Bracket Busters

[SHOXAAC]

You're right...just my opinion. If I was a coach and had the option I wouldn't do it. Wouldn't necessarily make me right, just the way I would do it.

I'm of course saying this tongue in cheek, but please keep your day job. :)

[1972Shocker]

I can not believe we are still talking about this.

Excellent point.

[Capitol Shock]

How'd we get back on this topic anyway? I'm going to go take a nap.

[GoGMU]

I'll say it again, the risk is greater than the reward. If the risk is greated than the reward then why participate? Sure beating VCU would have been great...but losing to them hurt more than beating them would have helped.

I really don't understand why this is a debate. BB simply presents teams with the opportunity for a quality win...and teams like ours sometimes struggle to get quality opponents, especially late in the season on TV.

Win and it helps. Lose and it hurts...but it's never a "bad loss" because by definition it's a quality opponent.

If you end up in a particularly precarious position on the bubble could that loss knock you out? Sure. But could that high profile win put you in? Absolutely (see GMU @ WSU in '06).

The only argument that I see merit in (but don't necessarily agree with) is that for schools like Gonzaga that have been having sustained big-time success against power 6 teams and in the NCAAs there is the perception that participation in BB reinforces the idea that they are not a big time program.

[Snapshot9]

GoGMU - I agree 100% with your analogy of the BB.

[RoyalShock]

I'll say it again, the risk is greater than the reward. If the risk is greated than the reward then why participate? Sure beating VCU would have been great...but losing to them hurt more than beating them would have helped.

I really don't understand why this is a debate. BB simply presents teams with the opportunity for a quality win...and teams like ours sometimes struggle to get quality opponents, especially late in the season on TV.

Win and it helps. Lose and it hurts...but it's never a "bad loss" because by definition it's a quality opponent.

If you end up in a particularly precarious position on the bubble could that loss knock you out? Sure. But could that high profile win put you in? Absolutely (see GMU @ WSU in '06).

The only argument that I see merit in (but don't necessarily agree with) is that for schools like Gonzaga that have been having sustained big-time success against power 6 teams and in the NCAAs there is the perception that participation in BB reinforces the idea that they are not a big time program.

I didn't see this post until just now, but interestingly enough I just posted a new topic that delves into your last paragraph in more detail, using our beat writers recent observations and historical conference RPI as evidence. See the topic "Thoughts on what Sunday says".

[shox1989]

I'll say it again, the risk is greater than the reward. If the risk is greated than the reward then why participate? Sure beating VCU would have been great...but losing to them hurt more than beating them would have helped.

I really don't understand why this is a debate. BB simply presents teams with the opportunity for a quality win...and teams like ours sometimes struggle to get quality opponents, especially late in the season on TV.

Win and it helps. Lose and it hurts...but it's never a "bad loss" because by definition it's a quality opponent.

If you end up in a particularly precarious position on the bubble could that loss knock you out? Sure. But could that high profile win put you in? Absolutely (see GMU @ WSU in '06).

The only argument that I see merit in (but don't necessarily agree with) is that for schools like Gonzaga that have been having sustained big-time success against power 6 teams and in the NCAAs there is the perception that participation in BB reinforces the idea that they are not a big time program.

And this is the part about BB that makes a killer in my opinion. If you are trying to recruit the best players you don't associate yourself with all of the bottom feeder teams.

I don't like the idea of playing a non-con opponent in the heat of the conference season, but that is a minor point.

The real problem is the perception that being in BB makes you one of the bottom feeder conferences. Which after a few years in this event, we have now become.

[SHOXAAC]

I'll say it again, the risk is greater than the reward. If the risk is greated than the reward then why participate? Sure beating VCU would have been great...but losing to them hurt more than beating them would have helped.

I really don't understand why this is a debate. BB simply presents teams with the opportunity for a quality win...and teams like ours sometimes struggle to get quality opponents, especially late in the season on TV.

Win and it helps. Lose and it hurts...but it's never a "bad loss" because by definition it's a quality opponent.

If you end up in a particularly precarious position on the bubble could that loss knock you out? Sure. But could that high profile win put you in? Absolutely (see GMU @ WSU in '06).

The only argument that I see merit in (but don't necessarily agree with) is that for schools like Gonzaga that have been having sustained big-time success against power 6 teams and in the NCAAs there is the perception that participation in BB reinforces the idea that they are not a big time program.

And this is the part about BB that makes a killer in my opinion. If you are trying to recruit the best players you don't associate yourself with all of the bottom feeder teams.

I don't like the idea of playing a non-con opponent in the heat of the conference season, but that is a minor point.

The real problem is the perception that being in BB makes you one of the bottom feeder conferences. Which after a few years in this event, we have now become.

Then WIN.

FIXED!