MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Aughnanure on September 02, 2015, 09:36:26 AM
-
College coaches talk postseason format change in ESPN survey
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/13563143/men-basketball-coaches-fear-separation-power-5-espn-poll-shows
By Andy Katz
College basketball coaches outside the Power 5 conferences are fearful of a breakup or a disruption of the current NCAA tournament format, an ESPN survey showed.
Some 150 Division I men's basketball coaches responded to the survey earlier this month. The coaches from outside the Power 5 (the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12), who requested anonymity, were in near concert that they're worried about a potential breakup.
"The thing I fear about the college game is that the BCS continues to separate and create a second tier within Division I,'' a coach from a smaller conference said. "That would be really bad for the game. March Madness is special because of the [George] Masons, VCUs and Butlers.''
The additional money that men's basketball players will receive due to the newly NCAA-allowed cost of attendance will be a recruiting advantage for some, according to an ESPN survey.
One coach from a conference considered just outside the Power 5 elaborated on his biggest concern: "The Power 5 schools breaking off from everyone else and forming their own association.''
The uncertainty has caused real angst with one coach, who asked, "Where will non-football schools be in 10-15 years from now?''
Another coach from a perennial one-bid league added: "There are more schools that are being forced to deal with what is being decided. It's no different than taxation without true representation.''
The survey also showed a split among some coaches -- depending on region -- on starting the regular season after the college football season ends. In addition, more would like to see the regular-season champion receive an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament in addition to the postseason tournament champ.
The only conference in which such a rule applies is the Ivy League, which doesn't have a conference tournament.
Conferences decide which schools will receive automatic berths to the NCAA tournament, and, other than the Ivy League, each has designated the conference tournament champion as the recipient.
"I would like to see the conference regular-season winner get the automatic bid,'' a coach from a Power 5 conference said. "The season is way too long. But giving the automatic bid to the regular season would make it more important.''
However, unbalanced schedules that prevent a true regular-season champ would be one problem a number of conferences would have with this format. The 10-member Big 12 is the only Power 5 conference that plays a true round-robin schedule. The 10-team, non-football-playing Big East also plays a similar schedule but is not in the Power 5.
"You should make the league champion of the regular season the automatic qualifier without a doubt,'' a coach from a Power 5 conference said. "But I do think doing that for the regular-season champion would make a lot of conference tournaments go away. When I was at the [one-bid conference] level, our season was three days in March.''
One coach from a conference that hasn't had multiple bids in more than 15 years added: "To make the regular season more meaningful, each of the automatic bid conferences should get two bids -- one for the regular season and one for the tourney champ. If the same team wins both, then you add to the at-large pool. This would require increasing the size of the tourney, but it would allow for the regular season to mean something and help all the schools that are not in a power conference. We already have the play-in games. It would just be more of them. Pretty simple.''
One idea a coach from a school out of the Power 5 floated is to create flex scheduling late in the season for television purposes to ensure the most intriguing games are highlighted across the sport. Currently, games on TV are predetermined.
"We need to do a better job of branding specific leagues and their style of play,'' the coach said. "Watching the Big East and ACC games used to be an event, but with the realignment, it's hard to establish new rivalries.''
There are schools like Kentucky, Kansas, Duke, North Carolina, Creighton, Villanova and Xavier at which garnering interest in regular-season games is never an issue -- even against their football-focused counterparts.
One coach from a one-bid conference added his take on the best way for college basketball to have more early-season relevance: "Hope that the NFL goes on strike.''
But pushing the start of the regular season to Thanksgiving or into December so college basketball could be a one-semester sport would run counter to programming on ESPN, CBS and Fox, as well as contractual agreements with in-season holiday tournaments.
"I know what it's like to be at a football school,'' one coach who used to be at a Power 5 school said. "Fans won't be fully committed to basketball usually until after football is over. ... At schools with great football programs, those basketball teams suffer. Their fan bases don't have two heartbeats; they have one, and the heartbeat is what sport is in season. During football season, the fans go to football. When football is over, they go to basketball.''
Pushing the NCAA tournament deeper into April or May is unlikely to happen as long as CBS owns any of the rights, with the Final Four as the lead-in to the Masters.
"If we could get the sponsors to do May Madness instead of March Madness, it makes a lot of sense to make it a one-semester sport,'' a Power 5 conference coach said. "Move the start date from November to late December. It would be great -- academically. But it's a huge paradigm shift for everyone involved.''
-
I love coaches, but there are reasons they don't run the sport:
**Having potentially two bids per conference, for regular and tournament champ, is an absolute non starter. Talk to your conference about it. They are the ones that make the decision about how to crown a champion. (They choose the tournament because it makes the tournament rights valuable.)
**Starting the season after college football ends is also never going to happen. The tournament falls in a perfect time frame - after the football playoffs and before the Masters and baseball. The NCAA isn't going to sacrifice $$$ to get larger in-person crowds during the first few weeks of the year.
**The P5 isn't going anywhere as long as they get their way with regards to football.
-
ugh - i hate this - even as a diehard college football fan - I would say start the season in late December and do the two bid system for the little guys suggested - but I only say this to prevent what looks to be feared by many as an uglier alternative
-
This is the biggest reason Wojo will not stay at MU his whole career.
-
The "Power 5" are not going to break away from the rest of the sport.
That said, f*ck college football.
-
DeCourcy's response:
Michael DeCourcy @tsnmike 3m3 minutes ago
Chock full of truly terrible, self-serving, tunnel-visioned ideas from college hoops coaches.
-
I still refuse to believe the P5 (or future P4x16?) would ever just completely splinter off all by themselves. 65 teams just isn't enough to create drama around a season, and killing the 64-team tournament can't possibly be their goal. Instead, I can see them leading a less severe splinter whereas the P5 jump and invite (under beneficial terms to themselves) the Big East, AAC, MWC, A10, WCC, CUSA, IVY, MVC, and maybe a few others.
-
The Power 5 could create their own tournament and it would do just fine. It wouldn't get the huge numbers like the current tournament does, but you are talking about the biggest schools with the largest alumni bases. And you wouldn't have to split revenue with the NCAA or the rest of the conferences.
And how would the viewership numbers be for the "Non-Power 5" tournament? Pretty dismal in comparison.
It would be like when the Indy Racing League broke off from CART in the mid-90s. It was ugly and brutal, but eventually the IRL won out because it had the marquee event (Indy 500) and eventually attracted the best drivers.
But I don't think it's going to happen.
-
I still refuse to believe the P5 (or future P4x16?) would ever just completely splinter off all by themselves. 65 teams just isn't enough to create drama around a season, and killing the 64-team tournament can't possibly be their goal. Instead, I can see them leading a less severe splinter whereas the P5 jump and invite (under beneficial terms to themselves) the Big East, AAC, MWC, A10, WCC, CUSA, IVY, MVC, and maybe a few others.
This I could see. Which wouldn't really hurt the Big East at all. This is basically what it is now (minus the low majors), but with the BCS schools running the show instead of the corrupt NCAA. I am confident that the Big East schools will all be just fine. The tin hat stuff is hilarious.
-
The Power 5 could create their own tournament and it would do just fine. It wouldn't get the huge numbers like the current tournament does, but you are talking about the biggest schools with the largest alumni bases. And you wouldn't have to split revenue with the NCAA or the rest of the conferences.
And how would the viewership numbers be for the "Non-Power 5" tournament? Pretty dismal in comparison.
It would be like when the Indy Racing League broke off from CART in the mid-90s. It was ugly and brutal, but eventually the IRL won out because it had the marquee event (Indy 500) and eventually attracted the best drivers.
But I don't think it's going to happen.
But didn't that also coincide with the huge emergence of NASCAR? If they do this, wouldn't they open up a vulnerability to something else. IMO, if they kill the NCAA Tournament they are never getting it back. They'll get something, but it will be much weaker.
-
This I could see. Which wouldn't really hurt the Big East at all. This is basically what it is now (minus the low majors), but with the BCS schools running the show instead of the corrupt NCAA. I am confident that the Big East schools will all be just fine. The tin hat stuff is hilarious.
Are you actually insinuating the NCAA is more corrupt than the BCS?
-
Are you actually insinuating the NCAA is more corrupt than the BCS?
Not really. Just saying that the BCS schools running the show wouldn't be all that different from what we have now with the NCAA. This stuff may ultimately be really bad for low majors, but a 5 conference "national championship" would dilute the interest in the NCAA tournament significantly. This I could see:
I still refuse to believe the P5 (or future P4x16?) would ever just completely splinter off all by themselves. 65 teams just isn't enough to create drama around a season, and killing the 64-team tournament can't possibly be their goal. Instead, I can see them leading a less severe splinter whereas the P5 jump and invite (under beneficial terms to themselves) the Big East, AAC, MWC, A10, WCC, CUSA, IVY, MVC, and maybe a few others.
Which really wouldn't be an earth shattering change for the Big East. What I am insinuating, is that none of this is going to happen soon, and if it does happen, the BE schools will be just fine. The BE will remain better than a couple P5 conferences each and every year, and the BCS would be idiotic to cut that out.
-
I say we should just break off and make a catholic league. I kid. I do agree with the regular season champion from those lower leagues, I think it'd lead to a more exciting NCAA tournament.
-
I say we should just break off and make a catholic league. I kid. I do agree with the regular season champion from those lower leagues, I think it'd lead to a more exciting NCAA tournament.
I'm not convinced it would make the NCAA tournament that much more exciting. Marginal at best.
One thing it would do is destroy the excitement around the conference tournaments. Those smaller tournaments are some of the most fun basketball to watch. Those games would be for naught.
-
I'm not convinced it would make the NCAA tournament that much more exciting. Marginal at best.
One thing it would do is destroy the excitement around the conference tournaments. Those smaller tournaments are some of the most fun basketball to watch. Those games would be for naught.
I respect that opinion but I maintain that if the smaller conferences could actually bring their best teams in they might have a fighting chance at advancing and gaining notoriety then. For me the NCAA tournament is more exciting when Davidson or Wichita State, or VCU or Butler advance. And how many of those teams could've advanced to but never got the chance because they were off in their conference tournament?
-
I respect that opinion but I maintain that if the smaller conferences could actually bring their best teams in they might have a fighting chance at advancing and gaining notoriety then. For me the NCAA tournament is more exciting when Davidson or Wichita State, or VCU or Butler advance. And how many of those teams could've advanced to but never got the chance because they were off in their conference tournament?
From those types of mid-majors? Very few. If you are the regular season champ of the A10 or MVC (which those schools are) you are very likely going to make the tournament regardless. And the years Butler was in the Final Four, they would have made the tournament had they won the Horizon tournament or not.
But low major schools? I doubt conferences like the Northeast are going to represent well regardless of who they send.
-
If those teams can't win their conference tournament, what makes you think they can advance in the NCAA?
-
From those types of mid-majors? Very few. If you are the regular season champ of the A10 or MVC (which those schools are) you are very likely going to make the tournament regardless. And the years Butler was in the Final Four, they would have made the tournament had they won the Horizon tournament or not.
But low major schools? I doubt conferences like the Northeast are going to represent well regardless of who they send.
Agree. There would be very negligible change in the amount of underdogs winning. In fact the team that wins the tournament may be better than the regular season champ by tourney time anyway. That tiny difference is not enough to kill the conference tourneys, which are loads of fun.
-
But didn't that also coincide with the huge emergence of NASCAR? If they do this, wouldn't they open up a vulnerability to something else. IMO, if they kill the NCAA Tournament they are never getting it back. They'll get something, but it will be much weaker.
I've always thought that if those conferences split off, that it would open the door for the other conferences like the Big East to start paying players and get the best talent.
-
From those types of mid-majors? Very few. If you are the regular season champ of the A10 or MVC (which those schools are) you are very likely going to make the tournament regardless. And the years Butler was in the Final Four, they would have made the tournament had they won the Horizon tournament or not.
But low major schools? I doubt conferences like the Northeast are going to represent well regardless of who they send.
Butler was an 8 seed the second FF year I doubt they'd be in without winning that tournament.
Last year 16-17 Hampton made it instead of 25-8 North Carolina Central that went undefeated during conference play. 19-15 UAB instead of 27-9 LA Tech or 27-8 Old Dominion.
I personally believe LA Tech or ODU could've made some better noise than UAB (yes I realize they took down Iowa St)
-
Butler was an 8 seed the second FF year I doubt they'd be in without winning that tournament.
Last year 16-17 Hampton made it instead of 25-8 North Carolina Central that went undefeated during conference play. 19-15 UAB instead of 27-9 LA Tech or 27-8 Old Dominion.
I personally believe LA Tech or ODU could've made some better noise than UAB (yes I realize they took down Iowa St)
You think the defending runner-up who made it as an 8 seed would have been shut out had they not won the Horizon tournament?
And North Carolina Central, ODU or La Tech weren't going to make any additional progress than the conference tournament winners did.
And regardless, it is up to the conference who their champion is. Not the NCAA. The conferences have determined that it is best to have their conference tournament champion make the NCAAs. (Mostly for financial reasons.)
-
I'm really getting sick of this constant carping from some coaches and league officials about how the regular season champ should get an automatic bid. If you coach a team outside the top 8 conferences your season should be meaningful because your goal should be to win games and have a good season. It should not be all about getting into the NCAA tournament. Lets face it any team that has a legitimate shot at WINNING the national championship is going to get an at large bid even if they didn't win their tournament. For those that win the regular season but lose in their tournament, you weren't going to win the national title anyway, enjoy the fact that you had a good season. If your really that good win the NIT. Its not the NCAA's job to admit all these secondary teams so that their coaches can say "I took us to the tournament". Jeez, the next thing you know there will be a call for these small conference teams to play someone other than a #1 seed so that have a legitimate chance to Win a game in the NCAA tourney as a reward for having a good season. Where does it stop.
-
You think the defending runner-up who made it as an 8 seed would have been shut out had they not won the Horizon tournament?
And North Carolina Central, ODU or La Tech weren't going to make any additional progress than the conference tournament winners did.
And regardless, it is up to the conference who their champion is. Not the NCAA. The conferences have determined that it is best to have their conference tournament champion make the NCAAs. (Mostly for financial reasons.)
Yes I do. How many times has the Horizon gotten multiple bids? Last time was 2009 so I just doubt it. I know it's not the NCAA that decides doesn't change my opinion. I would be very confident that LA Tech would've made noise on par or better than UAB.
The bottom line is the NCAA tournament is supposed to be the tournament of the best teams and some of the best teams aren't in it. Think back to 2012 if Murray St hadn't won their conference tournament it would've been a travesty to have a one loss team not make the NCAA tournament.
-
Considering that March Madness, the NCAA and CBS/Turner are in the beginning of a 14-year, $10.8 Billion contract, anyone that thinks there will be widespread changes during that time are just flat-out wrong. Nothing (major) is changing to the tournament until that deal runs out in the mid-2020s. That deal that was signed also included language to bump the tournament to 68 teams (from 64), so 68 is staying for awhile too.
Everyone needs to remember that the NCAA moves at a snail's pace. It took them nearly 10 years to create the College Football Playoff. It took them even longer to come up with the Bowl Championship Series. Even if non-Power 5 schools should worry (which they shouldn't be), they would take solace in the fact that nothing major will change for the foreseeable future.
Marquette and the Big East will be included in the P5 discussions, if a breakaway is to ever occur.
-
Yes I do. How many times has the Horizon gotten multiple bids? Last time was 2009 so I just doubt it.
It's not about the conferences. It's about the teams. The selection committee doesn't say "well I would invite them as an at large, but they are from the Horizon League."
There were 13 at-large teams seeded below them in this tournament. Do you really think the Horizon League championship victory over UWM allowed them to jump over all 13 of these teams?
-
The whole charm of the NCAA tourney is that it has a format that enables the underdogs who are hot to make a tourney run. A great script for TV viewership and fan participation. I don't see any economic reason for it to change.
Regular Season conference champs who lose in their league tournament and don't get an at large bid are automatically qualified for the NIT
I really like our double round robin schedule in the Big East makes for a meaningful regular season and build rivalries. We are in a good place.
-
So I ran through those conferences which the regular season winner was different than the tournament winner and here is what I got ignoring the major conferences where the tourney winner would've received an at-large anyways:
Big South: We would have had 23-10 High Point instead of 24-10 Coastal Carolina
Big West: We would have had 25-7 UC Davis instead of 21-13 UC Irvine
C USA: We would have had 27-9 Louisana Tech instead of 20-16 UAB who went on to beat Iowa State
MAAC: We would have had 26-9 Iona instead of 19-14 Manhattan
MEAC: We would had had 25-8 North Carolina Central instead of 16-16 Hampton
Mountain West: We would have had an extra at-large bid instead of 25-10 Wyoming (San Diego St won the regular season)
Northeast: We would have had 23-12 St. Francis instead of 20-15 Robert Morris
Ohio Valley: We would have had 29-6 Murray State instead of 22-11 Belmont
Patriot League: We would have had 19-15 Bucknell instead of 20-13 Lafayette
Save for Murray State over Belmont and an additional at-large bid over Wyoming, I highly doubt there would have been more excitement had the regular season winners been included. Additionally, we would have lost on the excitement that was UAB upsetting Iowa State.
Additionally, we would have lost ALL of the excitement from the 21 other conference tournaments which received only 1 bid.
-
The whole charm of the NCAA tourney is that it has a format that enables the underdogs who are hot to make a tourney run. A great script for TV viewership and fan participation. I don't see any economic reason for it to change.
Except the highest rated games are those involving top level teams. Everyone likes the ideas of the Cinderellas, just that comparatively fewer people watch them when they play next.
-
The first weekend of the NCAA tournament is among the best weekends in sports.
64 schools show up. Their alumni base and students, to a greater or lesser extent, are in the arena. The atmosphere is electric. I'll never forget the UCSB Gauchos (I think) at Milwaukee.
The television aura also is electric. Where else are you going to get Charles Barkley talking about the nuances of Coastal Carolina's defense? Or Murray State? It's a great time.
Over the years, I've been to tournament games in Knoxville (twice, once at Stokley Athletic Center to watch a Choneless Warriors led by Larry McNeill and Bob lackey beat up on Miami of Ohio and once against Duke at Thompson-Bolling Arena), Nashville (lost to Indiana and Bobby Knight), Milwaukee (not involving us), Indianapolis (the Holy Cross game and the infamous Steve Novak game), Minneapolis (DWade's greatest moment), Winston-Salem (when Tom Crean had his head handed to him by his mentor), Cleveland (when we beat Syracuse), St. Louis (when DWade lost to Tulsa -- yuck) and probably a couple of places I don't remember.
As the Hillbilly used to say, "why mess with happy?" Especially when Happy is kicking off massive cash flow.
-
So I ran through those conferences which the regular season winner was different than the tournament winner and here is what I got ignoring the major conferences where the tourney winner would've received an at-large anyways:
Big South: We would have had 23-10 High Point instead of 24-10 Coastal Carolina
Big West: We would have had 25-7 UC Davis instead of 21-13 UC Irvine
C USA: We would have had 27-9 Louisana Tech instead of 20-16 UAB who went on to beat Iowa State
MAAC: We would have had 26-9 Iona instead of 19-14 Manhattan
MEAC: We would had had 25-8 North Carolina Central instead of 16-16 Hampton
Mountain West: We would have had an extra at-large bid instead of 25-10 Wyoming (San Diego St won the regular season)
Northeast: We would have had 23-12 St. Francis instead of 20-15 Robert Morris
Ohio Valley: We would have had 29-6 Murray State instead of 22-11 Belmont
Patriot League: We would have had 19-15 Bucknell instead of 20-13 Lafayette
Save for Murray State over Belmont and an additional at-large bid over Wyoming, I highly doubt there would have been more excitement had the regular season winners been included. Additionally, we would have lost on the excitement that was UAB upsetting Iowa State.
Additionally, we would have lost ALL of the excitement from the 21 other conference tournaments which received only 1 bid.
Last year was actually a pretty poor example of my point. UAB pulled off a great upset, I'd still rather have watched LA tech or ODU in that game. Belmont is a program I respect but Murray State definitely should've been there. And you really think that Hampton at .500 was comparable to excitement that NCC was?
We spent a massive thread complaining about the nonconference slate this year yet at the same time we are for letting some of those teams into the NCAA tournament? I'm sorry I just think the tournament should be for the best teams.
-
And you really think that Hampton at .500 was comparable to excitement that NCC was?
We spent a massive thread complaining about the nonconference slate this year yet at the same time we are for letting some of those teams into the NCAA tournament? I'm sorry I just think the tournament should be for the best teams.
I don't think Hampton was comparable, but I don't think we missed out on much. Definitely not worth losing the watchability of the conference tournaments so I can see NCC instead of Hampton in the NCAAs.
-
I've said it once, I'll say it again....
As long as Nova, Georgetown and Marquette stick together, all three will be just fine.
-
I'm sorry I just think the tournament should be for the best teams.
The tournament hasn't been about the "best teams" ever since the automatic bid things was launched. Its about keeping the season interesting for all teams as long as possible. Heck even after our dismal season we still watched the BE tourney knowing there was some very small chance that MU could still get into the NCAA tournament if we won out.
But going back to your "Best Teams" argument I would have to assume that the worst miscarriage of justice in your eyes last year was Hampton replacing NC Central. So lets look at NC Centrals non-con record to see how good a season they had and how big a miscarriage of justice this was.
NC Central lost to North Carolina by 16, to Creighton by 20, to Cincinnati by 9, to Maryland by 11 and finally to Memphis by 34 to end their non-con season. So was this that big a problem that they were left out?
-
The tournament hasn't been about the "best teams" ever since the automatic bid things was launched. Its about keeping the season interesting for all teams as long as possible. Heck even after our dismal season we still watched the BE tourney knowing there was some very small chance that MU could still get into the NCAA tournament if we won out.
But going back to your "Best Teams" argument I would have to assume that the worst miscarriage of justice in your eyes last year was Hampton replacing NC Central. So lets look at NC Centrals non-con record to see how good a season they had and how big a miscarriage of justice this was.
NC Central lost to North Carolina by 16, to Creighton by 20, to Cincinnati by 9, to Maryland by 11 and finally to Memphis by 34 to end their non-con season. So was this that big a problem that they were left out?
It likely would've been a better game than Hampton though and actually would belong there having done the work all year.
-
I like that every team has a chance at the big dance until they lose in their conference tourney (excluding the ivy league). I think it keeps things interesting
-
MU needs a football team.
Not like we don't have the $$ for it. That new sports complex could have been a football stadium. Then we wouldn't have to worry about this.
-
I've always thought that if those conferences split off, that it would open the door for the other conferences like the Big East to start paying players and get the best talent.
It's a lot cheaper to pay 13 basketball players than 70 football players (plus 13 basketball players).
-
MU needs a football team.
Not like we don't have the $$ for it. That new sports complex could have been a football stadium. Then we wouldn't have to worry about this.
Yeah it's worked great for uconn we need one too!
-
Last year was actually a pretty poor example of my point. UAB pulled off a great upset, I'd still rather have watched LA tech or ODU in that game. Belmont is a program I respect but Murray State definitely should've been there. And you really think that Hampton at .500 was comparable to excitement that NCC was?
We spent a massive thread complaining about the nonconference slate this year yet at the same time we are for letting some of those teams into the NCAA tournament? I'm sorry I just think the tournament should be for the best teams.
Utopia: not happening anytime soon.
What you think is nice, but (as has been said) the deal is the NCAA lets the conferences decide that. If the conferences are willing to sacrifice their best teams on a regular basis in order to increase revenue from their postseason tournament, then their best teams will regularly be eliminated. Unless, of course, you're willing to limit the Big East to two or three teams appearing each year so that lower rated conferences can send both their regular season and tournament champions each year. What would that do for your wish to have the best teams there?
A very good argument could be made that UAB was a better team than La Tech at the time of the NCAA tournament, otherwise how would they have won their conference tournament? It's nice to reward a team for consistency throughout the year, but you'll get a better NCAA opponent when you choose the the team that's hot at the time of the tournament.
-
MU needs a football team.
Not like we don't have the $$ for it. That new sports complex could have been a football stadium. Then we wouldn't have to worry about this.
What you don't know about college football could fill many MUScoop threads. Heck, it has.
-
MU needs a football team.
Not like we don't have the $$ for it. That new sports complex could have been a football stadium. Then we wouldn't have to worry about this.
Marquette doesn't have the money for it. Other than that, this is a great idea.
-
Butler was an 8 seed the second FF year I doubt they'd be in without winning that tournament.
Last year 16-17 Hampton made it instead of 25-8 North Carolina Central that went undefeated during conference play. 19-15 UAB instead of 27-9 LA Tech or 27-8 Old Dominion.
I personally believe LA Tech or ODU could've made some better noise than UAB (yes I realize they took down Iowa St)
The Horizon had a 3 way tie in 2011. Under the proposed system Butler would probably have not made the tournament that year without winning the tournament due to not enough bids to go around.
-
MU needs a football team.
Not like we don't have the $$ for it. That new sports complex could have been a football stadium. Then we wouldn't have to worry about this.
How many private urban schools have successful high D1 football programs? I count two ... USC and "The U." Both have been around 100 years and both are in nice weather.
Bill Gates could give MU a billion dollars to start a football team and not only would it not be successful, but it would drag down our basketball program like Uconn is dragging down their basketball program.
I cannot think of one scenario where this is a good idea.
Mods ... any poster that calls for MU to start football should be banned for a month.
-
Well it's just a crapshoot!
-
How many private urban schools have successful high D1 football programs? I count two ... USC and "The U." Both have been around 100 years and both are in nice weather.
Bill Gates could give MU a billion dollars to start a football team and not only would it not be successful, but it would drag down our basketball program like Uconn is dragging down their basketball program.
I cannot think of one scenario where this is a good idea.
Mods ... any poster that calls for MU to start football should be banned for a month.
If everybody who claimed an impossible, irrational, or ignorant solution were banned, it would get awfully quiet in these parts in a hurry.
-
Holy testicle Tuesday. I got owned on that MU football idea. All fair points around gang!
-
Holy testicle Tuesday. I got owned on that MU football idea. All fair points around gang!
Actually I think Football would be a good thing for MU. Have a team in the Pioneer Football League which is no scholarships. Would be a lot of fun. The administration made a bad decision in 1960. Needs to be reversed.
-
I just don't understand why the powers that be just share the TV contract terms with these knuckleheads. The P5 cannot go on their own and take all the money with them from the basketball tournament. The contract is written in such a way that nothing is going to happen at the earliest until the next deal, which is well into the next decade.
-
It's a lot cheaper to pay 13 basketball players than 70 football players (plus 13 basketball players).
Exactly, it's where we have an advantage being smaller and not having football. We wouldn't even have to pay 13 since all NCAA rules would be out the window at that point, maybe something smaller like 10.
-
What should occur is Division I football at the FBS level should just split off from the NCAA. Even though there is the College Football Playoff it is still not an official NCAA Championship event, hence why it has it's own trophy instead of the standard NCAA Championship trophy used in every other sport.
If the non-power 5 conferences do not want to join them for football then they revert to FCS.
Personally I do not see anything happening now that they are allowing for "true" cost to be covered. Plus the Big East had already mentioned that any rules that the Power 5 implements, they will implement as well.
Not having football actually works to our advantage in this situation because it is not another cost that a mid-level football school with 84 scholarship players has to cover. I'm not sure what the cost per scholarship athlete will be but 13 is a lot easier to fund than 97.
-
It likely would've been a better game than Hampton though and actually would belong there having done the work all year.
But they didn't do the work all year, and that's the point. They stunk against actual tourney teams, as pointed out above, and lost their conference tourney. So at best they did slightly better work for part of the year. And it still wouldn't have mattered because it's unlikely that they would have done any better in the tourney.
-
But they didn't do the work all year, and that's the point. They stunk against actual tourney teams, as pointed out above, and lost their conference tourney. So at best they did slightly better work for part of the year. And it still wouldn't have mattered because it's unlikely that they would have done any better in the tourney.
Dude occasionally teams drop big games. The year we won the BE championship we lost to UWGB. Does that mean that UWGB was better than us? What if that type of pitiful performance were to happen in the conference tournament in a one bid league? The 09-10 year we don't make the tournament without winning two games in the BE tournament, what if we came out looking like we did against depaul that year? It happens but we get some leeway because we can get at large bids, the majority of teams in the NCAA don't.
-
Actually I think Football would be a good thing for MU. Have a team in the Pioneer Football League which is no scholarships. Would be a lot of fun. The administration made a bad decision in 1960. Needs to be reversed.
Non-scholarship D1 football is useless. Plus it gets you no closer to a P5 conference membership, so really what is the point? Because it's "a lot of fun?"
-
Dude occasionally teams drop big games. The year we won the BE championship we lost to UWGB. Does that mean that UWGB was better than us? What if that type of pitiful performance were to happen in the conference tournament in a one bid league? The 09-10 year we don't make the tournament without winning two games in the BE tournament, what if we came out looking like we did against depaul that year? It happens but we get some leeway because we can get at large bids, the majority of teams in the NCAA don't.
Even if the regular season champ is marginally better, it doesn't really make that much of a difference. It really is only marginal.
Plus the conferences are free to do this now. But they don't. Why do you suppose that is?
-
I just don't understand why the powers that be just share the TV contract terms with these knuckleheads. The P5 cannot go on their own and take all the money with them from the basketball tournament. The contract is written in such a way that nothing is going to happen at the earliest until the next deal, which is well into the next decade.
How do you think this will affect athletic scholarships for D1 basketball once this contract expires.
-
I just don't understand why the powers that be just share the TV contract terms with these knuckleheads. The P5 cannot go on their own and take all the money with them from the basketball tournament. The contract is written in such a way that nothing is going to happen at the earliest until the next deal, which is well into the next decade.
The P5 can leave the NCAA and form their own tournament and contract out its rights however. You think CBS is gonna pay that amount of money "well into the next decade" for a tournament that doesn't include the P5 conferences?
-
Even if the regular season champ is marginally better, it doesn't really make that much of a difference. It really is only marginal.
Plus the conferences are free to do this now. But they don't. Why do you suppose that is?
How many other versions of Lehigh over Duke, Norfolk State over Missouri, Florida Gulf Coast over Georgetown or Ohio over Georgetown, Mecer over Duke, Georgia State over Baylor, have we missed out on because that little margin could've provided a better match up? Better coaching? More experienced players? There's no way you're gonna tell me you'd rather watch 1, 2 and 3 seeds demolish wayyy inferior teams every year than than at least see the true best team from that conference give them a fighting chance.
-
How many other versions of Lehigh over Duke, Norfolk State over Missouri, Florida Gulf Coast over Georgetown or Ohio over Georgetown, Mecer over Duke, Georgia State over Baylor, have we missed out on because that little margin could've provided a better match up? Better coaching? More experienced players? There's no way you're gonna tell me you'd rather watch 1, 2 and 3 seeds demolish wayyy inferior teams every year than than at least see the true best team from that conference give them a fighting chance.
How many other versions? Probably a few but not many.
Would I rather watch the team that performs best over the regular season play in the NCAA tournament, probably. However, as others have noted before, the teams that win the tournament are playing hot at that time, so I think there is a lot to that.
And most importantly, I am willing to give up watching marginally better teams in the NCAA for maybe 8-10 conferences (usually the regular season champ wins the conference tournament), in order to watch 21 one-bid league's conference tournaments actually be exciting.
If the regular season champ moved on to the NCAA, I would have 0 interest in watching any of the smaller conference's tournaments.
-
How many other versions of Lehigh over Duke, Norfolk State over Missouri, Florida Gulf Coast over Georgetown or Ohio over Georgetown, Mecer over Duke, Georgia State over Baylor, have we missed out on because that little margin could've provided a better match up?
Very few. And really, even if I conceded that was the case, I don't really care. I like some upsets. They are fun on some level. But really when it gets down to the S16 or E8, I just want good basketball teams and good basketball games. Not once have I said, "man, I love the NCAA tournament and all, but I would love it even more if a couple more low major teams won some games."
And again, the conferences must realize this too.
-
Very few. And really, even if I conceded that was the case, I don't really care. I like some upsets. They are fun on some level. But really when it gets down to the S16 or E8, I just want good basketball teams and good basketball games. Not once have I said, "man, I love the NCAA tournament and all, but I would love it even more if a couple more low major teams won some games."
And again, the conferences must realize this too.
Then we don't watch the tournament with the same intent. I like to see the best teams in their conferences playing great games. I completely agree about the sweet 16 or elite 8, though I'd be happier to see LA tech take out a very overrated UCLA team than a hot UAB team get beat by them.
WarriorinNYC, I'd give the tournament champ the auto bid to the NIT, or runner up if it's the Regular season champ. I understand it's not as exciting but that's why I'm saying what I'd prefer without making any mention of money.
-
WarriorinNYC, I'd give the tournament champ the auto bid to the NIT, or runner up if it's the Regular season champ. I understand it's not as exciting but that's why I'm saying what I'd prefer without making any mention of money.
Sure, that may be nice. But again, I sure as hell wouldn't watch their conference tournaments. Loses almost all of the excitement in my book.
-
Very few. And really, even if I conceded that was the case, I don't really care. I like some upsets. They are fun on some level. But really when it gets down to the S16 or E8, I just want good basketball teams and good basketball games. Not once have I said, "man, I love the NCAA tournament and all, but I would love it even more if a couple more low major teams won some games."
And again, the conferences must realize this too.
Also, how many of those upsets occurred because a team that was running hot through their conference tournament extended that for a game or two in the NCAAs? As opposed to another mediocre team that had a good regular season and lost their first conference tournament game, sat around for a while, then went up against a team from a major conference.
-
Bill Gates could give MU a billion dollars to start a football team and not only would it not be successful, but it would drag down our basketball program like Uconn is dragging down their basketball program.
Funny.
NC's in 99, 04, 11, 14. That's pretty good.
One could argue that UConn is the last non-football school to win a NC in basketball. Of course, only the 99 championship would count. Others would argue that the school already made the investment to move up in football....so maybe 99 doesnt count.
If football is such a huge drag on schools, why dont non-football schools win more often in basketball? 1985?
UConn also got their second Top 40 commitment in the 2016 class. If they didnt play football, maybe they would have three by now? :o
-
Funny.
NC's in 99, 04, 11, 14. That's pretty good.
One could argue that UConn is the last non-football school to win a NC in basketball. Of course, only the 99 championship would count. Others would argue that the school already made the investment to move up in football....so maybe 99 doesnt count.
If football is such a huge drag on schools, why dont non-football schools win more often in basketball? 1985?
UConn also got their second Top 40 commitment in the 2016 class. If they didnt play football, maybe they would have three by now? :o
And don't those Top 40 recruits (and a 3rd in the top 100) know that UConn has been permanently damaged by playing in a league with UCF and East Carolina and Tulane?
-
Even if the regular season champ is marginally better, it doesn't really make that much of a difference. It really is only marginal.
Plus the conferences are free to do this now. But they don't. Why do you suppose that is?
A$ long as conferece$ decide and make money off conference tournament$, I $eriou$ly doubt we'll $ee change$.
-
Then we don't watch the tournament with the same intent. I like to see the best teams in their conferences playing great games. I completely agree about the sweet 16 or elite 8, though I'd be happier to see LA tech take out a very overrated UCLA team than a hot UAB team get beat by them.
WarriorinNYC, I'd give the tournament champ the auto bid to the NIT, or runner up if it's the Regular season champ. I understand it's not as exciting but that's why I'm saying what I'd prefer without making any mention of money.
Trust me. The coaches who filled out this survey and the league officials who constantly bring this up are not talking about sending the regular season champ INSTEAD OF the conference tournament winner. They are talking about AND, BOTH. So in your watching the tournament for the best games "drive" if this goes through you will see more Coastal Carolina as 9-12 seeds with more Top Conference At Large bids eliminated. So instead of Tenn playing Georgia in the 8-9 or 7-10 game it will be Georgia playing Coastal Carolina and Tenn will be out of the tournament.
Its fine the way it is. You have just enough mid and low majors to make it interesting AND you have enough teams that the high majors that are left out don't have a big beef that they were good enough that they could have reached the E8 or F4.
-
How many private urban schools have successful high D1 football programs? I count two ... USC and "The U." Both have been around 100 years and both are in nice weather.
Bill Gates could give MU a billion dollars to start a football team...
I cannot think of one scenario where this is a good idea.
If we received a generous donation from Bill and Melinda to build a football program, it would take a lot more than $1 billion to get into a Power 5 conference.
Consider that:
1) Marquette would need a stadium. Figure between 60,000 and 80,000 seats with contingency to go to between 90,000 and 100,000 (the "Big House", Neyland Stadium, Bryant-Denney Stadium etc.). Figure at least $700 million for the stadium, including land, infrastructure, construction etc. Not to mention the $100 million Marquette will spend in legal costs fighting the city, county and state on location, infrastructure and noise.
2) Marquette would need a practice facility and football center. Figure another $200 million all-in for these items.
3) Marquette would need an athletic dorm. McCormick Hall just won't do. Figure we either buy the Pfister Hotel or we build an Athletic Dorm capable of housing an elite football team. Figure $50 million at least.
4) A high Division 1 level coaching staff would probably cost $10.0 million per year. Plus administrative and operational support.
By my math, we've spent the billion and we've yet to have a football player on campus. Better ask for $2 billion from Bill and Melinda. And then, we have a record in the BIG or the ACC for most of existing Scoopers' lifetimes that would make Vanderbilt look like the University of Alabama or The Ohio State University. And, we will be fourth-rate in Wisconsin behind the Packers, nobody and Becky "Choke" Badger.
-
This is stupid.
What makes March Madness so magical is one simple concept:
When conference tournaments start, any of 335 (of the 350 D-I) teams can win the tournament. All you need to do is keep winning. The same holds true for most state HS tournaments across the nation.
This simple, fundamental concept what sets HS and college basketball aside from just about every other organized sport in the amateur and professional ranks... when the tourney starts, everyone is in and anyone can win.
Anyone advocating that regular season champs should get an auto-bid should know that their position is basically the NIT of arguments on the matter... it certainly held its own back in the day, but it's irrelevant now.
-
This is stupid.
What makes March Madness so magical is one simple concept:
When conference tournaments start, any of 335 (of the 350 D-I) teams can win the tournament. All you need to do is keep winning. The same holds true for most state HS tournaments across the nation.
This simple, fundamental concept what sets HS and college basketball aside from just about every other organized sport in the amateur and professional ranks... when the tourney starts, everyone is in and anyone can win.
Anyone advocating that regular season champs should get an auto-bid should know that their position is basically the NIT of arguments on the matter... it certainly held its own back in the day, but it's irrelevant now.
Benny is sooooooo right on this one.
-
One other aspect that hasn't been raised.
If you went down the road of allowing both the regular season champ and the tournament champ in wouldn't there be a powerful incentive in the low majors to "make sure" that the regular season champ DIDN'T win the Conference Championship. They could give the conference 2 bids instead of one and the money for an additional bid each year would be huge for the low majors. Remember these are the same teams that play 10 buy games in non con each year for the money. The conference tournaments are very close. A foul here or a non call there could change the outcome and surprise, the regular season winner gets knocked out. Its not like the extra win is going to mean much in seeding. These guys are all getting 16 and 15 seeds anyway.
-
Ok all I'm saying is specifically relating to ODU and LA Tech I thought should've been in. Great records, kicked butt all year, great RPI and chose the wrong nights to drop a deuce. I'm also saying that in the very least there should be some type of minimum win requirement to get in because I'm sick of seeing the hamptons of the world get in with .500 records or more annoyingly one of these teams
http://www.totalprosports.com/2013/03/11/worst-ncaa-tournament-teams-of-all-time/#3
-
Ok all I'm saying is specifically relating to ODU and LA Tech I thought should've been in. Great records, kicked butt all year, great RPI and chose the wrong nights to drop a deuce. I'm also saying that in the very least there should be some type of minimum win requirement to get in because I'm sick of seeing the hamptons of the world get in with .500 records or more annoyingly one of these teams
http://www.totalprosports.com/2013/03/11/worst-ncaa-tournament-teams-of-all-time/#3
But ODU wouldn't have gotten in as they didn't win their conference in the regular season.
-
I used to be in the camp of letting in the reg season conf winner too. Then they made the rule that the winner gets an auto bid to the NIT which I think is a fair compromise.
And MU fans have sacrificed for this as it cost us an NIT bid a few years ago.
-
And MU fans have sacrificed for this as it cost us an NIT bid a few years ago.
FIFY
-
I have a thought, what if we had an impartial group of people use the eye test and whatever other criteria they saw fit to decide the number one and number two teams each year? They could then match them up as a one-off, so we guarantee that one of the two best teams wins the championship. We could have similarly ranked teams matched up for guaranteed exciting games. We could call it the Basketball Championship Series, or BCS for short. That way we make sure that none of these garbage sub .500 teams even have a shot. We don't want these upstart teams getting too big for their britches, after all.
(sorry Boxer, meant as a good-natured joke)