Started By
Message
re: No more Divisions in SEC basketball
Posted on 6/2/11 at 10:44 am to CoonassBulldog
Posted on 6/2/11 at 10:44 am to CoonassBulldog
quote:
The move to 22 is being discussed because it would eliminate some of the meaningless games like Valley, Belmont, Jacksonville St and the like and give the SEC a big RPI boost
Then you would be complaining about how a 10-12 SEC record and 17-13 overall MSU team shouldn't be in the NCAA tournament.
This post was edited on 6/2/11 at 10:47 am
1
Posted on 6/2/11 at 10:44 am to Al Bundy Bulldog
quote:
Still, how will that get 8 teams in the tourney like Cal claims.
It won't.
All this will do is "correct the wrongs" in the SEC-T seeding where the east has been bitching for the past few years about the west 1 and 2 getting the first round bye. Now 1-4 east or west could get the bye.
I'm sure the east would have been bitching if the SEC went to the two best football teams playing for the title that would have lead to an Auburn- Arkansas rematch last season...
Posted on 6/2/11 at 10:48 am to DaleDenton
Fifth place sounds better than eleventh place.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 10:50 am to Teague
quote:
Bama got snubbed because they played in the "weak" western division.
Bama got snubbed because they played horrible in the non conference portion of their schedule.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 10:52 am to JasonMason
quote:
Bama got snubbed because they played horrible in the non conference portion of their schedule.
Bama didn't get snubbed...
They didn't deserve to be in the tournament.
This post was edited on 6/2/11 at 10:55 am
Posted on 6/2/11 at 10:53 am to DaleDenton
Sweet, no as opposed to being #6 in their division, LSU will get to be rated 12th.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 10:54 am to DaleDenton
quote:
He didn't deserve to be in the tournament.
I would agree with you.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 10:54 am to JasonMason
quote:
Bama got snubbed because they played horrible in the non conference portion of their schedule.
And had some bad losses in the process.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 11:05 am to c on z
Yep, UAB had a much stronger resume than the second place SEC team.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 11:08 am to bona fide
quote:
Yep, UAB had a much stronger resume than the second place SEC team.
UAB didn't lose to a team whose head coach was John Pelphrey, the NCAA should have mandated that any such loss was an automatic dis-qualifier from the tourney...
Posted on 6/2/11 at 11:46 am to JasonMason
quote:
Bama got snubbed because they played horrible in the non conference portion of their schedule.
Even with that, if the West hadn't been viewed as putrid, they would have gotten in.
Or, yes, if they had won the shitty out of conference games that they lost, they would have gotten in also.
Either way.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 11:48 am to Teague
quote:
Either way.
Bama didn't deserve to be in.
Colorado and Nebraska had just as much claim to being "snubbed" as Bama.
The only team truly snubbed was Wichita State.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 12:26 pm to Al Bundy Bulldog
quote:
Then you would be complaining about how a 10-12 SEC record and 17-13 overall MSU team shouldn't be in the NCAA tournament.
if we are going 10-12 in the SEC, we'll be getting a new coach
Posted on 6/2/11 at 12:48 pm to CoonassBulldog
quote:
if we are going 10-12 in the SEC, we'll be getting a new coach
And you will be rejoicing.
Posted on 6/2/11 at 12:51 pm to Al Bundy Bulldog
quote:
How the standings would have looked this year if there were no divisions.
1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Kentucky
4. Vanderbilt
5. Georgia
6. Mississippi State
7. Tennessee
8. Ole Miss
9. Arkansas
10. South Carolina
11. Auburn
12. LSU
WE SUCK AGAIN
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News