Hungry Ojos said:
HIT: Beyond the seeding, the committee got the teams right, too. I spent an hour in the late afternoon deciphering Texas A&M and Wyoming, reluctantly settling on the Aggies on account of their late run. But Wyoming had a better season-long rsum and was more than deserving. I should have stuck to my gut and the original plan to drop A&M if Richmond stole a bid. Instead, it's another 67 out of 68 year for yours truly, and I honestly don't have another team to bump in favor of the Aggies (although Notre Dame cut it unexpectedly close).
This right here is 100% evidence that the conference tournaments mean ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. After Sunday, A&M had a better resume than Wyoming - same amount of Q1 wins, no Q2 losses, WAY more Q1 games, much higher NET, much higher KenPom rating. We are better than Wyoming in EVERY SINGLE WAY.
But that is after the conference tournament.
Do that same comparison after the end of the regular season and he is right - Wyoming had the better resume. Basically, most of the teams that we are pissed off about had a better resume than us before the conference tournament, and thats why they got in and we didnt.
Its utter bull***.