We got screwed!!!!

918AGG · Post by **918AGG** » March 17th, 2024, 5:16 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:00 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:54 pm
Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.
Past years of success or lack thereof shouldn’t matter. But apparently they did for this collection of dumbasses.

Really? We don’t get the luxury of existing in a vacuum.

So what’s the point of winning, improving your brand, funding NIL, keeping talent, improving existing talent, and keeping a winning culture?

Houston, UNC, UCONN, and Purdue are all one seeds in part because they’re having great years, but also in part because they are the least likely teams to make the committee look like idiots.

I don’t blame an allegedly non-biased committee for looking at the SDSU brand and seeing “WINNERS” and then looking at the USU brand and seeing “CRAP TOURNAMENT PLAY.”

JFWAggie · Post by **JFWAggie** » March 17th, 2024, 5:22 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:16 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:00 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:54 pm
Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.
Past years of success or lack thereof shouldn’t matter. But apparently they did for this collection of dumbasses.
Really? We don’t get the luxury of existing in a vacuum.

So what’s the point of winning, improving your brand, funding NIL, keeping talent, improving existing talent, and keeping a winning culture?

Houston, UNC, UCONN, and Purdue are all one seeds in part because they’re having great years, but also in part because they are the least likely teams to make the committee look like idiots.

I don’t blame an allegedly non-biased committee for looking at the SDSU brand and seeing “WINNERS” and then looking at the USU brand and seeing “CRAP TOURNAMENT PLAY.”

Purdue, oh okay???LOL

MetsJetsAggies · Post by **MetsJetsAggies** » March 17th, 2024, 5:23 pm

Mw objectively got screwed on seeding outside of sdsu

New Mexico is favored as an 11 over a 6 and wouldn’t have even been in the field if they didn’t run the mwt

Nevada favored as a 10 over a 7, 2 teams as play ins after everyone in the world had them safely in.

We don’t deserve much but we won a 6 bid conference and sdsu got a 5 seed so id think we should’ve at least gotten a 6, maybe over the team who is underdogs to NM?

918AGG · Post by **918AGG** » March 17th, 2024, 5:23 pm

JFWAggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:22 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:16 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:00 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:54 pm
Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.
Past years of success or lack thereof shouldn’t matter. But apparently they did for this collection of dumbasses.
Really? We don’t get the luxury of existing in a vacuum.

So what’s the point of winning, improving your brand, funding NIL, keeping talent, improving existing talent, and keeping a winning culture?

Houston, UNC, UCONN, and Purdue are all one seeds in part because they’re having great years, but also in part because they are the least likely teams to make the committee look like idiots.

I don’t blame an allegedly non-biased committee for looking at the SDSU brand and seeing “WINNERS” and then looking at the USU brand and seeing “CRAP TOURNAMENT PLAY.”
Purdue, oh okay???LOL

Solid point. I should have left them out to improve my argument.

Section_L_Aggie · Post by **Section_L_Aggie** » March 17th, 2024, 5:26 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:16 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:00 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:54 pm
Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.
Past years of success or lack thereof shouldn’t matter. But apparently they did for this collection of dumbasses.
Really? We don’t get the luxury of existing in a vacuum.

So what’s the point of winning, improving your brand, funding NIL, keeping talent, improving existing talent, and keeping a winning culture?

Houston, UNC, UCONN, and Purdue are all one seeds in part because they’re having great years, but also in part because they are the least likely teams to make the committee look like idiots.

I don’t blame an allegedly non-biased committee for looking at the SDSU brand and seeing “WINNERS” and then looking at the USU brand and seeing “CRAP TOURNAMENT PLAY.”

Tournament seeding should be about body of work THAT YEAR.

But if we’re worrying about past tournament performance let’s put UCLA in every year just because they’re UCLA. I mean they did win a bunch of championships in a row before.

And why would anyone care about the committees looking like idiots before. That’s their problem and shouldn’t affect THIS YEAR!

Blitz79 · Post by **Blitz79** » March 17th, 2024, 5:28 pm

Just Win.

If we got a 7 seed we would possibly be playing a MW team at 10.

We are already making excuses, sad.

3rdGenAggie · Post by **3rdGenAggie** » March 17th, 2024, 5:31 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:54 pm
Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.

Is the tournament about what teams have done in past tournaments or what they've done this season?

blueaggie · Post by **blueaggie** » March 17th, 2024, 5:36 pm

3rdGenAggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:31 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:54 pm
Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.
Is the tournament about what teams have done in past tournaments or what they've done this season?

It sure didn’t help the MWC to have SDSU place 2nd in the tournament.

blueaggie · Post by **blueaggie** » March 17th, 2024, 5:41 pm

What a joke. A committee chair just said they look at every game evenly. From the games at the beginning until the games at the end. I would like him to explain how Creighton got a 3 seed when they got blown out of the gym against CSU and UNLV.

918AGG · Post by **918AGG** » March 17th, 2024, 5:43 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:26 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:16 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:00 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:54 pm
Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.
Past years of success or lack thereof shouldn’t matter. But apparently they did for this collection of dumbasses.
Really? We don’t get the luxury of existing in a vacuum.

So what’s the point of winning, improving your brand, funding NIL, keeping talent, improving existing talent, and keeping a winning culture?

Houston, UNC, UCONN, and Purdue are all one seeds in part because they’re having great years, but also in part because they are the least likely teams to make the committee look like idiots.

I don’t blame an allegedly non-biased committee for looking at the SDSU brand and seeing “WINNERS” and then looking at the USU brand and seeing “CRAP TOURNAMENT PLAY.”
Tournament seeding should be about body of work THAT YEAR.

But if we’re worrying about past tournament performance let’s put UCLA in every year just because they’re UCLA. I mean they did win a bunch of championships in a row before.

And why would anyone care about the committees looking like idiots before. That’s their problem and shouldn’t affect THIS YEAR!

I actually agree that UCLA should automatically be in every year.

I find it incredibly rich that “we got screwed” is coming from a fan base that is so obviously aware of its own tournament shortcomings. Win a solitary tournament game in 20 years, and I’ll be glad to change my mind.

In the meantime, let’s all deal with the hilarious reality that we stumbled down the stretch, got kicked in the crotch by a totally irrelevant Fresno team, looked as deep as a kiddie pool against SDSU, and we’re now sharting our pants about having to face a middle-of-the-pack Big12 team that’s heavily favored by Vegas and by all relevant metrics (unless I’m missing something).

We got what we deserve. Now go win (or sit around, make excuses, and then blame a more unbiased than we are committee).

I’m going to laugh my tail off when we blame this loss on the refs.

I know it’s hard to fathom, but nobody has it out for us - we aren’t relevant enough for anybody to have it out for us - we just flat out, undeniably suck in the tournament.

Section_L_Aggie · Post by **Section_L_Aggie** » March 17th, 2024, 5:46 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:43 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:26 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:16 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:00 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:54 pm
Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.
Past years of success or lack thereof shouldn’t matter. But apparently they did for this collection of dumbasses.
Really? We don’t get the luxury of existing in a vacuum.

So what’s the point of winning, improving your brand, funding NIL, keeping talent, improving existing talent, and keeping a winning culture?

Houston, UNC, UCONN, and Purdue are all one seeds in part because they’re having great years, but also in part because they are the least likely teams to make the committee look like idiots.

I don’t blame an allegedly non-biased committee for looking at the SDSU brand and seeing “WINNERS” and then looking at the USU brand and seeing “CRAP TOURNAMENT PLAY.”
Tournament seeding should be about body of work THAT YEAR.

But if we’re worrying about past tournament performance let’s put UCLA in every year just because they’re UCLA. I mean they did win a bunch of championships in a row before.

And why would anyone care about the committees looking like idiots before. That’s their problem and shouldn’t affect THIS YEAR!
I actually agree that UCLA should automatically be in every year.

I find it incredibly rich that “we got screwed” is coming from a fan base that is so obviously aware of its own tournament shortcomings. Win a solitary tournament game in 20 years, and I’ll be glad to change my mind.

In the meantime, let’s all deal with the hilarious reality that we stumbled down the stretch, got kicked in the crotch by a totally irrelevant Fresno team, looked as deep as a kiddie pool against SDSU, and we’re now sharting our pants about having to face a middle-of-the-pack Big12 team that’s heavily favored by Vegas and by all relevant metrics (unless I’m missing something).

We got what we deserve. Now go win (or sit around, make excuses, and then blame a more unbiased than we are committee).

I’m going to laugh my tail off when we blame this loss on the refs.

I know it’s hard to fathom, but nobody has it out for us - we aren’t relevant enough for anybody to have it out for us - we just flat out, undeniably suck in the tournament.

I didn't think you'd take the hyperbolic UCLA bait but that just shows our difference of opinion.

For the record, I'm not scared of TCU. Just feel that we got a raw deal and a poor chance to win more than one game.

Imakeitrain · Post by **Imakeitrain** » March 17th, 2024, 5:51 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:43 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:26 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:16 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:00 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:54 pm
Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.
Past years of success or lack thereof shouldn’t matter. But apparently they did for this collection of dumbasses.
Really? We don’t get the luxury of existing in a vacuum.

So what’s the point of winning, improving your brand, funding NIL, keeping talent, improving existing talent, and keeping a winning culture?

Houston, UNC, UCONN, and Purdue are all one seeds in part because they’re having great years, but also in part because they are the least likely teams to make the committee look like idiots.

I don’t blame an allegedly non-biased committee for looking at the SDSU brand and seeing “WINNERS” and then looking at the USU brand and seeing “CRAP TOURNAMENT PLAY.”
Tournament seeding should be about body of work THAT YEAR.

But if we’re worrying about past tournament performance let’s put UCLA in every year just because they’re UCLA. I mean they did win a bunch of championships in a row before.

And why would anyone care about the committees looking like idiots before. That’s their problem and shouldn’t affect THIS YEAR!
I actually agree that UCLA should automatically be in every year.

I find it incredibly rich that “we got screwed” is coming from a fan base that is so obviously aware of its own tournament shortcomings. Win a solitary tournament game in 20 years, and I’ll be glad to change my mind.

In the meantime, let’s all deal with the hilarious reality that we stumbled down the stretch, got kicked in the crotch by a totally irrelevant Fresno team, looked as deep as a kiddie pool against SDSU, and we’re now sharting our pants about having to face a middle-of-the-pack Big12 team that’s heavily favored by Vegas and by all relevant metrics (unless I’m missing something).

We got what we deserve. Now go win (or sit around, make excuses, and then blame a more unbiased than we are committee).

I’m going to laugh my tail off when we blame this loss on the refs.

I know it’s hard to fathom, but nobody has it out for us - we aren’t relevant enough for anybody to have it out for us - we just flat out, undeniably suck in the tournament.

That’s a bad argument. Not only is every year different- it is a begging the question fallacy.

We consistently get put in unfavorable matchups when we potentially deserve better matchups. The problem is with the matchups we’re given. That’s why we haven’t won a tourney game in over 20 years. I think this is only the 2nd game in that span we had a seeding better than our opponent.

scotlandog · Post by **scotlandog** » March 17th, 2024, 5:57 pm

918AGG wrote:Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.

I’m glad some of those points scored in SDSU’s run last year got applied to those close games this season, pushed them over the top to avoid a loss. It’s nice having those points saved up that you can use from season to season.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

aggiesdotcom · Post by **aggiesdotcom** » March 17th, 2024, 5:57 pm

We got screwed even more when you consider Scott Barnes is on the committee and apparently didn’t stand up for the program that employed him for almost a decade.

cval · Post by **cval** » March 17th, 2024, 7:52 pm

College Basketball is a bunch of new teams and players every year. The fact that we didn’t win in the tournament years ago has nothing to do with this team.

Those of you using “win a tournament game then talk to me about seeding” argument are completely disrespecting this team. Why should they be punished because teams years ago didn’t win.

Terrible argument.

Blue Sage · Post by **Blue Sage** » March 17th, 2024, 8:25 pm

Imakeitrain wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:30 pm
Our seed is probably fair-ish. But the MWC got hosed. We will see where UNM falls and if UNR is even in at this point.

No need to fall on your sword. We got jobbed.

jpswensen · Post by **jpswensen** » March 17th, 2024, 8:38 pm

With all apologies to StanfordAggie, I am going to keep beating the Michigan State drum until the cows come home.

Michigan State hasn't won a Q1 game since Feb 10, and the one before that was on Dec 30. They finished the season losing 5 out of 7 games. They got a 9 seed.

Infuriated is an understatements.

kofdog · Post by **kofdog** » March 17th, 2024, 8:42 pm

And some explain to me how Gonzaga gets favorable seeds on off years… unless it’s cause of their past years play and recognition. They say it’s based on this year and they try but they are humans and have subconscious biases

SLB · Post by **SLB** » March 17th, 2024, 8:49 pm

jpswensen wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 8:38 pm
With all apologies to StanfordAggie, I am going to keep beating the Michigan State drum until the cows come home.

Michigan State hasn't won a Q1 game since Feb 10, and the one before that was on Dec 30. They finished the season losing 5 out of 7 games. They got a 9 seed.

Infuriated is an understatements.

Stuff like this is why I posted the bracket and questioned it.

Imakeitrain · Post by **Imakeitrain** » March 17th, 2024, 9:30 pm

Blue Sage wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 8:25 pm

Imakeitrain wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:30 pm
Our seed is probably fair-ish. But the MWC got hosed. We will see where UNM falls and if UNR is even in at this point.
No need to fall on your sword. We got jobbed.

I mean people on here were saying after the SDSU loss we probably fell to a 7 and I even heard 8 or 9.

3rdGenAggie · Post by **3rdGenAggie** » March 17th, 2024, 10:09 pm

Imakeitrain wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:51 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:43 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:26 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:16 pm

Section_L_Aggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:00 pm

918AGG wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:54 pm
Yes, our 23 years of a lack of tournament results really do warrant a 4-seed.

Win or shut up.
Past years of success or lack thereof shouldn’t matter. But apparently they did for this collection of dumbasses.
Really? We don’t get the luxury of existing in a vacuum.

So what’s the point of winning, improving your brand, funding NIL, keeping talent, improving existing talent, and keeping a winning culture?

Houston, UNC, UCONN, and Purdue are all one seeds in part because they’re having great years, but also in part because they are the least likely teams to make the committee look like idiots.

I don’t blame an allegedly non-biased committee for looking at the SDSU brand and seeing “WINNERS” and then looking at the USU brand and seeing “CRAP TOURNAMENT PLAY.”
Tournament seeding should be about body of work THAT YEAR.

But if we’re worrying about past tournament performance let’s put UCLA in every year just because they’re UCLA. I mean they did win a bunch of championships in a row before.

And why would anyone care about the committees looking like idiots before. That’s their problem and shouldn’t affect THIS YEAR!
I actually agree that UCLA should automatically be in every year.

I find it incredibly rich that “we got screwed” is coming from a fan base that is so obviously aware of its own tournament shortcomings. Win a solitary tournament game in 20 years, and I’ll be glad to change my mind.

In the meantime, let’s all deal with the hilarious reality that we stumbled down the stretch, got kicked in the crotch by a totally irrelevant Fresno team, looked as deep as a kiddie pool against SDSU, and we’re now sharting our pants about having to face a middle-of-the-pack Big12 team that’s heavily favored by Vegas and by all relevant metrics (unless I’m missing something).

We got what we deserve. Now go win (or sit around, make excuses, and then blame a more unbiased than we are committee).

I’m going to laugh my tail off when we blame this loss on the refs.

I know it’s hard to fathom, but nobody has it out for us - we aren’t relevant enough for anybody to have it out for us - we just flat out, undeniably suck in the tournament.
That’s a bad argument. Not only is every year different- it is a begging the question fallacy.

We consistently get put in unfavorable matchups when we potentially deserve better matchups. The problem is with the matchups we’re given. That’s why we haven’t won a tourney game in over 20 years. I think this is only the 2nd game in that span we had a seeding better than our opponent.

And we're the underdogs on the betting markets.

dyedblue · Post by **dyedblue** » March 18th, 2024, 7:11 am

If we are under seeded, say we should be a 6 instead of an 8, then shouldn’t we still be able to get past a 9 seed? I don’t even care that the winner of the 8/9 gets the 1 seed because we’ve lost our last 10 tournament games.

Aggie formerly in Hawaii · Post by **Aggie formerly in Hawaii** » March 18th, 2024, 7:18 am

dyedblue wrote: ↑
March 18th, 2024, 7:11 am
If we are under seeded, say we should be a 6 instead of an 8, then shouldn’t we still be able to get past a 9 seed? I don’t even care that the winner of the 8/9 gets the 1 seed because we’ve lost our last 10 tournament games.

Yes we should beat TCU. If we can't beat a 9seed who didn't have a winning record in their conference, we don't deserve to complain.

jpswensen · Post by **jpswensen** » March 18th, 2024, 8:34 am

blueaggie wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 5:41 pm
What a joke. A committee chair just said they look at every game evenly. From the games at the beginning until the games at the end. I would like him to explain how Creighton got a 3 seed when they got blown out of the gym against CSU and UNLV.

That save committee chair also said that the MWC was supposedly punished for not playing good teams or of conference.

This tweet statements are utterly at odds with each other. Clearly good wins later were depreciated by the committee

Bullnamed_gus · Post by **Bullnamed_gus** » March 18th, 2024, 9:11 am

I personally don’t understand the rankings this year at all, with how things shook out we probably *should* have been higher, but we are more than deserving of an 8. In fact just looking at our schedule/results an 8 is generous. We got some serious luck wins, and didn’t beat anyone great OOC. We were a Darius Brown Hail Mary away from losing to Fresno. And they then took us to OT in the conf tournament.

Does the draw suck? Sure. But we just need to win. The conference as a whole needs to win

jpswensen · Post by **jpswensen** » March 18th, 2024, 10:25 am

Imakeitrain wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:30 pm
Our seed is probably fair-ish. But the MWC got hosed. We will see where UNM falls and if UNR is even in at this point.

I liked this tweet. The bracket matrix averages were within 1.29 for every teams in the country except 5 of the 6 MWC teams, which were off by 1.6-3.08. That seem a long ways from "fair-ish", and actually cries bias on a level that is atrocious.

"Fair-ish" would have been that a bunch of mid-majors saw themselves underperform the bracket matrix, or that the quantity experiences across the board was off by similar values.

Instead, nearly the entire conference was punished by far more that all other teams, and by a significant margin. This is not "fair-ish".

BigBlueDart · Post by **BigBlueDart** » March 18th, 2024, 11:00 am

jpswensen wrote: ↑
March 18th, 2024, 10:25 am

Imakeitrain wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:30 pm
Our seed is probably fair-ish. But the MWC got hosed. We will see where UNM falls and if UNR is even in at this point.
I liked this tweet. The bracket matrix averages were within 1.29 for every teams in the country except 5 of the 6 MWC teams, which were off by 1.6-3.08. That seem a long ways from "fair-ish", and actually cries bias on a level that is atrocious.

"Fair-ish" would have been that a bunch of mid-majors saw themselves underperform the bracket matrix, or that the quantity experiences across the board was off by similar values.

Instead, nearly the entire conference was punished by far more that all other teams, and by a significant margin. This is not "fair-ish".

Holy crap! That sure paints a picture!

88USUAggie · Post by **88USUAggie** » March 18th, 2024, 11:01 am

Blitz79 wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:37 pm
Man, all you have to do is win. It's the tournament and MW teams are getting paired with middle of the pack P5 schools. We either win or shut up.

Exactly...my buddies back east can't believe the MW got 6 teams in the tourny. They are in utter disbelief that what they see as a mediocre conference that plays a weak out of conference schedule was awarded 6 slots. A little perspective goes a long way. There are a ton of teams that would love a shot at TCU, but we are the ones who earned that chance.

Like previously said, win or whine.

WAAggie · Post by **WAAggie** » March 18th, 2024, 11:04 am

The last time we were an 8, we got our butts kicked and looked like a 16. We failed to show up and if we don't this time, we will all have to lick our wounds and try again. THe whole MWC is going to be watched by commentators under a microscope. Lose and the comments will NEVER end.

Aggie84025 · Post by **Aggie84025** » March 18th, 2024, 11:20 am

WAAggie wrote: ↑
March 18th, 2024, 11:04 am
The last time we were an 8, we got our butts kicked and looked like a 16. We failed to show up and if we don't this time, we will all have to lick our wounds and try again. THe whole MWC is going to be watched by commentators under a microscope. Lose and the comments will NEVER end.

If the MWC wins 3 games in the first4/first round then I would call that success given the seeds that were given. If only 1 gets out of the first round the conference will have been humiliated.

OrangeCountyAggie · Post by **OrangeCountyAggie** » March 18th, 2024, 12:45 pm

In a way it's our own fault for not scheduling any P5s in non conference. Also, we need to find a way to get into more prestigious mid season tournaments.

Post by **ProvoAggie** » March 18th, 2024, 12:47 pm

OrangeCountyAggie wrote: ↑
March 18th, 2024, 12:45 pm
In a way it's our own fault for not scheduling any P5s in non conference. Also, we need to find a way to get into more prestigious mid season tournaments.

Yeah because the P5's are just lining up to play us. Their argument is that we don't play anyone but when we call them up and ask for a game they say hell no. A better tournament would definitely help but in a year when you're projected to be the 9th best team in your conference you aren't going to get an invite to one of those events.

Rabidchild · Post by **Rabidchild** » March 18th, 2024, 2:07 pm

Ahbye wrote: ↑
March 17th, 2024, 4:37 pm
I'd have rather been Nevada playing Dayton in SLC.

I would have much rather played Virginia in Dayton and then had a 10 seed vs. Texas.

But that being said, are we really going to cry about getting seeded against the 8th place team in the Big 12?? If the MW is as strong as we want to believe it is, then the outright champion should be able to beat the 8th place Big 12 team. Let's just go and win!

cval · Post by **cval** » March 18th, 2024, 2:15 pm

WAAggie wrote: ↑
March 18th, 2024, 11:04 am
The last time we were an 8, we got our butts kicked and looked like a 16. We failed to show up and if we don't this time, we will all have to lick our wounds and try again. THe whole MWC is going to be watched by commentators under a microscope. Lose and the comments will NEVER end.

How many guys from this team were on that team? How many coaches?

Why are these guys held accountable for something someone else did years ago?

JFWAggie · Post by **JFWAggie** » March 18th, 2024, 2:25 pm

For some reason I think NEVADA was in the elite 8 a few years ago, where's their respect?

Upcoming Events

Event Results

We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

Re: We got screwed!!!!

USU Forums

MWC Forums

Upcoming/Past Opponents

Schedules

Upcoming Events

Event Results

Basketball

National Polls/Rankings

Stats

Football

National Polls/Rankings

Stats

Newspapers

Newsletters

Radio

Blogs

Podcasts

Websites

Donate