Maybe should have won against the worst teams?
- Thread starter MountaineerWV
- Start date
Or not have our do everything forward who is also the coach’s son, go down. This team impressively held it together after losing its 2nd gun who was also a highly experienced player and also the coach’s son who undoubtedly helped a roster of new faces hit the ground running. But losing him helped the committee invent a reason to omit us, I was hoping that happened long enough ago that they’d forget, but apparently not. In theory if you assume we don’t pickup 2 Q1 wins in Maui without Tucker, which isn’t far fetched to assume, then we didn’t belong. If you don’t do that mental exercise then we should have been a 10 seed.
Or don't implode in the 2nd half against Colorado? Quality coaching effort there. But when 2 feet are out the door and your head is in Iowa, that can happen.
I don’t think a win over Colorado would have gotten us in TBH, committee had their mind made up. 6 Quad 1 wins vs UNC’s 1… it’s only a debate if you basically shortchange us 2 quad 1 wins because Tucker played a big role in those wins.
After seeing the BS of allowing 14 teams of 16 from one conference in then a win over Colorado would not have made a difference.
With their reasoning of 14 teams from SEC getting in plus UNC. A win over Colorado would not have made a difference.
If UNC got in, WVU should have been in sans Tucker. We still have a better resume without Tucker than the Tarheels.
But UNC at least made it to the ACC championship game and didn't lose in their first game against one of the WORST TEAMS in the conference (Colorado).
They had virtually no bad losses but only 1 quality win. We had 3 bad losses but 6 quality wins. You take away 2 quality wins because Tucker helped (and he certainly did) and suddenly the resumes look close, and then if you look at NET and it’s a landslide for UNC.
Committee did this to us when I was a freshman in 2006-07, we beat UCLA who was #2 but future NBA player Darren Collison didn’t play and our resume everywhere listed our quality wins as (Marquette, UCLA without Collison) and we went to the NIT. The only way to lock it in is to just win a lot more games is all I got, if you’re on the bubble the committee will find a reason.
And they could have won if they had left their feet planted on the foul shot.
If you're on the bubble and a blue blood your in. If you're on the bubble and WVU you're probably out.
Texas 19-15 (6-12) and a 15 point loss to last place South Carolina gets in as the 14th of 16 teams from the conference then that tells me politics are involved.
Texas is not a blue blood. WVU got in as a 9 seed 2 years ago with a similar resume 19-14 (7-11).
SEC is unquestionably stacked this year.
Is there any positive memories any player can live the rest of their life in not playing in the NIT? They have the memory and knowledge they acted like a spoiled brat by pouting just like a stupid fan and not accepting an invitation to play against other teams continuing their season. And they can go back to Morgantown and do nothing.
Go play, represent yourself and the team and kick ass. If you do well, you will have memories and you might improve your future in the game.
Go play, represent yourself and the team and kick ass. If you do well, you will have memories and you might improve your future in the game.
When you are 6-12 in your conference, and I don’t care how difficult the conference is, then you don’t deserve to get in. Look at all the times the Big 12 was the best conference and the teams that were left out back then.
No doubt.
Both OU and Texas were 6-12 and got in. Are they sending Big 12 a message or what?
