Started By
Message
re: NCAA should change "First Four" to last 8 bubble teams
Posted on 3/18/15 at 10:43 am to MMB5DAP
Posted on 3/18/15 at 10:43 am to MMB5DAP
No, it wouldn't. K state underachieved all year and finished 15-17. I don't see why they should be rewarded with postseason play for a mediocre at best season.
Small conference basketball would also cease to exist in this format and would end up much like football with separate divisions. If you like that then that's fine, but the current tournament format is a cash cow and a radical change like this is a terrible business choice
Small conference basketball would also cease to exist in this format and would end up much like football with separate divisions. If you like that then that's fine, but the current tournament format is a cash cow and a radical change like this is a terrible business choice
1
Posted on 3/18/15 at 10:51 am to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
No, it wouldn't. K state underachieved all year and finished 15-17. I don't see why they should be rewarded with postseason play for a mediocre at best season.
So did most 16 seeds and they are rewarded with a postseason birth for beating 3-4 equally bad teams in a row. I understand my opinion isnt popular, I just hate the first round 1-3 seeds games. Out of those 12 games, you might get 1 or 2 upsets. It would be much more chaotic IMO if it were just the best 64 teams.
Posted on 3/18/15 at 11:02 am to MMB5DAP
quote:
So did most 16 seeds and they are rewarded with a postseason birth for beating 3-4 equally bad teams in a row.
Hampton 17-17 (8-8)
Manhattan 19-14 (13-7)
Coastal Carolina 24-9 (12-6)
Lafayette 20-12 (9-9)
Robert Morris 19-14 (12-6)
UNF 23-11 (12-2)
Lafayette and Hampton were the only teams that were mediocre in their conference. UNFs record, for instance, is beat down because they played several P5 schools OOC. If you finish 8th out of 10 teams in your conference like a KState you don't deserve to get an at large bid to the postseason.
This post was edited on 3/18/15 at 11:04 am
Posted on 3/18/15 at 11:09 am to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
Robert Morris 19-14 (12-6)
Of those 19 wins only 1 was against a team with an RPI <150. They also had 10 of their 14 losses to teams with RPI>100. Who cares what their conference record was. They proved on the court they suck just like KSU did. I just threw that team out there. There are probably many more deserving teams than KSU to make the tournament (just look at the NIT). Teams like Richmond, LA Tech etc. would all make the NCAA tournament much better in place of most of the current 15 & 16 seeds.
ETA: I'm not saying get rid of these tiny mid-majors and add only P5 schools. If you just replaced the (eventual) 16 and 15 seeds with the top 8 teams in the NIT you would add these teams:
Richmond
Temple
Colorado St
Stanford
Tulsa
Miami
Old Dominion
Texas A&M
You're telling me those teams vs the 1 & 2 seeds wouldnt be infinitely more entertaining?
This post was edited on 3/18/15 at 11:14 am
Posted on 3/18/15 at 11:12 am to MMB5DAP
quote:
Of those 19 wins only 1 was against a team with an RPI <150. They also had 10 of their 14 losses to teams with RPI>100. Who cares what their conference record was. They proved on the court they suck just like KSU did. I just threw that team out there. There are probably many more deserving teams than KSU to make the tournament (just look at the NIT). Teams like Richmond, LA Tech etc. would all make the NCAA tournament much better in place of most of the current 15 & 16 seeds.
You would pretty much have to separate basketball into two divisions like football and kill off small conference basketball in order to make this happen, since no school from the small conferences would ever be able to have a resume that could match up to a large school one having to play 16-18 small school teams every year. That's fine if that's your preference, it would just be extremely boring in the way the GoDaddy.com bowl is boring
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News