stever20 wrote:GumbyDamnit! wrote:Ok Stever lets play by your criteria. According to you Nova "has NOT held up its end of the bargain, because what matters is NCAA tournament results." Great let's use that as the criteria since you brought it up. Please tell me which BE team has played in more tourney games than Nova since the new league was formed? (Cue Jeopardy music).... Well? Your answer is:_________? Great. Thanks for playing.
See I contend that positive exposure for the BE would have been non-existent these past 2 years if not for 2 things: 1). McBuckets and 2). Villanova. You see, even ESPN is forced to show highlights of Top 5 teams. If Nova wasn't in the Top 5 two years in a row, would anyone be talking about the BE being a legitimate conference? Would we hear on ESPN: "#22 in action at the BET tourney...let's roll the highlights." Of course not. I especially love your flimsy argument where you praise UCONN from the AAC for winning the NC but at the same time crucify Nova for losing to them. Typical cockroach behavior. So scurry along back to your little AAC boards and end this charade. This from the same guy who was convinced last Feb & March that the AAC was going to get 5 bids and the BE 4. How'd that work out for you Stever?
Be gone troll.
Xavier has played in as many games, and they actually went to the sweet 16. You know, a place that Nova hasn't been to for a while. Xavier saved the leagues bacon making the sweet 16 last year.
The problem with Nova is yeah they were like that- but now- all folks say is that they were way overrated- should have never gotten that 1 seed.
The UConn game folks give Nova a pass to large degree because UConn did win the title. But not the NC State loss. NC State should have lost to LSU. That's the one that is the absolute killer.
Who the hell cares what "all folks" think? Did teams in this conference think that Nova was "overrated," on their way to two consecutive 16-2 seasons? How are you overrated when you post a 89% winning % and are in the Top 5 RPI?
Thanks for actually responding to what I asked. So in other words there are exactly zero other BE programs that have played MORE NCAA tourney games than Nova the last 2 years. I would say that is "keeping up their end of the bargain." I would also say that XU has kept up their end of the bargain. In the first two years 2 teams have played 4 tourney games (X & Nova), 3 have played 2 games (PC, Butler & CU) and 2 have played 1 game (G'town & SJU). So according to you in that list Nova should feel like it let the BE down? Really?
I love the addition of XU--quality program with a proud tradition of March performance. They are among the top 3-4 programs in the BE for sure. However if you recall, I made it very clear that the tourney is often about how the dice rolls and who you end up getting matched up against. Take PC for example. Absolutely screwed last year having to play a team on it's own home floor. They didn't deserve that draw. XU on the other hand beats an #11 seed and a #14 seed on its way to the SW16. I'm not saying that to belittle XU and their run; they are the only BE team in the first two years to do that and deserve credit. But many March tourney runs involve some luck. UCONN should have lost their 1st round game 2 years ago, but squeak by and end up going all the way. All you can do is put yourself in position to have a shot, and sometimes things fall perfectly for you and sometimes they don't.
UCONN wins the Nat. Championship in 2014, so is there any shame in losing to that team? The answer is obviously no. NC State also beat Duke, UNC and L'ville, (and lost to #2 seed UVA and #3 seed ND on the last possession) last year. Do you think that is a shameful loss? Do you think it would be easier or harder to win those 2 games or a game vs. #14 seed GA State?
So please put things in perspective before making your typical Stever troll arguments. Now enlighten us again on how you had 5 AAC teams comfortably in the tourney and thought XU, SJU and PC were all at risk of not making it. AAC apologist tool.