ESPN agrees with us...

[gurlybull]

While we didnt have a locked down case, we definetly should have made it over La Lafayette.....

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncw/ncaatourney07/columns/story?id=2796452

Trust me, this bracketing thing is no easy task. This season, I've been doing it for the last three months and it can be painstaking. And everyone here in bracketology land has an opinion about who should be in, where teams should be seeded and who should travel furthest from home.

Last season, the selection committee missed the boat on a few teams and a few bracketing essentials. This season, the committee hit the mark.

Of course, there are questions and I'll get to some of those, but this is a fair bracket and I don't think anyone can seriously complain. But I will … a little.

I would not have had Louisiana-Lafayette in the draw. I have nothing against the Rajun' Cajuns, but I don't feel they did more than South Florida. La.-Lafayette in and the Bulls out goes against what the committee did last year in putting Cal and Missouri in at the expense of mid-majors such as Western Kentucky and Indiana State. The Hilltoppers actually had better credentials in 2006 than Lafayette does this season.

Not that I can make an iron-clad case for South Florida. In fact, as I've been saying all season, the bottom of the at-large pool was not very good, and in all honestly, this was a tough year to fill out an entire field of 64 teams. That's why I can't quibble too much with La.-Lafayette's inclusion.......

Article continued

                                                          -Gurly

[outrunner]

I get this feeling the Big East is going to be very mad about this year, with Syracuse being left out of the men's and USF being left out of the women's. It would be awesome to see both win the NIT.

[Economics_Nerd82]

Would you rather be a 16th seed in the NCAA tournament and facing almost certain defeat or have a first round bye and a good possibility of going far in the tournament. I know the NCAA tournament is much more exciting and prestigious, but, I'd much rather have success in the NIT than to lose the first game in the tourney. IMO

[BullyPulpit]

We would/should have been a 10, 11, or 12 seed, not 16th. That would give us a manageable opening round game and a possibility for another upset in the second round, landing us in the Sweet 16. That would bring more notoriety than winning the NIT. So, the short answer is no. On the other hand, when given the choice between losing in the 1st Round of the NCAAs and winning the NIT, I would choose the latter.

[Mama_Bull]

We should have gotten in over DePaul if for only 2 minor considerations, SOS and RPI, both which were much beter than DePaul.  This is only with regard to the BE.  I am not making any comparisons to any other division.

[USF_Grouper]

I agree, but USF seemed to finish very poorly.  Just like in Football, early losses are not as bad as late losses.

[crambone]

^add to it the fact that we did very poorly against ranked opponents.

[Joe]

Well we were 5-11 vs. RPI top 100. Men's or Women's basketball your not making a good case for the tourny with that record added to finishing the year 3-6.

It's over gotta move on.

[Sunil]

We knew we were a bubble team and need to face facts. If we wanted to get into the tourney, we needed have won a few more games. Plain and simple. If you just win your games, everything else takes care of itself.

[dabullsfan]

I agree.  It would have been great to make the NCAA tournament for a second straight year.  But, we lost some tough big east games and it looks like they gave the final bid to DePaul.  They beat us by 7.  Now, we have to put that behind us and go out and win the WNIT.  It would be much better to win that then to lose in the 1st round of the NCAA for the program.