowa before orear was hurt, so it was actually a much better win than what they got credit for.

i don't know why that is either, but i do know WHAT it is. the committee values quality wins, and they don't care if they come in conference our out of conference. teams outside the top conferences have a circumstantial disadvantage when it comes to getting opportunities to prove themselves. they need to get the good games out of conference, and while not impossible, it's not always easy either. at least the major conference teams that scheduled weak and had so-so years in conference were left out. truth be told, i'm not sure missouri state was better than any of the teams that actually were selected, but they were good. i wouldn't have complained too much had they gotten in. lets just say that i believe them to be better than virginia tech.

[DoubleD86]

I am not saying VaTech deserved to be in over VCU. Just saying using the results is not an adequate argument for why they deserved to be in.

That being said, I was in the camp of VCU not deserving to be in, thought them UAB and USC shouldn't have been. But that argument has been done already so not looking to go into that. Still, I love what they have done and am rooting for them to do well.

[GoMuskies]

Much like when Alabama played Utah in the Sugar Bowl after squandering the chance to play in the bcs championship game following a loss in the SEC championship, the Tide came into the post-season with no motivation to beat an "inferior" opponent in a lesser bowl.

Perhaps. Or maybe they just got their asses handed to them. Utah was really good.

[gladdenguy]

Perhaps. Or maybe they just got their asses handed to them. Utah was really good.

I agree Go. Utah was good and playing great ball at the end of the year. Yes, an SEC team got drilled. Suck it.