Does anyone think we *shouldn't* have gotten in?

[jficke13]

With all the talk of some epic snubs/surprise bids on the ESPN (notably UAB/VCU in... they talked about it for like 20 minutes straight), does anyone outside of the Warrior community think we should not have gotten a bid?

[TJ]

I heard one guy talking about the BE & 11 seeds saying "you should have to be .500 or better in conference."  But I would discount his obviously uninformed opinion because he doesn't know that all 11 teams were 9-9.

What bothers me is if people are going to complain about 11 in from the BE, they should also complain just as much about 7 in from the Big 10/1/2.  It's the same number of teams percentage wise, and everyone thinks the Big 10/1/2 was the 3rd best conference this year behind BE & Big 12/0.

[CTWarrior]

The biggest complaint snub complaints were Colorado and Va Tech, and while I agree they were more worthy than some teams that got in, we're not one of them.  There isn't an excluded team that has a better resume than us, so we deserve to be in.

[jficke13]

I was just wondering if anyone was thinking we shouldn't have gotten in. For the record, I think we should have been a higher seed than 11.

[dtdream]

With all the talk of some epic snubs/surprise bids on the ESPN (notably UAB/VCU in... they talked about it for like 20 minutes straight), does anyone outside of the Warrior community think we should not have gotten a bid?

[ChicosBailBonds]

I think we should have gotten in.  If we lost to WVU....it would have been a very interesting outcome.

[Goose]

It was a crazy college season and really nothing surprises me. MU is top 64 team but it is hard to believe a .500 conference record and 14 losses gets you in. That said, this year we deserve to be in big dance. I would not want to press our luck and try it again next year.

[Eye]

MU was the third-to-last team to miss the PIG, so I'd say if they'd have lost to WVU, may have been in the PIG. A loss to PC probably would have kept them out.