So how would you sift through bubble SEC teams? Because if they beat a bunch of really good SEC teams, they’re not a bubble team. Hell if they go .500 they’re not a bubble team- they’re likely a pretty to very good team. So what do you propose to evaluate teams that play in a better conference? Do we really not believe that if Kentucky played our ACC schedule they wouldn’t have gone over .500
I mean is a standard: you have to have both a winning overall and winning conference record (unless you win conference tournament for auto bid) to compete for a national championship blanket provision really too much to ask?
1 Like
Seem reasonable. If you are not winning half the games in your conference you’re not winning the national championship in that sport. These events are made better by a little more inclusion.
Our ACC schedule was a complete joke this year. Guess it’s just random that we didn’t play Wake, UNC, Louisville, and Clemson — and because of a tragedy we didn’t play FSU — but that, along with shitting the bed in OOC, absolutely made us an undeserving team — metrics-wise as well as total body of work.
2 Likes
I mean if the standard is we should only invite teams that can win a national title, then we should shrink the field dramatically anyways. Drop all the teams from low level conferences. But I don’t have any problem with teams with hood metrics getting in over teams with worse metrics, even if those teams lost more games in a much better conference
1 Like
There really is no right or wrong answer when you start talking about the 45-64 teams in a tournament. I think it’s all about what you want the tournament to be about.
2 Likes
Feels like a big jump from saying winning records but go off King
1 Like
https://x.com/monty2740/status/1928955149411639524?s=46&t=lMa7F-gR141SbjqqmdY87A
Acc > Sec!
Oak don’t make the move!
4 Likes
I just think you have no actual grip on how to incorporate conference strength in a meaningful way. You’ve just developed an arbitrary cutoff because you’re grumpy that Kentucky got into the field. But you do you bb
1 Like
Because by your formulation a team that goes 14-16 playing in the hardest conference would be ineligible for postseason play but a team that went 15-15 in the easiest conference would. I don’t think that makes a lot of sense
1 Like
14-16 team: no shouldn’t be in.
15-15 team: also no, because that’s not a winning record 
This seems to be going nowhere. Enjoy watching your favorite team pecker slap ACC heavyweight Clemson in a game that Troy should be playing in instead.
1 Like
I think you just made my point lmao. Shift those teams record by one and all of a sudden the eligibility is completely different. Seems a little stupid
I’m sorry that you can’t wrap your head around the fact that it is more difficult to win game in some conferences than others. I’m sure your Cinderella sweetheart Troy would have put up stellar results in the SEC (they went 1-3 this year lmao)
Like you really brought up Troy but didn’t even check the receipts 
For those paying attention Kentucky is up ten on Clemson on the way to eliminating Clemson in their own regional. Shouldn’t be in though 
You keep saying 14-16 give em one win they’re in well Kentucky went 13-17…. Not even good enough for your benefit of the doubt clause trying to be added to my imaginary proposal 
My proposal is that there shouldn’t be arbitrary cutoffs because arbitrary cutoffs are stupid because a team that is 16-14 in the easiest conference is eligible for postseason play while a team that is 15-15 from the hardest conference is ineligible.
1 Like
Troy baseball did go 1-3 against Auburn, Mississippi State (TROY WIN), Alabama (TWO LOSSES)
Against those same teams Kentucky went 1-5, did not play Bama and was SWEPT by the Mississippi State team Troy beat at their place. I got plenty of receipts.
1 Like
This isn’t that hard to follow. You’re just mad about the SEC lol
Y’all should just DM each other at this point
10 Likes
So damn if Troy played in the SEC they may have also been eliminated by your stupid cutoff. You neutered your own golden boy
1 Like