[Ed. Note: Bumped from FanPosts.]

One of the biggest gripes that I have this year (besides VT being left out) was the way the ACC got totally screwed on the number of NCAA bids provided.  The ACC is too good to be a four bid league and the performance so far in the tournament supports that.Let's look at the records so far in the tournament for the major conferences:

Big East 9-9

Big Ten 7-5

Big Twelve 4-4

SEC 4-3

Pac-10 4-2

ACC 7-1

Better yet, look at the number of breakdown on the number of bids and the teams who made it through the first two rounds:

Big East  2 for 11  18%

Big Ten 2 for 7   28%

Big Twelve 1 for 5   20%

Pac Ten 1 for 4   25%

ACC 3 for 4     75%

Sure the ACC is pretty top heavy but all the conference play has hardened them to play in big games in the tournament.  Everyone talks about how the Big East is the toughest conference.  Well, not so far.  See you later Pittsburgh (first number 1 seed out).  Duke, UNC and FSU got this good by playing tough conference games the last half of the year.  Imagine if Clemson didn't have to go to Akron and then do a quick turnaround and have to play early on Thursday.  They had game against WVU and if rested, they could have won.  Thanks a lot to the committee. 

Sure VT lost in the NIT (and at home).  I don't even count the NIT.  These kids had their souls crushed by the committee.  It's just not the same.  Bottom line, results are showing that VT and BC should have gotten bids over some of the sad performances that got some teams into this tournament:

USC (beaten in play in game by VCU)

Tennessee (absolutely run over by Michigan)

Villanova (lost 10 of their last 15)

Georgia (beat no one)

Michigan State (had 14 losses going into the tournament)

UAB (had nothing)

and throw Missouri and Georgetown in there too.