• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

TAS Bracketology 2011 Edition

TheAsianSensation said:
Only 6 out of 37 is actually really bad this year.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we are only one year removed from only 4 out of 34 in as well. And it seems like last year's total of 8 is the ceiling.

Actually you are right in that apparently the expansion did absolutely nothing to increase the number of mids in the tournament.
 
TheAsianSensation said:
NIT

EAST
1) Boston College (20-12) vs. 8 )Bethune-Cookman (17-12)
4) Hofstra (20-11) vs. 5) Nebraska (19-12)
3) Cleveland St (24-8 ) vs. 6) Fairfield (24-7)
2) Harvard (21-6) vs. 7) Vermont (23-8 )

SOUTH
1) Georgia (21-11) vs. 8 )Florida Atlantic (19-10)
4) Dayton (22-13) vs. 5) California (17-14)
3) Wichita St (23-8 ) vs. 6) Charleston (24-10)
2) VCU (23-11) vs. 7) Coastal Carolina (24-5)

MIDWEST
1) Missouri St (25-8 ) vs. 8 )McNeese St (17-11)
4) Southern Miss (19-10) vs. 5) New Mexico (20-12)
3) Washington St (19-12) vs. 7) Milwaukee (19-13)
2) UAB (22-8 ) vs. 7) Murray St (21-8 )

WEST
1) USC (19-14) vs. 8 )Long Beach St (20-11)
4) Baylor (17-13) vs. 5) Tulsa (19-13)
3) Colorado St (18-12) vs. 6) Kent St (22-11)
2) UTEP (24-9) vs. 7) Texas Southern (19-12)

Note: The geography of these brackets are quite screwy. I don't see how the NIT keeps teams from major road trips without majorly comprimising the seeds of the teams in the field.
Click to expand...

Wow! Am I reading this right that there you are predicting just 7 BCS teams in this year's NIT field? I thought that's what the CBI and CIT were for! :D

I hope those two tournaments have enough teams to fill up their slots.
 
Bravesfan said:
Wow! Am I reading this right that there you are predicting just 7 BCS teams in this year's NIT field? I thought that's what the CBI and CIT were for! :D

I hope those two tournaments have enough teams to fill up their slots.
Click to expand...

Well, it's what the NIT should do.

This makes me really nervous, because if the trend is to BCS up in the NIT, a staggering amount of mid majors are in trouble. Teams like Wichita St are not NIT locks. Believe it or not. Wichita St is in real danger of missing the NIT.
 
TheAsianSensation said:
Well, it's what the NIT should do.

This makes me really nervous, because if the trend is to BCS up in the NIT, a staggering amount of mid majors are in trouble. Teams like Wichita St are not NIT locks. Believe it or not. Wichita St is in real danger of missing the NIT.
Click to expand...

But the interesting thing here is that Wichita St may not make the NIT because of all of the low majors taking up the bottom three lines as well. So while the NIT has made it easier for the SWAC, Summit and Ivy Leagues to get at least one team in, you're right that teams like Wichita St and Valparaiso may not get in.

Plus, like it or not, don't think the NIT committee does not see what the CBI and CIT folks are doing. They probably figure those are the tournaments for the mid-majors. And as I have stated in the past, if Division I ever splits up into two subdivisions like exist in football, you know which two tournaments will evolve into the "Division I-AA" postseason tournaments!
 
Bravesfan said:
But the interesting thing here is that Wichita St may not make the NIT because of all of the low majors taking up the bottom three lines as well. So while the NIT has made it easier for the SWAC, Summit and Ivy Leagues to get at least one team in, you're right that teams like Wichita St and Valparaiso may not get in.

Plus, like it or not, don't think the NIT committee does not see what the CBI and CIT folks are doing. They probably figure those are the tournaments for the mid-majors. And as I have stated in the past, if Division I ever splits up into two subdivisions like exist in football, you know which two tournaments will evolve into the "Division I-AA" postseason tournaments!
Click to expand...


Good point. The NIT committee is by far more corrupt than the NCAA committee. They're bad. Terrible. Terribad.
 
TheAsianSensation said:
Good point. The NIT committee is by far more corrupt than the NCAA committee. They're bad. Terrible. Terribad.
Click to expand...

That is unfortunately very true. I guess for now I will still hang my hopes on the NCAA Tournament selection committee doing the right thing today and making a few "upset" picks.

But I was just thinking in the last hour or so, do we really believe that these "locks" are all sure bets? I know you base your picks TAS on what you believe will happen, not what you would like to happen. But are we really sure that teams like Virginia Tech, Illinois, Michigan St. and Georgia are in?

Well, in reality they probably all are. But think of this. There are quite a few "locks" the selection committee could make a case against making the tournament if they looked at things objectively, which they usually don't. I can see cases for leaving Virginia Tech, Clemson, Illinois, Michigan St., Michigan, USC, Georgia, Alabama, Colorado and even Marquette out of the tournament. And if a "perfect storm" of selections left most if not all of these teams out, look how many deserving mid-majors could make the tournament!

You could choose Missouri St., Harvard, VCU, Cleveland St, and UAB, and still have five of those above BCS teams make it. But the BCS power structure obviously wants to squeeze every last BCS team into the tournament, and won't even consider a mid-major unless they have "graduated" into power team status (see Butler, Gonzaga and Xavier), or unless they have had an exceptionally good resume like St. Mary's, George Mason or Old Dominion.

I know it's a long, long shot, but boy would it be nice to see a few more mid-majors joining the party in about 20 minutes or so!
 
Bravesfan said:
That is unfortunately very true. I guess for now I will still hang my hopes on the NCAA
But I was just thinking in the last hour or so, do we really believe that these "locks" are all sure bets? I know you base your picks TAS on what you believe will happen, not what you would like to happen. But are we really sure that teams like Virginia Tech, Illinois, Michigan St. and Georgia are in?

Well, in reality they probably all are. But think of this. There are quite a few "locks" the selection committee could make a case against making the tournament if they looked at things objectively, which they usually don't. I can see cases for leaving Virginia Tech, Clemson, Illinois, Michigan St., Michigan, USC, Georgia, Alabama, Colorado and even Marquette out of the tournament. And if a "perfect storm" of selections left most if not all of these teams out, look how many deserving mid-majors could make the tournament!

You could choose Missouri St., Harvard, VCU, Cleveland St, and UAB, and still have five of those above BCS teams make it. But the BCS power structure obviously wants to squeeze every last BCS team into the tournament, and won't even consider a mid-major unless they have "graduated" into power team status (see Butler, Gonzaga and Xavier), or unless they have had an exceptionally good resume like St. Mary's, George Mason or Old Dominion.

I know it's a long, long shot, but boy would it be nice to see a few more mid-majors joining the party in about 20 minutes or so!
Click to expand...

Long story short, if the committee sticks to previous trends, your hopes for mid major risings will be cut way short.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top