Big Boys Crying

I've heard a lot of whining (which you do every year) by BCS schools left out of the dance. This year it seemed it was Dick Vitale's turn to play the whiner. He ranted about how teams like Utah St didn't deserve to get in over teams like Illinois or Virginia Tech. How those teams were .500 in their leagues. How he couldn't see how Utah St could be .500 in those leagues.



It got me thinking and I decided, you know I think Utah St could be .500 in the Big 10, ACC or even Big East. Why? The Spectrum! I don't think guys like Vitalke understand how hard it is to win there. It's at elevation, the fans and students are right on top of you and they are relentless.



If Utah St had 9 home conference games they could go 7-2 in those. Then they just need to go 2-7 on the road to break .500. I don't think ANY team in the Big 10 can match the intensity, environment and hostility of the Spectrum.



Utah St would easily beat the following Big 10 teams at home: Illinois, Northwestern, Penn St, Michigan, Indiana, Iowa, and Minnesota. That's seven wins right there and I bet they would 2-3 at worst against Michigan St, Wisconsin, Ohio St, and Purdue.



They may go 0-5 against that second group, but I think they could pick up 2 wins against the previous six.



In the ACC, I'd like USU chances at home against UNC, NC State, Boston College, Virginia and Miami. I bet they could get two wins from Virginia Tech, Florida St, Clemson and Wake Forest. I don't think they'd beat Maryland or Duke though.



Bottom line: Utah State could easily go .500 in those leagues. What guys like Vitale are forgetting is that Utah State wouldn't have to play EVERY conference game on the road. They're completely ignorant when it comes to playing in Logan. With half their conference games at home, Utah St would be a very viable at large candidate. You just don't waltz into Logan and win.

I was going to comment on that as well. It really was a pathetic sight to see Vitale whining like a baby about VT and how, because they beat WF head to head, they are more deserving. Overall resume bub. I have no respect for Vitale in any case because he is the most obvious East coast homer on ESPN. He isn't an analyst so he just has to yell a lot--that's why he's famous. Not because he knows hoops.

I was talking with Tyler Haws over the weekend and asked him where the toughest place to play was this season . . . he said the Spectrum. He said (paraphrasing) it was wild, and loud. The fans have a bunch of synchronized chants and really get after the visiting players. He said it was hard to play there. He did also mention UNLV, but it wasn't close to the Spectrum.

BYULV wrote:
I was talking with Tyler Haws over the weekend and asked him where the toughest place to play was this season . . . he said the Spectrum. He said (paraphrasing) it was wild, and loud. The fans have a bunch of synchronized chants and really get after the visiting players. He said it was hard to play there. He did also mention UNLV, but it wasn't close to the Spectrum.

Speaking of Utah State and their fans, has anyone else seen that Wild Bill (the Utah St. fan who dresses up (or the lack thereof) and dances to distract players during their free throws) has been on ESPNU a TON these last 2 days. Like, live on the set I mean. As in, right there with the analysts. Some of it has been pretty funny I have to say. Good exposure for Utah State.

I'm so sick of these tired arguments every year. There's plenty of evidence to show that there is already a bias against the "mid-majors". Even that title heaped upon them by the talking heads shows they don't respect them.



Jay Bilas said it best when he said that 'none of those teams would have made it very far anyway and certainly wouldn't have come anywhere close to competing in the championship game'. So at least give the "mid-majors" a chance. They're always talking about how weak their schedules are and how they haven't proved they deserve it. Well this is there chance to prove something. Maybe not all the time but often these so-called "mid-majors" make a Cinderella run and are the story of the tournament. People love the underdogs. But you never see that out of a 0.500 BCS team. Why? For the same reason they use against the "mid-majors"... the schedule. We know they can't compete and they've proven it so at least throw a bone to the unproven "little guy" and see what they can do.



But in my opinion, the biggest problem with the whole system is the stupid conference tournaments. The regular season champ deserves to get the auto-bid after proving it night-in and night-out. Not some team that got hot or just plain lucky at the right time like East Tennessee State, Winthrop, Montana, Ohio, Arkansas-Pine Bluff, Houston, Saint Mary's, New Mexico State or any others that I missed. Then you don't have this problem about "robbing the poor kids" from Virginia Tech of a seed so that an equally deserving kids from Utah State can have their shot. Obviously the WAC isn't two-bid league. Same this year with C-USA and the WCC. That opens up at least three more seeds for these poor BCS babies that got left out but don't have a prayer of making it anyway past round two anyway.



And get we get rid of the play-in game too? I'm so sick of that too. Really, what's the point? Nobody cares about it and they never win anyway. So either just cut it off at 64 or make each of the four 16 seeds a play-in game.

I too don't like the idea of giving the tourney champ an automatic bid and not the regular season champ. It should be the other way around. The tourney should just be an opportunity to improve your at large chances, IMO. If they continue to award the tourney champ an auto bid then I think they should make a rule that the tourney can't be played on one of the team's home court unless it's on a rotating schedule with all the teams.