March Sadness

[tbonezone]

i think the spirit of the tournament is matching teams from smaller conferences who had outstanding seasons against the power conference teams they would never be able to schedule in the regular season. it's not about the best 64 teams in the ncaa . it's the best teams from each conference across the country.
i frankly have trouble calling any team who couldn't finish top 3 in their conference the best team that year.

 

[pfister1]

I should add that I certainly don’t have a problem with those schools making the tournament...if they’re good enough. Occasionally you’ll get one of them that’s legit and fully capable of beating anybody.

Which I realize is harder to evaluate in the regular season with those schools, depending on their non league schedules.

In some ways its a vicious circle. They can't be good enough unless they can recruit talent to compete with the teams that are consistently among the "top 68". One way to help them do that is to give them the exposure that comes with a potential bid in the dance.

I think it is fantastic that every team has a legitimate path to the post season championship. If that means that some P5 "bubble teams" get left out to enable the champion of the Big South conference to get in, than so be it. The bubble team truly had two paths to get in; play better during the regular season and failing that, win their conference tournament. If you don't do either one, I don't have a lot of sympathy for you.

 

[OrangeDW]

In some ways its a vicious circle. They can't be good enough unless they can recruit talent to compete with the teams that are consistently among the "top 68". One way to help them do that is to give them the exposure that comes with a potential bid in the dance.

I think it is fantastic that every team has a legitimate path to the post season championship. If that means that some P5 "bubble teams" get left out to enable the champion of the Big South conference to get in, than so be it. The bubble team truly had two paths to get in; play better during the regular season and failing that, win their conference tournament. If you don't do either one, I don't have a lot of sympathy for you.

While true, it’s also a much harder path than the one taken by winning a crappy league’s tournament.

 

[pfister1]

While true, it’s also a much harder path than the one taken by winning a crappy league’s tournament.

But the P5 team is given much greater resources to navigate that harder path. How much money do we get as a result of being in the ACC, how much exposure do we get (exposure begets recruiting) etc. Now compare that to what the programs in the Big South get. Who has it harder?

 

[MSOrange]

I don't disagree as a fan of college basketball. But as a grad of one of those "crappy conferences" I gotta tell you those teams, schools , players and students live for the opportunity to bring down a Goliath in the dance.

As a Mercer grad, I completely agree.

 

[SWC75]

How about we just leave it the way it is.
We don’t need participation trophies for everyone.
Win quality games away from home you make the tournament.

Just because teams 69-91 were left out doesn’t mean we need more.
Less is more. Heck the regular season of college hoops already struggles for attention making the tournament for everyone is just stupid.
Conference tournaments are the 351 idea. Everyone gets a shot to make it.

This statement stuck with me.

After another morning of listening to discussions of quadrants and how many or what wins we need, I went back to my hobby of overthinking things, (that may have been under-thought to begin with).

I don't like the uncertainty of this time of year- not only the uncertainty of whether you are going to make it but the uncertainty of what you have to do to make it. I also don't like arguments about which team that don't really belong in a national championship tournament will make it and which will not. If we have a team that clearly isn't among the top teams I'd just as soon know ahead of time that we aren't going to get in unless we do certain specific things. I also don't like the undervaluing of the regular season, which I think does more to establish the quality of a team than a single elimination tournament.

How about this: Automatic bids go to any team that wins or ties for their conference regular season championship, (which would be the team with the best record, regardless of divisions) and to conference tournament champions. Then let's use a mathematical system or a compilation of mathematical systems to fill out the rest of the field up to 64. (I prefer math systems because we can keep track of where a team stands as the season goes on and what factors will be important in future games and the finals decisions are not made behind closed doors). Such a system would put a strong emphasis on the conference regular seasons and on the conference tournaments. I don't like the way they have been stressing the pre-conference season so much in recent years: teams are still eveolivng into the teams they will become at that stage.

Let's look at last season as an example:
2016–17 NCAA Division I men's basketball season - Wikipedia

There were 38 conference regular season champions or co-champions and 12 other teams that were not but won their conference tournaments. (Note: UT Martin was not actually among them: they won the western division of the Ohio Valley conference with a 10-6 conference record while Belmont on the East with a 15-1 record: to me that doesn't make them co-champions.) That's 50 teams. we need 14 more.

Now let's look at the Sagarin rankings just as an objective source for picking the other 14 teams:
NCAAB Sagarin - NCAAB Basketball - USA TODAY

The other 14 would have been West Virginia, Florida, Louisville, Virginia, UCLA, Baylor, Wisconsin, Cincinnati, Oklahoma State, Florida State, St. Mary's Notre Dame, Butler and South Carolina.

The last 10 teams out would have been Creighton, Xavier, TCU, U of Miami, Indiana, Kansas State, Marquette, Arkansas, Michigan State and Minnesota. All wound up with double figures in losses, (three of them had 10 losses,,meaning they would have had 9 on selection Sunday). Sagarin ranked Minnesota #37. Syracuse was at #44 with what was an 18-14 record on selection Sunday.

These teams had no real right to be playing for a national championship with those records so nothing would have been stolen from them. All the true national title contenders would be in this tournament.Syracuse would have know that they weren't going to get in as an at large team and couldn't win the conference regular season so it was all about the ACC tournament. it would have been a worse situation than what actually transpired but a clearer one, without all the angst the current system produces. We were an NIT team and would have know that was where we were going if we didn't win the tournament. It would have been all about the action on the court, not what happened behind closed doors.

 

[oli44]

I like it the way it is. I was initially opposed to the four play-in games as being unnecessary but now I think it's a nice way to whet the appetite before Thursday. Sort of like opening one present on Christmas Eve.

 

[Madbiker]

These type of threads are found on fan boards of loser schools who can't get into the tourney so they want to see changes. Either to expand the field so they can get in or so they can share the misery and keep more teams out. Almost all completely neglect the business/revenue aspect of the tourney for both the NCAA and the TV networks. It's a profit making venture. Constricting it generally means less national interest/less revenue. The tourney is great the way it is. Don't water it down by giving everyone a participation trophy. We need to win more meaningful games and we'll be fine. If not we shouldn't be in.

 

[Forloveoforange]

Is there an advantage to teams to lose in their conference tournaments for reasons of rest? If so, this should be addressed. No?

 

[RandygoCuse]

I'm ok with the process. The only year I felt we were truly snubbed was 2007. And even in that year, we had the chance to control our own destiny and lost games we could have won. The selection process isn't perfect, but with 68 spots, it doesn't have to be. Every team has the opportunity to get into the field (you can't say this about the CFB playoffs).

 

[SWC75]

These type of threads are found on fan boards of loser schools who can't get into the tourney so they want to see changes. Either to expand the field so they can get in or so they can share the misery and keep more teams out. Almost all completely neglect the business/revenue aspect of the tourney for both the NCAA and the TV networks. It's a profit making venture. Constricting it generally means less national interest/less revenue. The tourney is great the way it is. Don't water it down by giving everyone a participation trophy. We need to win more meaningful games and we'll be fine. If not we shouldn't be in.

My second suggestion is for a 64 team tournament so I don't think revenue would be an issue there. I would think a 351 team tournament would make more money, not less. The financial thing is the reason I don't expect it to contract, unless they they go to a round-robin pool system that would produce more games to make up for the lost ones. I just get tired of the endless micro-parsing of records this time of year and the uncertainty about what will be enough and what won't.

 

[RandygoCuse]

My second suggestion is for a 64 team tournament so I don't think revenue would be an issue there. I would think a 351 team tournament would make more money, not less. The financial thing is the reason I don't expect it to contract, unless they they go to a round-robin pool system that would produce more games to make up for the lost ones. I just get tired of the endless micro-parsing of records this time of year and the uncertainty about what will be enough and what won't.

I'm not sure a larger tournament would make more money. When they looked at expanding it in the past, I recall one of the reason's they didn't was that there wouldn't be enough interest in games before the 64 (does anyone watch the play-ins?). It cost money to hold the games and they have to make sure they can make up the costs.

 

[Sherman20]

Why are people trying to fix something by ain’t broke? The NCAA tourney is one of the few things about the awful organization that actually works. Leave it alone.

 

[SWC75]

Why are people trying to fix something by ain’t broke? The NCAA tourney is one of the few things about the awful organization that actually works. Leave it alone.

The tourney exists in it's present form because people looked at prior versions of it and thought it could be improved.