HOW THE VARIOUS CONFERENCES DOING IN THE DANCE?

[shocker3]

A breakdown of the Sweet 16 by original number of bids:

BIG EAST - 2 (out of 8 bids) 25%
BIG 12- 2 (out of 7 bids) 29%
ACC- 1 (out of 6 bids) 17%
BIG 10- 3 (out of 5 bids) 60%
SEC- 2 (out of 4 bids) 50%
MWC- 0 (out of 4 bids) 0%
A-10 1 (out of 3 bids) 33%
WCC 1 (out of 2 bids) 50%
PAC 10 1 (out of 2 bids) 50%
C-USA 0 (out of 2 bids) 0%
WAC 0 (out of 2 bids) 0%
THE VALLEY 1 (out of 1 bid) 100%
IVY 1 (out of 1 bid) 100%
HORZ 1 (out of 1 bid) 100%


All other conferences were 0 out of 1 bid.

[ShauXTyme]

Is this supposed to mean something? If it's supposed to point out that the MVC has 100% of bids in the S16, that doesn't really mean anything. If we had had 2 or 3 bids, we more than likely would have been 1 of 2 or 1 of 3, or heaven forbid we get 4 and then we'd have 1 of 4.

[AndShock]

I believe when we get 4, we still get 50%. But I see your point.

[Ashockalypse]

I don''t see your point. You don't at all know where we would be if we had 3 or 4 bids but you do know that if you get eight bids, it is hard to get your conference out of there. The point of the chart is the Valley made the most of its one bid and the Big Hype and ACC made very little of their 14 bids between them. The point is we don't get to find out what our 4 teams may have done cuz we didn't get 4 teams. We would like the opportunity to prove it on the court...not in your head!

[shocker3]

It was more to point out how poorly some of the overrated BCS conferences were doing with their many bids.

I Knew that the Big Easy wasn't doing very well, but until I started compiling this I didn't realize how poorly the ACC (1/6) and the Big 12 were doing as well (2/7).

Actually the conference that has done the worst is the Mountain West. They got 4 bids including a #3 seed and have no one in the sweet 16.

The way UNLV fans put down the Valley before (including some anti-WSU remarks) they played UNI both on the UNI board and their own board I don't feel sorry for them.

Normally I would root for any non-BCS conference to do well but this year I wasn't too upset to see the MWC flame out so fast.

We know that we are doing well with our one bid it would be nice to have an opportunity to show what we could do if we got more bids (as we did in 2006).

[shocker3]

I don''t see your point. You don't at all know where we would be if we had 3 or 4 bids but you do know that if you get eight bids, it is hard to get your conference out of there. The point of the chart is the Valley made the most of its one bid and the Big Hype and ACC made very little of their 14 bids between them. The point is we don't get to find out what our 4 teams may have done cuz we didn't get 4 teams. We would like the opportunity to prove it on the court...not in your head!

Exactly. You made my point better than I could.

[shox1989]

I don''t see your point. You don't at all know where we would be if we had 3 or 4 bids but you do know that if you get eight bids, it is hard to get your conference out of there. The point of the chart is the Valley made the most of its one bid and the Big Hype and ACC made very little of their 14 bids between them. The point is we don't get to find out what our 4 teams may have done cuz we didn't get 4 teams. We would like the opportunity to prove it on the court...not in your head!

I would love to hear the talking heads at espn and CBS talk about how little the ACC and Big Least have done with their 14 bids (and some pretty decent seeds).

I would love to hear just one of them say something like Billy Packer used to say about the non-power conferences. It is how you do in tournament. If these conferences don't perform in the dance they don't belong.

[ShauXTyme]

WSU was the #2 team in the Valley, and we got beaten by Nevada in the 1st round of the NIT. Now, I love our Shockers, and I root hard for most of the MVC, but there is no way we should be saying that the MVC should have had more teams in the tourney this year. And, there are only 16 spots in the S16, so, leagues that have 4-5 top 25 teams should have at least 4-5 spots, but maybe only 1 gets into the S16...this shouldn't mean those teams leagues shouldn't get the 4-5 spots, should it?

[ABC]

ShauxTyme = KCShox, in case you hadn't figured it out.

I think that UNI's non-fluke victory over the tournament's #1 seed does in fact reopen the argument about WSU getting an at-large.

NIT results, in my opinion, are meaningless to this argument.

[shox1989]

WSU was the #2 team in the Valley, and we got beaten by Nevada in the 1st round of the NIT. Now, I love our Shockers, and I root hard for most of the MVC, but there is no way we should be saying that the MVC should have had more teams in the tourney this year. And, there are only 16 spots in the S16, so, leagues that have 4-5 top 25 teams should have at least 4-5 spots, but maybe only 1 gets into the S16...this shouldn't mean those teams leagues shouldn't get the 4-5 spots, should it?

I am not saying that we should have had six teams dancing this year. But if we had, we certainly wouldn't be doing any worse than the ACC right now (1/6).

The Valley should be a 2 or 3 bid conference every year. We are not at the same level as the SWAC or MEAC etc.

I heard a commentator say that the PAC 10 deserved at least 2 bids this year, because even though they are down this year they still are a lot better than the SWAC.

I think you can certainly say the same thing about the Valley.

Personally I think WSU deserved a bid as much as teams like San Diego St., UTEP, Florida and Minnesota.

[Denny Crane]

ShauxTyme = KCShox, in case you hadn't figured it out.

I think that UNI's non-fluke victory over the tournament's #1 seed does in fact reopen the argument about WSU getting an at-large.

NIT results, in my opinion, are meaningless to this argument.

Especially since we played another good mid major.

[shockball]

Another point could be made that the MVC has had 7 out of its last 16 at large bids wind up in the sweet 16 (44%). I'd bet that compares very favorably with the success of the BCS bids over the same time frame.

Overall 8 out of the last 33 MVC participants have made the sweet 16 (24%) which is the same percentage of 16 teams out of 65 making it. Add in the lousy seeding and we would be ahead of the curve.

[kcshocker11]

Another point could be made that the MVC has had 7 out of its last 16 at large bids wind up in the sweet 16 (44%). I'd bet that compares very favorably with the success of the BCS bids over the same time frame.

True, especially when you consider the average seed of a Valley team wasnt as good as the big boys. We had to work harder for that %. :goshocks: 8)

[shockball]

Your reply just beat my edit.

[shox1989]

Another point could be made that the MVC has had 7 out of its last 16 at large bids wind up in the sweet 16 (44%). I'd bet that compares very favorably with the success of the BCS bids over the same time frame.

Overall 8 out of the last 33 MVC participants have made the sweet 16 (24%) which is the same percentage of 16 teams out of 65 making it. Add in the lousy seeding and we would be ahead of the curve.

Actually I think the at-large number (44%) is more significant since that is what the committee is trying to decide. They have no control over the automatic bid.

When given the opportunity by the committee our conference has done very well.