That is the problem in judging non P5 teams. They just don't get enough games against P5 teams to get a real feel for their ability.
A split on the road against Utah State and San Diego State is really pretty good stuff. The loss to Seattle was totally f'ing ugly, but when you play 25 games against lousy opponents, you are bound to lay an egg once, and in that game Seatlle shot 50% bta. Lord knows we've been guilty of surrendering a 12-2 run in the second half in a conference road game against a team we should beat. And it isn't like we didn't lose by 15 to SEC cellar dweller South Carolina.
And that is my complaint about the quad and tournament selection system. A team that plays a huge number of q3 games is deeply penalized for every loss even though one or two are almost invariably bound to happen, while a team that plays a huge number of q1 games is greatly rewarded for every win while every loss is explained away.
I mean really, even if Texas deserves to be above UC San Diego for an at large bid, can we necessarily say the same about Indiana, UNC, Xavier, or Boise State?
Here's hoping UC San Diego stops committing the silly turnovers and pulls away in the second half, and that will moot this whole debate. It's a 2 point game at the half, so that could happen.
Pity Louisville couldn't do a number on Duke today to make UNC look silly.
My attitude is that the best of the mid-majors should get the benefit of the doubt and should be given a shot at the big dance. The bottom third of the major-majors had plenty of chances already.