What's the point of conference tournaments? | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

What's the point of conference tournaments?

That's a great point, I know at the D3 level they use that system. I don't like the idea of a neutral venue either for small leagues.
I can't imagine that the small conference tourneys make any money (but please correct me if I'm wrong). I think a championship between the top two on the leading team's floor would work best.
 
Both regular season and conference tournament champions should get automatic bids.
 
Thinking about the loss of AO and our 2nd national championship

Really what is the point of them? I know they are fun and exciting but they don't exactly prove much especially when we've already seen who the better teams are for 18 games of conference play.

The answer is C.R.E.A.M. but others can provide insight too.

Money and entertainment. Like everything else, including the internet, tv, movies, music...
Recognizing that television only exists to broadcast commercials, i'm not sure why anyone asks questions like this. The ACC tournament has, thus far, been a bust for us, but the Big East Tournament? You would be fine if none of those games ever happened? That was the shizzzznits.
 
This is true, I guess I was more referring to the smaller conference tournaments than anything. For instance, if UNC doesn't win the ACC tournament this year, they will still be in the NCAA. The team that doesn't win in a league such as the Patriot League would very rarely, if ever get a bid to the tourney.
Yeah, I see it both ways if you're a small league. You want your regular season champ to make the Dance because they're the team with the chance of going the furthest, but at the same time having a conference tournament is an opportunity for small leagues to get attention and TV time in March.

If I was a low-major league I would have the conference tourney played on the home floor of the #1 seed as opposed to a neutral venue.
Having a tournament was the "price of admission" for these conferences to move up to D-1 from D-3. There are over 300 D-1 teams now, I doubt that half of them were D-1 when the Big East was formed. Most of them should still be in D-3. To be totally frank and honest, the conferences that sponsored football were none too happy that the BE was allowed to form without football.
 
I personally am not a fan of conference tournaments. Especially for the small schools such as Colgate. You could finish first in the regular season and some team could come out of no where and get the automatic bid. It negates your entire conference regular season, idk just doesn't make too much sense.

Of course, the counter argument is that it gives everyone a chance. I can see both sides, but it isn't that logical to me.

I agree it is definetely punishing for those small school conferences, and if we only regular season champions there would have been at least a few 1-16 upsets by now, and much more 2-15 upsets.

Although, the NCAA did at least allow regular season champs an automatic entry to the NIT which is at least some consolation for those schools.
 
Are you going to expand the NCAA tournament field?
JB once suggested going to 128. I think 64 was perfect, and wouldn't mind contraction at the expense of the P5.

Edit - or maybe he said 96... I forget.
 
Last edited:
JB once suggested going to 128.

I never understood JB's rationale there. Why would he want to create more opportunities for mediocre teams to get to the Final Four and water down the regular season.
 
I never understood JB's rationale there. Why would he want to create more opportunities for mediocre teams to get to the Final Four and water down the regular season.
Job security for fellow coaches.
He is looking out for coaches if the tournament was 128 then everyone makes it and schools don't fire the coach when he makes the NCAAT.

It is a coaches logic. 128 would suck.
68 is fine.
 
I'd prefer to create a 1AA like in football.
The conferences full of former D-3 schools are in D-1 for the money. Unless they get the same money they'll never agree to it. The schools "relegated" to D-1AA in football did not like it at all. The Ivies are still fuming over it.
 
The conferences full of former D-3 schools are in D-1 for the money. Unless they get the same money they'll never agree to it. The schools "relegated" to D-1AA in football did not like it at all. The Ivies are still fuming over it.


They just need a rule dividing 1A and 1AA by their all-time NCAA records. In football thay couldn't find a rule to use.
 
When they were considering 96, my guess is that they would have started awarding two bids if a team that wins the regular season is different from the one that wins their tournament.
 
Thinking about the loss of AO and our 2nd national championship

Really what is the point of them? I know they are fun and exciting but they don't exactly prove much especially when we've already seen who the better teams are for 18 games of conference play.

The answer is C.R.E.A.M. but others can provide insight too.

I havent read any other posts in the thread yet, but if we are lucky come NCAA bubble time, you may be thankful for conference tournaments this season.
 
411c4acb41624e6c2e81283499cb74b4.jpg
don_money_autograph.jpg

Are you suggesting my next single be an Eddie Money parody, "Two Tickets To The Big East Tournament"? Actually, that would be a fun song!
 
Thinking about the loss of AO and our 2nd national championship

Really what is the point of them? I know they are fun and exciting but they don't exactly prove much especially when we've already seen who the better teams are for 18 games of conference play.

The answer is C.R.E.A.M. but others can provide insight too.

A Jackpot ticket for those less fortunate.
 
Well the irony is, this year it means everything. Our likely only chance to get in, is to win this thing.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,421
Messages
4,702,938
Members
5,908
Latest member
AlCuse

Online statistics

Members online
52
Guests online
1,572
Total visitors
1,624


Top Bottom