Anyone else think they'd be in, if their bench didn't act like a bunch of freaking dorks? Monmouth's antics might be the reason they aren't there, and i'm fine with that.
Last edited:
Monmouth
- Thread starter litespeedhuskerfan
- Start date
Well it wasn't their resume that kept them out. That doesn't leave much besides their bench antics, as a reason they aren't in. It's just a thought.
I would certainly think their bid shouldn't be affected one way or the other by the antics of their bench players. They play in a low mid-major conference where the only expectation is the auto-bid. Win your damn conference.
If memory serves listening to folks discussing Monmouth they were the only team that would have gotten in that had multiple losses to teams rated below 200 in the RPI I believe. They had some chances but when you get beat by teams that have no chance to be considered for the NCAA otherwise on multiple occasions kind of like Nebraska does on a yearly basis and no you should not be in the NCAA
The committee probably wanted to give Tulsa one last shot at the tournament before Frank Haith jumps to another job and lets someone else deal with his NCAA violations.
Team..............RPI........ SOS
Monmouth.....52...........166
St Mary's........38..........148
Tulsa...............58.............64
I don't pretend to know anything about how the selection committee selects teams, but maybe the strength of schedule was a huge factor?
Monmouth.....52...........166
St Mary's........38..........148
Tulsa...............58.............64
I don't pretend to know anything about how the selection committee selects teams, but maybe the strength of schedule was a huge factor?
You can cherry pick tons of stats to say they should or shouldn't be in, and that's a darn good one, but if you just looked at their schedule and looked at the "names" they beat, then looked at the # of road wins they have, they are in. Obviously they got punished because teams like UCLA were down this year, but so the heck what? You know what kind of balls it takes Monmouth to schedule those teams, then they get penalized if those teams aren't as good as they have been historically. Monmouth beating UCLA means something, regardless of the down year for UCLA and Monmouth's schedule is full of those games.
I actually think the bench antics would have been perfect for March Madness. If their SOS would have been higher, they would have made it for sure. I think CBS, etc. would have eaten that up and shown it relentlessly on television during their game and on the highlights for that day's games.
PTI did a small segment on them about 2 months ago(ish) Wilbon said "I know what people would think of this, if this team was full of brothers of another color", and I thought to myself, he's dead on balls accurate (My Cousin Vinny reference, sorry). I could be WAAAY off on this, I know it, I am not saying I am right, I am just wondering out loud and I am wondering the selection committee was happy their SOS wasn't higher as I wonder if they'd want the controversy. Again, just a thought.
Disgrace that Syracuse and Tulsa got in while Monmouth is at home. Monmouth did what they were told to do. Their wins over Notre Dame, USC, UCLA and Georgetown outweigh bad losses as far as I'm concerned because it shows that they can win in the tournament.
To me, the whole "Top 50 wins" thing is flawed. Team A had 3 number of wins against top 50 RPI teams while Team B had only 1. Well, never mind the fact that Team A lost a bunch of games to top 50 teams while Team B can't get anyone to play them in the non-conference. To ask these smaller schools to "run the table" while power five schools can underachieve all season long and still make the tourney doesn't make sense to me.
This message is OT for this thread, but I am surprised and disappointed that Nebraska did not play in a post season tournament. With their two wins in the Big 10 tournament, especially the win over a good WI team, I am sure they would have gotten a bid from the NIT. Nebraska won the NIT a few years back, and it was a welcome title for the University. It is my understanding the players voted down any post season play. What are the benefits of that decision? If the NIT is good enough for Creighton, Ohio State, Alabama, etc, why did NE decide not to accept a bid? I know this has been discussed before, but there did not seem to be any good reasons put forth.
If Nebraska had been eligible for and invited to the NIT, I'm guessing they would have accepted. I believe their only options were the CBI and Vegas 16 tournaments. If you want to make an argument for playing in one of those events, there's nothing wrong with doing so. But the NIT is not part of the discussion.
I was not aware that the NIT was not an option. I guess the other two tournaments would not be worth the effort. Thanks for the info.
