I think that most analysts were right in their assessments on BYU's CHANCES TO GET INTO THE TOURNAMENT based on known criteria and past decisions made by the committee. Turns out that most people that said we were on the bubble were right, correct?

Now that we are in the tournament, their assessment switches from "what have they done that will get them into the tournament" to "how good of a team is this" and they start to talk about BYU winning games.

It is perfectly clear minded of someone to not focus on a team's ability when speculating tournament selection, because their record and stats are the loud talkers when that decision is being made.

At first I was pretty bugged by the polar comments about BYU, but I actually think it makes a lot of sense.