If we do not get into the NCAA.....

[mjadams]

2 hours ago, flsportsfan83 said:

The 2012 team won not only our first ever Tournament game but won 2.

Its not even a contest. That 2012 is the best team in USF history.

Yup

[hm101]

i take back what i said I want to go to the tournament

[bcgruber]

We are not the only team is this converstation, App St, High Pt, Indiana St, Richmond, UC Irvine, Princeton, Toledo and possibly Grand Canyon.  All are the same argument.  Best we can do is Go win the NIT anndd  show them they were wrong.  Will help with scheduling next year and hope it doesn't  come down to aa bubble next year.  Need Selton to come back too

[M50_BULL]

1 hour ago, Rex Havoc said:

If FAU gets in over us I will watch zero minutes of the tournament this year. 

You mean when they get in...

And right on. I will watch only the bulls from here on. Forget that popularity contest.

[bcgruber]

All of the non power 6 should boycott....if they don't have the cinderellas they lose the cache of the tourney.  The rules need to be changed to at lleast require the comittee to look at something more then AI generated numbers.  eye test and how you are playing later in the year is getting the better teams in

[Sk00b]

At the end of the day, i don't give a ****. I enjoyed watching this team WIN a AAC championship. I'm not a basketball guy and never have been. I may be now though as it's been so much fun this season. Again, the conference tournaments are dumb as hell. Makes winning the conference almost meaningless. I'll enjoy watching them in whatever post season tournament we go to. 

[Leviathan]

****, FAU losing to Temple really makes our loss hurt more. All we had to do was beat ECU, UAB and Temple.

The amount of top seeds going down in conference tournaments shows what a joke it is putting more weight in a week long tournament than a full conference schedule.

Has a  regular season AAC champ ever been kept out of the tournament? I’m assuming USF will be the first.

[79 Bull]

13 hours ago, bcgruber said:

The rules need to be changed to at lleast require the comittee to look at something more then AI generated numbers.  eye test and how you are playing later in the year is getting the better teams in

There should be 6 slots left open after all the AQ's and At Large bids based on NET are a given.  Those 6 slots should be based on eye test, other rankings, conference record, end-of-season momentum, etc.  When all the selections are announced, next to each team should be a label of AQ, AL NET, AL COM (for committee, not NET decision).  The committee could focus on seeding and matchups for the given teams while spending more time determining the last 6 in.

[Triple B]

13 hours ago, bcgruber said:

The rules need to be changed to at lleast require the comittee to look at something more then AI generated numbers.  eye test and how you are playing later in the year is getting the better teams in

There are no rules saying they have to only look at AI generated numbers. It's how teams have been included and omitted in the past that wouldn't have been if only looking at strict numbers. They could still shock the world and include us ...... **** what the bracketologists say ..... but very doubtful.

[bcgruber]

8 minutes ago, Triple B said:

There are no rules saying they have to only look at AI generated numbers. It's how teams have been included and omitted in the past that wouldn't have been if only looking at strict numbers. They could still shock the world and include us ...... **** what the bracketologists say ..... but very doubtful.

we all know it aint gonna happen.  its just a shame, this team and a few others at well deserve to dance over some medicore power 5