Larry BRown was interviewed on KESN Radio yesterday in Texas about SMU , the NCAA Tourney and the lack of teams chosen from the AAC.

On not getting more teams into the Tourney from the AAC Brown stated:I really don't know. Temple beat Kansas by 25 when Kansas had Cliff and Perry Ellis. They were at full strength. Tulsa got off to a bad start, but I think our conference has some real quality teams.

Brown also wondered if not having someone on the selection committee hurts us and that perhaps some people get our conference confused with others.


http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/college...in-nba.ece

Well, having a MW person (USU Scott Barnes) on the selection committee didn't help CSU get in. Being how close religiously BYU and USU are, he probably kept BYU in the play-in game.

(03-18-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Well, having a MW person (USU Scott Barnes) on the selection committee didn't help CSU get in. Being how close religiously BYU and USU are, he probably kept BYU in the play-in game.

Did you see his interview? To get more of your conference teams in as a member of the committee, you at least have to make an intelligent case on the merits. I don't see Scott Barnes making an intelligent case on the merits of eating a ham sandwich.

(03-18-2015 08:10 AM)Puckhead48E Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Well, having a MW person (USU Scott Barnes) on the selection committee didn't help CSU get in. Being how close religiously BYU and USU are, he probably kept BYU in the play-in game.

Did you see his interview? To get more of your conference teams in as a member of the committee, you at least have to make an intelligent case on the merits. I don't see Scott Barnes making an intelligent case on the merits of eating a ham sandwich.

THAT was the MWC rep? Yeah, he wasn't making a good case for anything.

(03-18-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Well, having a MW person (USU Scott Barnes) on the selection committee didn't help CSU get in. Being how close religiously BYU and USU are, he probably kept BYU in the play-in game.

Having Barnes on the committee may well have been the difference between the MWC getting two at-large teams rather than one. IMO, CSU was slightly more deserving of a bid than Boise, but at least the conference got a second at-large bid. I think Temple deserved to be in ahead of Boise as well. CSU and Boise combined played 18 top 100 games winning 9 of them. Temple played 16 top 100 games (half of its schedule) and won 8 games. The committee says it values SOS when it includes UCLA then ignores SOS when it excludes Temple which had a significantly higher overall, and especially OOC SOS than either CSU or Boise.

And the usual 1 or 2 troll posters, who generate the majority posts on every AAC thread, will arrive telling us why the AAC sux in 3... 2.... 1...

Boise should not be in the tournament over Temple or Tulsa. Eleventh ranked RPI conference and zero big out of conference wins. They swept SDSU but also lost to Fresno and Utah State.

(03-18-2015 08:10 AM)Puckhead48E Wrote:  

(03-18-2015 08:03 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Well, having a MW person (USU Scott Barnes) on the selection committee didn't help CSU get in. Being how close religiously BYU and USU are, he probably kept BYU in the play-in game.

Did you see his interview? To get more of your conference teams in as a member of the committee, you at least have to make an intelligent case on the merits. I don't see Scott Barnes making an intelligent case on the merits of eating a ham sandwich.

I didn't see it. But, being the BYU's AD was also on the committee, I can probably guess that Scott Barnes and Tom Holmoe with the friendly relationship they have spent their energy on BYU despite BYU very ugly losses in the WCC.
Well, next year the WCC will only have 1 bid since BYU is rebuilding. It'll be an interesting situation to see BYU rebuild in the WCC vs the MW.

Its a judgement call on Boise and CSU over Temple. Its very close. However, not only taking UCLA over Temple, but giving them an 11, is beyond embarrassing for the NCAA. And Barnes looks even stupier when he says, "UCLA passed the eye test".

I think he meant, "UCLA passed the P5 test".

(03-18-2015 12:19 PM)taximan1 Wrote:  "UCLA passed the eye test".

(03-18-2015 12:19 PM)taximan1 Wrote:  Its a judgement call on Boise and CSU over Temple. Its very close. However, not only taking UCLA over Temple, but giving them an 11, is beyond embarrassing for the NCAA. And Barnes looks even stupier when he says, "UCLA passed the eye test".

I think he meant, "UCLA passed the P5 test".

They took the "madness" out of March, now it's just the ncaa ( read P5 ) basketball tournament, ho hum. F#%* them and their biased tournament. Only games I'll be watching involve SMU and Cincy. For crying out loud, how could UCLA pass the eye test, when they couldn't pass the smell test? Temple got hosed!

(03-18-2015 07:57 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  Larry BRown was interviewed on KESN Radio yesterday in Texas about SMU , the NCAA Tourney and the lack of teams chosen from the AAC.

On not getting more teams into the Tourney from the AAC Brown stated:I really don't know. Temple beat Kansas by 25 when Kansas had Cliff and Perry Ellis. They were at full strength. Tulsa got off to a bad start, but I think our conference has some real quality teams.

Brown also wondered if not having someone on the selection committee hurts us and that perhaps some people get our conference confused with others.


http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/college...in-nba.ece

Does anyone know how the committee is selected? For example MWC and CUSA rotate off and the ACC and MAC rotates in. 2016-17 will be the earliest for an AAC member to serve a five year term. Since the AAC is technically a new conference, I have no idea when they can be on the committee.

Actually the new big East is a new conference that purchased the big East name so the AAC should be rotating in as were scheduled for the old big east. Cincinnati and Uconn and USF didn't join a new league, they were left. Behind in an already existing reconstituted conference

Again the reason I ask how it is done. It seems Big East would have kept the spot with the basketball spot with the name but logic does not always apply to the NCAA. Thus why they wanted the Big East name. Again, the real question is how do people get on the committee?

I heard the AAC office was moving to Dallas?

I heard Larry Brown (allegedly) takes the high road, but needs a road map to find it.