Dicky V's anti-VCU

Yesterday, Dick Vitale said that VCU's run to the Final Four was more improbable than George Mason's run five years ago. That may be. But Vitale's reason was that everyone thought Mason deserved to make the tournament five years ago. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Billy Packer and Jim Nantz were vocal in deriding the inclusion of Mason in the tournament five years ago. They favored including a team from a power conference instead. Jay Bilas felt that RPI was a bad statistic. Mason's high RPI was the reason they got in. Unfortunately, I couldn't find Vitale's sentiments on Mason at the time.

Vitale still claims that VCU didn't deserve to make it, spouting out anecdotal evidence like their losses against other Colonial teams. VCU was 12-6 in the conference. They've beaten five teams from power conferences on their road to the Final Four. Everyone still wants to leave out their early season victory over UCLA for some reason. Perhaps 12-6 in the Colonial is just that good.

Someone criticized VCU by stating that their tournament numbers are better than their regular season stats. VCU endured key injuries during the season, something that has been overlooked. Now, they're at full strength. But the fact is, teams in the Colonial are better defensively than the teams VCU has faced in the tournament.

Listen, the Colonial has some bad teams at the bottom, no doubt. But the middle is at least decent and we know how good the top of the conference is. The Colonial should get at least four teams in the tournament every year. If you think different, maybe you should watch a Colonial game at some point. You'd be impressed, Dicky V. "Oh baby! I didn't know they could play! They're awesome with a capital A!"