They were talking about how teams like USC and Mississippi State didn't deserve to make the tournament. They even compared us to UGA last year? There's a big difference between State of this year and UGA of last year. Anyways I know there are a few of people that feel the way they do, but I mean I really don't see how they think we don't deserve being there when we win 4 games in 4 days.</p>
Screw you Mike and Mike.....
- Thread starter 38843dawg
- Start date
They were talking about how teams like USC and Mississippi State didn't deserve to make the tournament. They even compared us to UGA last year? There's a big difference between State of this year and UGA of last year. Anyways I know there are a few of people that feel the way they do, but I mean I really don't see how they think we don't deserve being there when we win 4 games in 4 days.</p>
UGA was much different for two reasons. 1) They won 4 SEC regular season games and followed that by going 4-0 in the tourney. MSU was 9-7.
2) UGA had to make a run against a stronger SEC.
Given the fact that there are no teams from the SEC that are even expected to make the Sweet Sixteen this year, most people considered the SEC tourney to be anyone's to win. Last year, no one would've expected a team like UGA could've won the thing. This year, there are probably 8 or 9 teams that could've won it without it being a big shocker.
2) UGA had to make a run against a stronger SEC.
Given the fact that there are no teams from the SEC that are even expected to make the Sweet Sixteen this year, most people considered the SEC tourney to be anyone's to win. Last year, no one would've expected a team like UGA could've won the thing. This year, there are probably 8 or 9 teams that could've won it without it being a big shocker.
What would be considered "power conferences" because that could change from year to year. Plus if you made it where the auto bid went away for power conf. what would the teams have to play for? Nothing.
He said that State and USC do not deserve going, echoing what Mike and Mike said, but what got me is he listed some teams that got "robbed" by not getting in and he said Auburn and Florida? I understand Auburn because I believe they had a legit case to get in, but Florida? I mean seriously Bayless, you are an idiot.
T
Toag Redloh
Guest
screw anybody who says otherwise. Sour grapes. Talking heads are the most ignorant ones out there.
You get a gold star. I don't see how anyone not on crack thinks we have no business in the tournament compared to the mediocre teams that were left out.
that after yesterday, we are 3-3 against the top 50, which is a better record against the top 50 than any of those teams they are mentioning. They would also see we lost two double games, which, with two more points, we're a 25 win team.
Like I said, idiots.
Like I said, idiots.
winning a weak, weak tourney to get in, I could understand and agree to a certain extent (although I think those kind of stories make college basketball a little better than it already is).
But to say that USC and MSU don't deserve to get in after winning 3 or 4 games in a row against RPI top 50 or 100 kind of teams on a neutral floor is just plain ignorance. Nothing more needs to be said. It's like all these stock jockeys on TV who have been so wrong about the market for years, but they keep talking and keep getting paid. It ain't about being right. It's just about being loud and controversial.</p>
One final point. If we didn't desrve to be there, we would sure be a lot bigger underdog than 4.5 points to the PAC 10 champs. The guys who put there net worths on the line taking bets know we are the real deal as far as being a legit NCAA team.</p>
</p>
But to say that USC and MSU don't deserve to get in after winning 3 or 4 games in a row against RPI top 50 or 100 kind of teams on a neutral floor is just plain ignorance. Nothing more needs to be said. It's like all these stock jockeys on TV who have been so wrong about the market for years, but they keep talking and keep getting paid. It ain't about being right. It's just about being loud and controversial.</p>
One final point. If we didn't desrve to be there, we would sure be a lot bigger underdog than 4.5 points to the PAC 10 champs. The guys who put there net worths on the line taking bets know we are the real deal as far as being a legit NCAA team.</p>
</p>
We've been there before too and have been left out before. We could, at that time, look back to a couple of games and know we have our chances to secure a bid. I don't feel sorry for teams that got "left out". They had chances to secure a bid and didn't. Boo hoo. We secured our bid via winning the tourney. If someone didn't win their tourney or didn't win enough games to secure an at-large bid, I don't feel bad for them.
People complain about the BCS and one of their key arguments is this: they don't earn it on the field. People get up in arms because everything is determined by analysis of records, quality wins, SOS, etc rather than playing for these things on the field. Now, when teams that earn their NCAA bids via winning a conference tournament, they would rather choose someone via analysis of records, quality wins, SOS, etc than take someone who earned their bid on the court. It just seems like an inconsistent position to me.
Anyone who thinks that if college football went to a playoff that there wouldn't still be a bunch of bitching is kidding themselves. Whether it is the #3 team in football or the #66 team in basketball, someone is left out and there is gnashing of teeth from some talking head.</p>
So you're telling me that he and his debate opponent on that show happen to disagree on every single topic?
You don't have to be a conspiracy freak to realize that show is scripted.</p>
You don't have to be a conspiracy freak to realize that show is scripted.</p>
So you think he happens to believe the opposite of the person across from him on every single topic? That would be the greatest coincidence in the history of mankind.
since he is the ratings getter, he states his viewpoint in the pre-show meetings and the other person has to argue aGAINST it.
Let's all just agree that skip's an asshat who has never touched female genitalia in his entire, obnoxious life.
Maybe he's been talking to C34.
No respect for SEC this year, we just need to prove them wrong. I think we can beat Wash as long as our players get the rest they need this week.
No respect for SEC this year, we just need to prove them wrong. I think we can beat Wash as long as our players get the rest they need this week.
That could be the case, but I think he plays a character, and that character is a douchebag who has irrational opinions on everything. Either way, someone is saying what they are told to say so there can be an argument.</p>
but what he's saying just reinforces it. Heck, there wasn't but a gnat's hair difference in the resumes of Auburn, Florida and MSU BEFORE the SEC tournament started. A couple of 2OT losses was the thing that was killing us before the SEC tournament started, otherwise we would have been sitting on 11-5 and pretty much a lock to get in.