Billy Packer is a jerk

[Go...gate]

Can you believe this guy?

He and Jim Nantz flat-out trashed Craig Littlepage as to the NCAA Selection Committee's field. This is the same BS he pulled when Saint Joseph's received a #1 seed in 2004. As far as he is concerned, if a team is not a member of the Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, PAC-10 or Conference USA, they may as well give up the game, because they are just not "good enough" to compete for a national championship. And this guy's father was the head coach for Lehigh BB, for Pete's sake!! What an a$$hole he is!!!!

[griz37]

I don't think I have ever read a truer thread title than this one! I have hated the guy since I was old enough to feel hate. I don't understand why CBS keeps him around. Sure people rag on Dookie V for being too boisterous but at least he is positive & enjoys the game. Packer hates everything & everyone who plays the game. It was funny to see his bald little head turn all red though. His idea that the committee should look at the records of conferences for the last 4 or 5 years is ridiculous. Isn't the tourney supposed to based on this years performance. Hell why don't they just drop the whole ACC & Big East tourney into the Big Dance?

[AppGuy04]

While I agree that he is an ass, he does have some valid points. I'm an ACC and SoCon guy, so I'm not totally biased.

There is no argument you can make that would PROVE that any team would beat any team on any given day, but think about it this way. Do you honestly think that a team like Florida State, who beat Duke, would get beat by say, George Mason, Air Force for example, I think not. There are 6 or 7 teams in the NIT that would whoop, and I mean absolutely whoop those 2 teams. The argument he and others have made is: This should be the best 65 teams in the country, hands down, and that is obviously not the case.

[dirtbag]

His idea that the committee should look at the records of conferences for the last 4 or 5 years is ridiculous.

This isn't THAT far off base. I don't think they should base bids on this, but... They should look at this stuff to evaluate the performance of the RPI as their primary seeding tool. If one conference is consistently under(over)performing their seedings, the RPI should be adjusted to compensate for this.

I know the NCAA baseball committee doesn't do this, even though the ACC pretty consistently underperforms its seeds.

[griz37]

This isn't THAT far off base. I don't think they should base bids on this, but... They should look at this stuff to evaluate the performance of the RPI as their primary seeding tool. If one conference is consistently under(over)performing their seedings, the RPI should be adjusted to compensate for this.

I know the NCAA baseball committee doesn't do this, even though the ACC pretty consistently underperforms its seeds.

How can you use this as an actual tool? Every year the MVC gets multiple bids, yet they are always seeded lower than the team they play, which means they should lose! Then you get ACC & Big East teams w/top seeds so of course their numbers are inflated. I can't say I am not biased since I almost automatically disagree w/everything Packer says.

[AppGuy04]

Just answer me one question without bias.

Is the MVC as good as the ACC?

If the answer is no, then Packer has a valid point.
If the answer is yes, then my team(NC State) would be glad to play every team in the MVC

[dirtbag]

How can you use this as an actual tool? Every year the MVC gets multiple bids, yet they are always seeded lower than the team they play, which means they should lose! Then you get ACC & Big East teams w/top seeds so of course their numbers are inflated.

???

Your seed "predicts" when you should go out.

Go out later = good. Go out earlier = bad. Go out when predicted = push.

It's not rocket science.

[griz37]

Just answer me one question without bias.

Is the MVC as good as the ACC?

If the answer is no, then Packer has a valid point.
If the answer is yes, then my team(NC State) would be glad to play every team in the MVC

Is the MVC as good as the ACC? Of course not, Duke, UNC & Boston College would probably all go undefeated in that league. But the other 9 teams in the league are not so great that MVC teams couldn't hang w/them. And the way the Wolfpack are playing right now I wouldn't take them against any of the MVC top six. And I actually root for NC St.

I am just trying to point that past success in the tourney should have no bearing on who gets into the dance each year. Pacific won a game each of the last 2 years, should the Big West get 2 bids?

[dirtbag]

Just answer me one question without bias.

Is the MVC as good as the ACC?

If the answer is no, then Packer has a valid point.



No, he doesn't, because he's missing the entire freakin' point.

The only thing that the committee should consider is whether or not Maryland/FSU is better than UNI/Bradley. What conference they play in is irrelevant.

[AppGuy04]

Is the MVC as good as the ACC? Of course not, Duke, UNC & Boston College would probably all go undefeated in that league. But the other 9 teams in the league are not so great that MVC teams couldn't hang w/them. And the way the Wolfpack are playing right now I wouldn't take them against any of the MVC top six. And I actually root for NC St.

I am just trying to point that past success in the tourney should have no bearing on who gets into the dance each year. Pacific won a game each of the last 2 years, should the Big West get 2 bids?

If it comes down to an MVC and an ACC team, then it should matter. The ACC is a better league, has better teams, period. Sure there are a few teams in the ACC that play badly at times, but they play badly against the likes of Duke, UNC, BC etc. Big difference than the MVC. On any given day, the MVC could POSSIBLY hang with the big boys, but 9 out of 10 times, they get beat, and most likely blown out. So for the ACC and MVC to both get 4 bids is what started all this mess. You can't tell me that Florida State, Virginia, Miami and Maryland aren't better than a handful of teams in the tourney

[AppGuy04]

No, he doesn't, because he's missing the entire freakin' point.

The only thing that the committee should consider is whether or not Maryland/FSU is better than UNI/Bradley. What conference they play in is irrelevant.

So losing to Creighton is the same as losing to Duke, wrong

conferences matter, otherwise, they wouldn't exist

and there would be "Mid-Major" poll

[colgate13]

I am just trying to point that past success in the tourney should have no bearing on who gets into the dance each year.

Apply that mentality to the I-AA playoffs. Still feel the same way?

[FargoBison]

Just answer me one question without bias.

Is the MVC as good as the ACC?

If the answer is no, then Packer has a valid point.
If the answer is yes, then my team(NC State) would be glad to play every team in the MVC

The MVC is not as a good as the ACC but that doesn't change the fact that the MVC deserved 4 seeds(and probably one more). The commitee also thought the ACC was better and thus gave the conference seeds of 1,3,4, and 10 while giving the MVC's four teams seeds of 7,10,11, and 13. The ACC is better at the top but once you get past Duke, UNC, and BC there isn't much difference.

[dirtbag]

So losing to Creighton is the same as losing to Duke, wrong



Losing to Duke will give you a higher RPI than losing to Creighton, so the committee already accounts for that.

Try again.

[AppGuy04]

The MVC is not as a good as the ACC but that doesn't change the fact that the MVC deserved 4 seeds(and probably one more). The commitee also thought the ACC was better and thus gave the conference seeds of 1,3,4, and 10 while giving the MVC's four teams seeds of 7,10,11, and 13. The ACC is better at the top but once you get past Duke, UNC, and BC there isn't much difference.

I beg to differ with your last statement. I've seen "mid-major" basketball and I've seen "Power conference" basketball. There is a big difference. like I said before, any given day, who knows, but 9 out of 10, the ACC is better, even Wake Forest, Virginia Tech and Clemson would probably go 7 or 8 out of 10 against the MVC

[griz37]

Apply that mentality to the I-AA playoffs. Still feel the same way?


Yes I do. Besides Montana how many Big Sky teams have won playoff games in the last 10 years. EWU advanced to the semis 1 year. Does that mean that if the Big Sky has a great season & we have worthy teams that only 1 should get in, because we have not been successful in the past? Should the I-AA committee automatically give 3 or 4 playoff spots to the So-Con because of their past success? I think not.

[AppGuy04]

Losing to Duke will give you a higher RPI than losing to Creighton, so the committee already accounts for that.

Try again.

RPI means jack to me

The Big Ten is supposedly the best conference in the nation this year, and the ACC has waxed them the last 7 years in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge

[griz37]

RPI means jack to me

The Big Ten is supposedly the best conference in the nation this year, and the ACC has waxed them the last 7 years in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge

So make your case for FSU being in the dance, over one of the MVC or Colonial teams. I will give you them over Air Force. Their non-conference SOS was horrendous, their only real good win was Duke & they lost to the last place team in the 1st round of their conference tourney. They have every advantage when it comes to scheduling & yet they play the little sisters of the poor!

[FargoBison]

I beg to differ with your last statement. I've seen "mid-major" basketball and I've seen "Power conference" basketball. There is a big difference. like I said before, any given day, who knows, but 9 out of 10, the ACC is better, even Wake Forest, Virginia Tech and Clemson would probably go 7 or 8 out of 10 against the MVC

There is so much parity in college basketball that there really isn't that much difference between the "Power schools" and the "Mid Major schools". The great schools from the power conferences are still the powers but soild mid major are just as good if not better then mid level of schools of the power conferences. The Power conferences have no one to blame but themselves on the MVC getting 4 teams in if they truely feel that they are better they should schedule some home and home games with MVC schools and prove it. I agree 100% with the committee chairman who said that the Major conference schools have to step up their scheduling and leave their home court every now and then during non-conference play and play some of these mid-majors.

[Go...gate]

No doubt that Packer is knowledgable, but he really has made a career out of supporting only the big schools. I still remember when he called Larry Bird underrated in 1979 and tried to claim that he would not succeed in the pros because he went to Indiana State. 25 years later, he really made an idiot out of himself with respect to Saint Joseph's. His opinions seem to have ossified over the years to the point that he is nothing but a shill for the power conferences with no appreciation of those teams who might be quite good but not from a conference that he feels is worthy. I'm sure he would have loved to see Wake Forest in the NCAA this year, even though they went 1-12 in the ACC.

[griz37]

There is so much parity in college basketball that there really isn't that much difference between the "Power schools" and the "Mid Major schools". The great schools from the power conferences are still the powers but soild mid major are just as good if not better then mid level of schools of the power conferences. The Power conferences have no one to blame but themselves on the MVC getting 4 teams in if they truely feel that they are better they should schedule some home and home games with MVC schools and prove it. I agree 100% with the committee chairman who said that the Major conference schools have to step up their scheduling and leave their home court every now and then during non-conference play and play some of these mid-majors.

Big conference teams go on the road in non-conference & play mid-majors? Are you crazy? Then they can't pad their schedules w/cupcake wins. Hell they might even lose. Their is tons of parity in college basketball. I think Stanford found that out this year when they went on the road to some mid-major teams. Littlejack is right, if you don't like being excluded because you have a weak SOS, do something about it! I am so tired of the ACC guys complaining about only 4 bids.

[putter]

The biggest problem I have with this discussion is that the argument that AppGuy is making leans toward having a BCS type set-up. Hey lets create a BCS in basketball and ruin it like football. My take is this, if you can't go better than .500 in your conference you shouldn't even be looked at for the NCAA at large. Yes, the ACC, Big East etc. are the better conferences but what makes the Dance special is the mid-major teams playing against the big boys, period.

[dirtbag]

RPI means jack to me

The Big Ten is supposedly the best conference in the nation this year, and the ACC has waxed them the last 7 years in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge

Thanks for the strawmen.

The RPI *DOES* mean a lot to the committee, and FSU *DOES* get boosted for losing to Duke instead of losing to Creighton. So the committee *DOES* take conference strength into account. In fact, that and the gaudy record were the only things FSU had going for it. Especially since the gaudy record was built by 7 wins over teams ranked 250+, and their 2nd-best win was a home win over Maryland (and Maryland was 2-7 on the road this season, so that's not real special).

[blur2005]

While Packer may occasionally have a point on things like this, he is a true asshole. I can't stand him and I don't even think he's that good at annoucning games. Plus, he has one of the most obnoxious voices of any announcers I know. He and Jim Nantz are a great combination - an idiot and a prick.

[dbackjon]

Packer is an asshole, and I can't stand him. I grew up with Big Ten Basketball, went to a Big Ten School, and also to a Big Sky school.

The ACC has no complaints - UNI/Missouri State (which got shafted)/Bradley are as good as Maryland/Florida State. I would much rather have a quality #2 from a smaller conference than the 5th or 9th best team from a Big Conference.

[AppGuy04]

FSU losing to Duke, UNC, hell, even Clemson, is in no way on the same level as teams like Bradley losing to Drake and Butler

I agree that the competition in the MVC is of the highest level in the smaller conferences, but you can't compare apples and oranges. FSU lost to Duke, UNC and BC by a combined 5 points, and beat Duke the 2nd time they played. Hell, they should have swept Duke, would that have changed your mind. There are 6 teams in the NIT from the ACC, what say you that there are atleast 2 in the Final 4 of that tourney.

[colgate13]

Yes I do. Besides Montana how many Big Sky teams have won playoff games in the last 10 years. EWU advanced to the semis 1 year. Does that mean that if the Big Sky has a great season & we have worthy teams that only 1 should get in, because we have not been successful in the past? Should the I-AA committee automatically give 3 or 4 playoff spots to the So-Con because of their past success? I think not.

Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of: Eastern Washington doesn't get in, but San Diego does. Or South Carolina State.

BTW, I'm not in favor of the FSU in this whole discussion, just trying to make a point that past conference performance should be one factor of many.

[AppGuy04]

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaab/news;_ylt=AkstOURcAxhd7b02djgovJ_evbYF?slug=ap-ncaatournament&prov=ap&type=lgns

[Go...gate]

Funny thing about Nantz is that he is a nice guy. I met him once and he was a very warm and humble person, not arrogant or standoffish at all.

[dirtbag]

FSU losing to Duke, UNC, hell, even Clemson, is in no way on the same level as teams like Bradley losing to Drake and Butler




Butler's not a bad team, 19-12 and ranked #82, about the same as Virginia, Clemson, and Miami. And that game was at Butler. And yes, FSU lost at Clemson.

Bradley's loss to Drake (#162) is not significantly worse than FSU's loss to Virginia Tech (#146).

And as long as we're comparing losses, let's compare wins. FSU's Duke win is a gorilla, but FSU had 7 wins over teams ranked 250+. Bradley only had one. (Interestingly, that's their only common opponent -- Bowling Green, lost to FSU by 11, to BU by 29.) Bradley has wins over RPI #21, 25 (twice), 27, and 29. Besides Duke, FSU's best wins are over RPI #50, 78, 79, 80.

You can criticize the RPI as a measurement tool, but they use it every year, so this shouldn't be a surprise.

[AppGuy04]

Butler's not a bad team, 19-12 and ranked #82, about the same as Virginia, Clemson, and Miami. And that game was at Butler. And yes, FSU lost at Clemson.

Bradley's loss to Drake (#162) is not significantly worse than FSU's loss to Virginia Tech (#146).

And as long as we're comparing losses, let's compare wins. FSU's Duke win is a gorilla, but FSU had 7 wins over teams ranked 250+. Bradley only had one. (Interestingly, that's their only common opponent -- Bowling Green, lost to FSU by 11, to BU by 29.) Bradley has wins over RPI #21, 25 (twice), 27, and 29. Besides Duke, FSU's best wins are over RPI #50, 78, 79, 80.

You can criticize the RPI as a measurement tool, but they use it every year, so this shouldn't be a surprise.

we all know that FSU's scheduling probably did them in, but if they had swept Duke, there would be no question, that seems odd to me

Cincy and Michigan would probably be a better argument, particularly Cincy

[griz37]

Cincinatti should probably be in over Air Force. I am one of the biggest Michigan fans there is, but they did themselves in by losing 7 of their last 9 and playing like they didn't care in the Big 10 tourney. I think Missouri St. has the biggest beef after Cincy.

[MYTAPPY]

When FSU lost to Wake in the ACC tourney, it was over for them. Bradley and Air Force should be kissing Florida's butt for winning the SEC. Bradley and AF were 11 seconds from having a seat on the tourney couch. Billy is not all bad. I wonder if he actually cares about Wake at all. I know he has to be bias on the air, but he probably doesn't cheer for them when he is by himself at home. And being a Wake fan myself....layofff.........
They have one bad year and you think they are in the hole for the next ten years. They should still be considered as one of the big four on tabacco road.

[dirtbag]

we all know that FSU's scheduling probably did them in, but if they had swept Duke, there would be no question, that seems odd to me



Sure, that's the definition of a bubble team. One more win/loss and you're in/out.

Cincy should have been in. 5th-ranked schedule in the country. Wins over #13, 17, 35, with one of those on the road and one neutral. 1 really bad loss (DAYTON?!?!), but all their other losses were to Top 100 teams on the road or Top 20 teams at home.

[Pard4Life]

Air Force's schedule doesn't add up....

they really did beat nobody...

they lost to sub .500 Wyoming in the conference tourney

they beat Georgia Tech, who is not even in the NIT (i think), Miami might be their only decent win

and what was their top 50 record? like 0-2 or something?

Cincinnati should have gotten the nod... Missouri St. was second in line. I don't even think Bracketology Joe had AF on his bubble list... geez.

..now watch them beat Illinois :rolleyes:

[AppGuy04]

Air Force's schedule doesn't add up....

they really did beat nobody...

they lost to sub .500 Wyoming in the conference tourney

they beat Georgia Tech, who is not even in the NIT (i think), Miami might be their only decent win

and what was their top 50 record? like 0-2 or something?

Cincinnati should have gotten the nod... Missouri St. was second in line. I don't even think Bracketology Joe had AF on his bubble list... geez.

..now watch them beat Illinois :rolleyes:


you are correct on all points, them getting in was an absolute travesty

[FargoBison]

Yeah, I still can't believe that Air Force got in they definately didn't deserve getting into the dance but what also boggles my mind is that the last two teams left out where Hofstra and Western Kentucky. How can Cincy and Missiouri St not be the last two left out? Cincy and Missouri State should have been in to began with and Utah State and Air Force should be in the NIT.

[wkuhillhound]

It was unbelievable to me. I used to respect Billy Packer on some levels but not anymore. Jim Nantz was talking about Bradley's schedule and said that it was weak and mentioned Western Kentucky was part of that. South Carolina is going to get a surprise when the NIT starts, WKU is not so weak after all.

[dbackjon]

It was unbelievable to me. I used to respect Billy Packer on some levels but not anymore. Jim Nantz was talking about Bradley's schedule and said that it was weak and mentioned Western Kentucky was part of that. South Carolina is going to get a surprise when the NIT starts, WKU is not so weak after all.

Definately cheering for WKU in that one - I know everyone in Bowling Green is steamed over the double insult of having both teams in the NIT/WNIT (absolute travesty that the Lady Toppers did not get into the Big Dance), but beating the team that almost won the SEC tourney would be sweet.

[MYTAPPY]

Out of all the teams the got hosed. Michigan got hosed the most.

[wkuhillhound]

Definately cheering for WKU in that one - I know everyone in Bowling Green is steamed over the double insult of having both teams in the NIT/WNIT (absolute travesty that the Lady Toppers did not get into the Big Dance), but beating the team that almost won the SEC tourney would be sweet.

I know that's right. I really feel for Tiffany Porter-Talbert, the NCAA Tournament is missing a great player. Crystal Kelly has got two more years to get in but both players are murderous rebounders. At least WKU doesn't have to play in the opening round and that is critical.

[wkuhillhound]

Is Air Force really that bad of a team?

[Lehigh Football Nation]

A few points:

1) I think, beyond a shadow of a doubt, Hofstra should have been in over Air Force. Beating GMU twice, a tourney team, should have been enough.

2) I have a major problem with having the worst team of your conference determine the strength of your conference. I have this problem in the I-AA playoffs, and folks constantly apply the same logic. This is the problem with computer models in general in any sport.

Example: Southern Illinois has to play Illinois State and Florida State has to play Georgia Tech. Southern Illinois gets creamed in the RPI for beating the worst team in their conference, whereas when FSU beats Georgia Tech, they (comparatively) get a bigger RPI boost.

It's not right. SIU didn't mean for Illinois State to be not such a great team, yet their RPI gets drilled.

Take it to football. Lehigh beats Georgetown, and Richmond beats Villanova. Lehigh's GPI actually goes down. Richmond beats Villanova, a sub-.500 team in the A-10. Their RPI goes up. Neither team asked to play these teams - these are league games. They have to play them.

I don't know what the solution is, other than to use more human judgement in looking at the teams, which (admittedly) is an impossible job.

[dirtbag]

Out of all the teams the got hosed. Michigan got hosed the most.

In their last nine games, Michigan has won twice. Everyone knows the committee hates that. (While they played some really good teams in that stretch, one of their losses was to 9-19 #174 Purdue.) Combine that with a #47 RPI, and that doesn't fit my definition of "hosed."

[wkuhillhound]

Definately cheering for WKU in that one - I know everyone in Bowling Green is steamed over the double insult of having both teams in the NIT/WNIT (absolute travesty that the Lady Toppers did not get into the Big Dance), but beating the team that almost won the SEC tourney would be sweet.

Western Kentucky also beat Louisiana Tech by a bunch in Diddle Arena. WKU just has to win the conference tournament to be certain. They should have gotten in. Do you know any women's team that did not deserve an invite?

[dirtbag]

Air Force's schedule doesn't add up....

they really did beat nobody...

they lost to sub .500 Wyoming in the conference tourney

they beat Georgia Tech, who is not even in the NIT (i think), Miami might be their only decent win

and what was their top 50 record? like 0-2 or something?



0-1 vs. Top 50 -- lost @Washington by 11.

5-2 vs. 51-100 -- split with #55 SD State and #65 BYU, beat #92 UNLV twice and beat #79 Miami.

GaTech was #163.

[dbackjon]

Western Kentucky also beat Louisiana Tech by a bunch in Diddle Arena. WKU just has to win the conference tournament to be certain. They should have gotten in. Do you know any women's team that did not deserve an invite?

California

Missouri


Washington

[AppGuy04]

You think Packer is a tool?

Michael Wilbon just said on PTI: "I don't care about the play in game, I just wanna see Hampton's band"

How's that for a tool

[griz37]

You think Packer is a tool?

Michael Wilbon just said on PTI: "I don't care about the play in game, I just wanna see Hampton's band"

How's that for a tool

Did you watch the play-in game? Their band probably was the most exciting part of the game. I read an article Cnnsi today where the writer suggested that the last 2 at larges should have to take part in the play-in game since they did the least to earn their spot. It would certainly generate more interest than Hampton-Monmouth.

[DUPFLFan]

Seems like Billy Packer's opinion of mid major baseketball sounds a lot like some of our friends on this site when discussing 1-aa football vs 1-aa mid major football...

All the arguments on this thread are flipped around when trashing non-scholarship football.

Sounds different when it comes out of someone else's mouth??

[AppGuy04]

Did you watch the play-in game? Their band probably was the most exciting part of the game. I read an article Cnnsi today where the writer suggested that the last 2 at larges should have to take part in the play-in game since they did the least to earn their spot. It would certainly generate more interest than Hampton-Monmouth.

Yeah, this game was sad. Thats the only comment I'm gonna make for fear of incrimination

[dbackjon]

Seems like Billy Packer's opinion of mid major baseketball sounds a lot like some of our friends on this site when discussing 1-aa football vs 1-aa mid major football...

All the arguments on this thread are flipped around when trashing non-scholarship football.

Sounds different when it comes out of someone else's mouth??

Big difference between teams with schollies/non-schollies vs. teams that both offer the same amount to scholarships.

The Pioneer League can apply for one of the 8 auto-bid spots. If deemed worthy, they are in.

That being said, I would have no objection if the I-AA playoffs expanded to 24, and gave the Pioneer an autobid.

[Reed Rothchild]

I've seen "mid-major" basketball and I've seen "Power conference" basketball. There is a big difference.

How many Valley games did you watch this year?

[Reed Rothchild]

Seems like Billy Packer's opinion of mid major baseketball sounds a lot like some of our friends on this site when discussing 1-aa football vs 1-aa mid major football...

All the arguments on this thread are flipped around when trashing non-scholarship football.

Sounds different when it comes out of someone else's mouth??

This argument is very different. UNI beat Iowa and went down to the wire with Iowa State this year in basketball.

Drake got smoked by UNI in football.

Football is very different.

[Reed Rothchild]

Air Force should not have been in. Cincinatti should have. The arguments these guys have against the Valley have no merit. It would have been different if Packer actually saw 1 MVC game. I'm sure Nantz didn't see a lot either. He just didn't admit to never seeing a game.

[AppGuy04]

How many Valley games did you watch this year?

2 or 3

its not as easy as turning on ESPN and watching an ACC game every week

[Reed Rothchild]

2 or 3

its not as easy as turning on ESPN and watching an ACC game every week

...so its a pretty uniformed assessment that you are making about Valley basketball.

[dbackjon]

Bradley beat DePaul (Big East) by 15 at DePaul - the same DePaul that beat Syracuse by 40 right before the Big East tournament.

Wichita State beat Providence (Big East)

Creighton beat Nebraska (Big Twelve), along with George Mason, Xavier and Fresno State.

Northern Iowa beat Iowa (Big Ten) and LSU (at LSU) (SEC), plus Bucknell

MVC bottom feeders Evansville beat Purdue (Big Ten) and Indiana State beat Indiana (Big Ten)

[AppGuy04]

...so its a pretty uniformed assessment that you are making about Valley basketball.

not in my mind, It doesn't take long to notice the difference, atleast in my mind

how many times have you seen Florida State, Cincy or Michigan play, I guarantee you its not more than the number of times I've watched MVC play

[Reed Rothchild]

not in my mind, It doesn't take long to notice the difference, atleast in my mind

how many times have you seen Florida State, Cincy or Michigan play, I guarantee you its not more than the number of times I've watched MVC play

Its not too hard especially when ESPN shows ACC games at least 3 times a week and we are in Big 10 country.

[Reed Rothchild]

Bradley beat DePaul (Big East) by 15 at DePaul - the same DePaul that beat Syracuse by 40 right before the Big East tournament.

Wichita State beat Providence (Big East)

Creighton beat Nebraska (Big Twelve), along with George Mason, Xavier and Fresno State.

Northern Iowa beat Iowa (Big Ten) and LSU (at LSU) (SEC), plus Bucknell

MVC bottom feeders Evansville beat Purdue (Big Ten) and Indiana State beat Indiana (Big Ten)


Yup, and we're inferior conferences.

[crunifan]

Iowa beat N.C. State of your precious ACC.

UNI beat Iowa.

LSU beat West Virgina.

UNI beat LSU.

Yet, we would get creamed by the "basketball Gods" that live in the BCS conferences.

UNI would be able to compete in the ACC. As would Wichita State, Creighton, Missouri State, Bradley, and Southern Illinois. Sure, we would probably get smoked by Duke and UNC. But you honestly think Maryland, Florida State, Wake Forest, Clemson, Miami, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and Georgia Tech would cream us? Think again. The MVC's best would finish in the top half of the ACC.

[Go...gate]

Well, one pie in Mr. Packer's face with the Wichita rout of Seton Hall....

[dbackjon]

Well, one pie in Mr. Packer's face with the Wichita rout of Seton Hall....

Yup - a team that didn't even make the MVC finals routed one of his precious Big East Teams.

[AppGuy04]

Iowa beat N.C. State of your precious ACC.

UNI beat Iowa.

LSU beat West Virgina.

UNI beat LSU.

Yet, we would get creamed by the "basketball Gods" that live in the BCS conferences.

UNI would be able to compete in the ACC. As would Wichita State, Creighton, Missouri State, Bradley, and Southern Illinois. Sure, we would probably get smoked by Duke and UNC. But you honestly think Maryland, Florida State, Wake Forest, Clemson, Miami, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and Georgia Tech would cream us? Think again. The MVC's best would finish in the top half of the ACC.

just like football, there is no transitive property in sports

[AppGuy04]

Yup - a team that didn't even make the MVC finals routed one of his precious Big East Teams.

this wasn't an upset

[dbackjon]

just like football, there is no transitive property in sports

UNI has shown quite well it could compete this year in a BCS conference. Wichita State did too.

[dbackjon]

this wasn't an upset

Seeding wise, no. But according to Packer, more Big East teams should have been in the tourney, over MVC teams, so obviously, according to Packer, Big East is superior in every way to the MVC.

[AppGuy04]

UNI has shown quite well it could compete this year in a BCS conference. Wichita State did too.

I have no problem with the 4 MVC teams that got in, but to say they should have gotten more is crazy

[AppGuy04]

All conferences are top heavy and Packer only focuses on the top of the Big East

[dbackjon]

I have no problem with the 4 MVC teams that got in, but to say they should have gotten more is crazy

Missouri State was the highest RPI team ever to be left out. They deserved a bid as well.

[AppGuy04]

Missouri State was the highest RPI team ever to be left out. They deserved a bid as well.

not over Cincy or Michigan

[dbackjon]

not over Cincy or Michigan

Yes, over Cincy or Michigan.

The 9th best Big East team is not worthy of the tourney - the 7th or 8th best team just got blown out.

And Michigan had lost last 7 of 9 games. They played there way out of the tournament.

[Reed Rothchild]

Well, UW-Milwaukee just beat Oklahoma. MSU beat UW-Milwaukee. Hmmm...

[Reed Rothchild]

Well, the "higher level of competition" of the Big East laid a goosegg today.


From Dan Wetzel's blog on Yahoo

Billy Packer in the Chicago Tribune today; "My charge in life is not to know all 334 Division I teams. If someone said, 'Packer, that's your job,' that would be one thing. But I'm not one of those guys who sounds smart because he can spout off the names of every coach."


I thought the job of a national basketball analyst was to know DI teams outside the ACC and Big East???

[AppGuy04]

Well, the "higher level of competition" of the Big East laid a goosegg today.


From Dan Wetzel's blog on Yahoo

Billy Packer in the Chicago Tribune today; "My charge in life is not to know all 334 Division I teams. If someone said, 'Packer, that's your job,' that would be one thing. But I'm not one of those guys who sounds smart because he can spout off the names of every coach."


I thought the job of a national basketball analyst was to know DI teams outside the ACC and Big East???

he's supposed to know the teams he's talking about, trust me, thats all they know for that game, and then they forget it 5 minutes after the game

[Tribefan]

Well, the "higher level of competition" of the Big East laid a goosegg today.


From Dan Wetzel's blog on Yahoo

Billy Packer in the Chicago Tribune today; "My charge in life is not to know all 334 Division I teams. If someone said, 'Packer, that's your job,' that would be one thing. But I'm not one of those guys who sounds smart because he can spout off the names of every coach."


I thought the job of a national basketball analyst was to know DI teams outside the ACC and Big East???

Marquette and Alabama were a pretty even match-up. I half expected Syracuse to lose after they shot their wad in the BET. Seton Hall wasn't even favored to win. The better BE teams play today. It's too soon to really judge.

[AppGuy04]

Marquette and Alabama were a pretty even match-up. I half expected Syracuse to lose after they shot their wad in the BET. Seton Hall wasn't even favored to win. The better BE teams play today. It's too soon to really judge.

The Big East went 0fer with their bad teams, whoopdifreakindo, watch today and see if you say the same thing

The ACC was 2-0, but they were less than stellar, who cares

[Tribefan]

The MVC champ should beat Seton Hall, that's a non-event IMO.

[AppGuy04]

The MVC champ should beat Seton Hall, that's a non-event IMO.

They were a 7, no upset there

[Go...gate]

Two more big cream pies in Mr. Packer's face in the guise of Syracuse's loss to Texas A&M and Marquette's loss to Alabama (though the Warriors/Golden Eagles really played a good game).

I think Packer has been coasting for years. Yes, he should know about all 334 Division I teams! He is getting paid to be a D-I college basketball analyst - that is his job.

[AppGuy04]

Two more big cream pies in Mr. Packer's face in the guise of Syracuse's loss to Texas A&M and Marquette's loss to Alabama (though the Warriors/Golden Eagles really played a good game).

I think Packer has been coasting for years. Yes, he should know about all 334 Division I teams! He is getting paid to be a D-I college basketball analyst - that is his job.

Packer, and every other college basketball analyst know the power conferences and only the power conferences, and for any of them to tell you otherwise is stupid

[Go...gate]

Another two Packer faves, Wisconsin and Iowa, gone!!!

[dbackjon]

Marquette and Alabama were a pretty even match-up. I half expected Syracuse to lose after they shot their wad in the BET. Seton Hall wasn't even favored to win. The better BE teams play today. It's too soon to really judge.

But the whole point of Packer's rant was that the 7-8-9-10 teams in the Big East WERE BETTER than any of the little guys, and thus deserved the bids STOLEN by the small conferences. Obviously, this weekend proved that Packer is full of crap, and that the middle of the Big East is nothing special. That is the point you Big East symphcants overlook.

[wkuhillhound]

The shock and awe continues as GEORGE MASONthe so-called no talent mid-major only makes the Final Four while beating the likes of Wichita State, Connecticut, and the two power conference teams that no one cares about.............I simply don't care to remember at the moment.

:nono: :nono: :nono: Shame on you Packer and Nantz for your arrogant ways. You have just reaped what you sowed and I hope you enjoy your humble pie. :doh: :doh: :doh: It looks very ugly on y'all southern style. :nono: :nono: :nono:

[Go...gate]

I'm glad Verne Lundquist and Bill Raftery had the GMU game. Packer would have been making endless excuses for UConn's defeat, while Lundquist and Raftery were very classy.

[blukeys]

I'm glad Verne Lundquist and Bill Raftery had the GMU game. Packer would have been making endless excuses for UConn's defeat, while Lundquist and Raftery were very classy.


I would have loved to see Packer in D.C.. From what I have heard there were jeers directed at Packer and Nantz during the GMU UConn game.

It would have been nice to see Packer to show some class and admit that his earlier remarks were off target but no such luck. :smiley_wi :smiley_wi