NCAA Tourney. Is the fix in for UCLA?
- Thread starter Skkorpion
- Start date
Disagree. UNC has by far the easiest path, playing 4 homes games.
Now his next two points are valid:
The highest RPIs omitted are from non-BCS leagues
The teams with the top three RPIs not included in the field are No. 32 Dayton (Atlantic 10), No. 33 Illinois State (Missouri Valley) and No. 42 UMass (Atlantic 10). No big deal, right? Perhaps not. But what would you say if I told you this marks the fourth consecutive time that the top three RPIs omitted from the field belong to non-BCS schools? That's four years in a row, and a pattern that cannot be denied.
The highest RPIs omitted are from non-BCS leagues
The teams with the top three RPIs not included in the field are No. 32 Dayton (Atlantic 10), No. 33 Illinois State (Missouri Valley) and No. 42 UMass (Atlantic 10). No big deal, right? Perhaps not. But what would you say if I told you this marks the fourth consecutive time that the top three RPIs omitted from the field belong to non-BCS schools? That's four years in a row, and a pattern that cannot be denied.
And this really sucks - I noticed it again the minute the brackets were announced:
Quality non-BCS schools paired to eliminate each other
Butler, South Alabama, Gonzaga, Davidson, Drake and Western Kentucky were all either ranked or receiving votes in the latest AP poll, and somehow they ended up playing each other in the first round. This ensures more non-BCS schools will advance and fewer non-BCS schools will advance.
I would cast it off as nothing if I hadn't been in New Orleans last March and watched Creighton (MVC tournament champion) and Nevada (WAC champion) battle in the first round of the 2007 NCAA tournament for the right to be eliminated by Memphis (C-USA champion) in the second round. Put another way, last year's bracket was designed so that a non-BCS power (Memphis) would eliminate the winner of a game between two other non-BCS powers (Creighton and Nevada), ensuring only one of the three could make the Sweet 16. This is not an accident, I tell you.
Quality non-BCS schools paired to eliminate each other
Butler, South Alabama, Gonzaga, Davidson, Drake and Western Kentucky were all either ranked or receiving votes in the latest AP poll, and somehow they ended up playing each other in the first round. This ensures more non-BCS schools will advance and fewer non-BCS schools will advance.
I would cast it off as nothing if I hadn't been in New Orleans last March and watched Creighton (MVC tournament champion) and Nevada (WAC champion) battle in the first round of the 2007 NCAA tournament for the right to be eliminated by Memphis (C-USA champion) in the second round. Put another way, last year's bracket was designed so that a non-BCS power (Memphis) would eliminate the winner of a game between two other non-BCS powers (Creighton and Nevada), ensuring only one of the three could make the Sweet 16. This is not an accident, I tell you.
OP
OP
Thank you, Jon. I saw that too and side with you. The choice of thread title was to get people to read the article. That and I hate UCLA.
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 88,588
- Reaction score
- 40,397
If his first point is true does that make his second one true too? Afterall you already told us the idea that they setup the USC/K State matchup for ratings was "nonsense." Now you're endorsing an article that makes the exact same claim?
UCLA clearly has the best draw but I think it's pretty obvious why, of the so called "power schools" this year UCLA was really the only obvious one in the West. Stanford is the only other "west" team in the top 10, Texas is about as close to West as you got. There's so many more teams East and Midwest than West that for years now they've shipped big name teams West when there's no clear cut good team in the West. When there is they use the West almost as "punishment" taking the thought to be weakest of the power seeds and putting them in the West.
Of course last year everyone said the same thing and UCLA had to beat Pitt and Kansas to get out of the West. This year Kansas is one of the favorites and Pitt is one of the hot teams in the country and neither one of them is clearly better this year than they were last year(probably both as good).
For some reason the perception last year was Pitt and Kansas were overseeded.
There's no question they pick games to setup tv marketing opps. And I think there's no question this year UCLA has the weakest path to the final 4, what's odd is all year UCLA fans have had a list of teams that could beat us and A&M and Duke were on it all year.
UCLA clearly has the best draw but I think it's pretty obvious why, of the so called "power schools" this year UCLA was really the only obvious one in the West. Stanford is the only other "west" team in the top 10, Texas is about as close to West as you got. There's so many more teams East and Midwest than West that for years now they've shipped big name teams West when there's no clear cut good team in the West. When there is they use the West almost as "punishment" taking the thought to be weakest of the power seeds and putting them in the West.
Of course last year everyone said the same thing and UCLA had to beat Pitt and Kansas to get out of the West. This year Kansas is one of the favorites and Pitt is one of the hot teams in the country and neither one of them is clearly better this year than they were last year(probably both as good).
For some reason the perception last year was Pitt and Kansas were overseeded.
There's no question they pick games to setup tv marketing opps. And I think there's no question this year UCLA has the weakest path to the final 4, what's odd is all year UCLA fans have had a list of teams that could beat us and A&M and Duke were on it all year.
