Gibberman: Despite Loss, ASU Deserves Bid

When ESPN Bracketologist Joe Lunardi joined Gambo and Ash earlier in the week, he discussed why Arizona State should not be in the NCAA tournament.
He used a bunch of fancy statistics like the RPI, SOS and their non-conference SOS - which is exactly what is wrong with the NCAA Tournament selection process.
It has become too much about numbers and not using common sense.
Over the course of an NCAA season you can watch a lot of college basketball. I haven’t watched every team that is on the bubble, but I have watched a decent amount of programs play throughout the season. I’m not sure how many teams the members of the NCAA Committee have watched, but if they have taken in a couple ASU games, it would seem obvious that the Sun Devils should be apart of the 65 team field.
Here is a look at the Sun Devils resume and some teams competing with them:
ASU went .500 in the toughest conference in the country prior to the Pac-10 Tournament. The Sun Devils a solid non-conference win against Xavier and a bad loss against Illinois on a neutral court, but did not play for two weeks before that game. If injuries are taken into account, why not a team being rusty in their first game of the season? They swept Arizona, split with Oregon and beat Stanford and USC at home. A win against UCLA or Washington State would have clinched a spot for them, but their resume is still good enough to get in between an 8-12 seed.

read_more

Tags: acc, online, tournament, watch

14 Responses to “Gibberman: Despite Loss, ASU Deserves Bid”

on 16 Mar 2008 at 6:45 pm 1Gib

Cool. I’ll have to remember to set that in OmniWeb’s site preferences next time I visit NYT. Thanks.
on 16 Mar 2008 at 7:35 pm 2Haven

Let me put it like this, by way of analogy:Since you can fairly reliably block spam (e.g. with OpenBSD’s spamd via greylisting and tarpitting), do you think it’s ok that companies spam you?
on 16 Mar 2008 at 8:26 pm 3Roderic

Meh. NYT has great content, so it’s worth the fifteen seconds for registering. I get their headlines e-mail every day too.
on 16 Mar 2008 at 9:16 pm 4Nicholas

If your coming from (I assume) outside the US, NYT does not require a login, at least not for me in England.
on 16 Mar 2008 at 10:07 pm 5Pauletta

Thats why there is bug me not and the firefox extension that makes all those little logins go away!
on 16 Mar 2008 at 10:57 pm 6Lavina

What a bloody waste of a reddit submission!This shit really pisses me off - “this is how it should be done”, “this is how your titles should be written”, blah blah.If you don’t want to login and read something, don’t.Leave the rest of us who don’t mind alone please.
on 16 Mar 2008 at 11:48 pm 7Delaney

Agreed … It’s so annoying to see a great headline then click the link only to find out that the New York times wants you to log in.Grrr …
on 17 Mar 2008 at 12:39 am 8Geoffrey

And then you discover bugmenot, quite useful in such case!
on 17 Mar 2008 at 1:29 am 9Elijah

Thanks to bugmenot, I haven’t even seen a login link in years. Hell, I had forgotten than NYT even had registration. What kind of retard doesn’t use bugmenot?
on 17 Mar 2008 at 2:20 am 10Emily

WINNER.
on 17 Mar 2008 at 3:10 am 11Cliff

I use bugmenot and the dratted thing keeps showing a login screen I have to right click and invoke bugmenot, so I still find it very annoying
on 17 Mar 2008 at 4:01 am 12Karyn

I second that!
on 17 Mar 2008 at 4:51 am 13Ainsley

Let me put it like this, by way of you’re right and wrong on different levels:reddit presents a login-free NYT link generator, and therefore yes, people should bury the non-linkgen’d version.if a site required paid access, then sure, it shouldn’t be posted. But bugmenot exists.

on 16 Mar 2008 at 6:45 pm 1Gib

Cool. I’ll have to remember to set that in OmniWeb’s site preferences next time I visit NYT. Thanks.

on 16 Mar 2008 at 7:35 pm 2Haven

Let me put it like this, by way of analogy:Since you can fairly reliably block spam (e.g. with OpenBSD’s spamd via greylisting and tarpitting), do you think it’s ok that companies spam you?

on 16 Mar 2008 at 8:26 pm 3Roderic

Meh. NYT has great content, so it’s worth the fifteen seconds for registering. I get their headlines e-mail every day too.

on 16 Mar 2008 at 9:16 pm 4Nicholas

If your coming from (I assume) outside the US, NYT does not require a login, at least not for me in England.

on 16 Mar 2008 at 10:07 pm 5Pauletta

Thats why there is bug me not and the firefox extension that makes all those little logins go away!

on 16 Mar 2008 at 10:57 pm 6Lavina

What a bloody waste of a reddit submission!This shit really pisses me off - “this is how it should be done”, “this is how your titles should be written”, blah blah.If you don’t want to login and read something, don’t.Leave the rest of us who don’t mind alone please.

on 16 Mar 2008 at 11:48 pm 7Delaney

Agreed … It’s so annoying to see a great headline then click the link only to find out that the New York times wants you to log in.Grrr …

on 17 Mar 2008 at 12:39 am 8Geoffrey

And then you discover bugmenot, quite useful in such case!

on 17 Mar 2008 at 1:29 am 9Elijah

Thanks to bugmenot, I haven’t even seen a login link in years. Hell, I had forgotten than NYT even had registration. What kind of retard doesn’t use bugmenot?

on 17 Mar 2008 at 2:20 am 10Emily

WINNER.

on 17 Mar 2008 at 3:10 am 11Cliff

I use bugmenot and the dratted thing keeps showing a login screen I have to right click and invoke bugmenot, so I still find it very annoying

on 17 Mar 2008 at 4:01 am 12Karyn

I second that!

on 17 Mar 2008 at 4:51 am 13Ainsley

Let me put it like this, by way of you’re right and wrong on different levels:reddit presents a login-free NYT link generator, and therefore yes, people should bury the non-linkgen’d version.if a site required paid access, then sure, it shouldn’t be posted. But bugmenot exists.

dimblr.com Welcome Guest | Login or Register