Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   The NCAA Men's tourney favors big conferences   (newsok.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

2207 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Mar 2003 at 8:13 AM (13 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



59 Comments   (+0 »)

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2003-03-05 08:18:37 AM  
As well they should. Go Big Ten.
 
2003-03-05 08:19:29 AM  
Vicious circle:

Top schools get best athletes.
Top schools win more tourneys.
Big conferences have top schools.
Top schools get best athletes.

Rinse, repeat.
 
2003-03-05 08:19:35 AM  
That must be why so many conferences use "Big" in their titles.

So get with it, Missouri Valley, or MAAC. Big Mo, Big Maac. Guaranteed more bids.
 
2003-03-05 08:20:54 AM  
Wow, Sherlock, how long did it take you to figure that one out? Next thing you know you're going to be saying the BCS is full of shiat!

Of course, the reverse can also happen. Just look at some mid-majors that are ranked way higher than they should be: Creighton and Dayton. It's no coincidence those two rhyme. Ohhhh no.

Oh, and finally, GO TIGERS! Memphis, not Missouri... or Auburn... or LSU... or any of the thousands of other Tigers in college athletics.
 
2003-03-05 08:24:04 AM  
YAWN

Boobies are cool
 
2003-03-05 08:26:18 AM  
My ass you should limit to 4 teams per league.... The teams who are the best should go, not some crappy teams because they have some stupid limit, I mean c'mon which would you rather watch, a Big Ten vs Big East showdown or MAAC vs Big Ten Showdown......
 
2003-03-05 08:27:44 AM  
Not exactly true, The SEC is pretty big and it looks like they're not gonna have much representation this year. It'll all be OK as long as UT makes the bubble...IF they can win their last two games. They did, afterall, beat #25 Georgia AND #4 Florida withou being in the top 25, have the leading scorer in the league, and the league assist leader.
/shameless UT promotion.
 
2003-03-05 08:33:21 AM  
Well, I'd much rather see a few number 2 teams from some mid-major conferences than see a bunch of number 5, 6, and 7 teams from the big conferences. Of course, I went to the College of Charleston, and I'm biased, especially after 1995 when we had all of three losses on the whole year and got shafted.
 
2003-03-05 08:36:45 AM  
This is no surprise.
Is this constant posting of crap a way to force us all to get totalfark?
 
2003-03-05 08:44:28 AM  
--------
My roomate masturabated last night while I was trying to sleep
 
2003-03-05 08:45:24 AM  
He has a point but I think he dismisses the RPI rating too easily. NC State plays a tougher schedule than does the College of Charleston, for instance. Playing Duke and Maryland 4 times a year probably matches the CoC's toughest out of conference games.
Easy solution. Go to 128 teams. One more round. And nobody can biatch because Podunk U. didn't get an invite to the ball. Not to mention more possibilities for Cinderella teams knocking off big teams. Everybody loves Cinderella teams, except for the fans whose teams lose to them.
 
2003-03-05 08:46:46 AM  
whats the problem?


[image from 216.136.200.194 too old to be available]
 
2003-03-05 08:46:51 AM  
how are you supposed to rank 128 teams?
 
2003-03-05 08:51:11 AM  
Easy solution. Go to 128 teams. One more round. And nobody can biatch because Podunk U. didn't get an invite to the ball.

I suspect that Number 129 will be quite pissed. But then, they're out of luck with either system, aren't they?

how are you supposed to rank 128 teams?

Uh... like you rank 64?
 
2003-03-05 08:53:54 AM  
Jim applauds the whole idea:
[image from cal-mum.com too old to be available]
and says Suck it Irish!
 
2003-03-05 08:55:01 AM  
What, no "Duke sucks" in the title?

/duke sucks
 
2003-03-05 09:02:10 AM  
Nodhg Great game last night.

128 teams solves little, IMO. The #16 seeds have never advanced beyond the first round. So no one ranked 61st or lower has a good argument that they have a shot at the final four or even eight. The key is the exposure a team gets from a first round game, and the great exposure a low seed gets when they win one. What exposure is, say, a 19th seed going to get when it "upsets" a 13th seed? (in the 128 team bracket in my head that's who would be playing.) Not much, and they would get almost certainly get completely drilled by the #3 seed they then have to play.

Arizona will probably completely destroy the 64th best team in the country come tourney time. Does anyone really want to see them play the 128th best team?
 
2003-03-05 09:03:15 AM  
I agree that something needs to be done, but it doesn't all rest on the committee. Smaller schools need to have the oppurtunity to play the big name teams in their out of conference schedule. Here at UNC-Wilmington, we have one of the best defenses, one of the best all-around players in the nation, and a 21-4 record after starting the season 2-3. A team with the same players that took out USC last year, and nearly beat Indiana in the 2nd round of the tourney. Of course, none of that is going to matter, and we won't be able to get into the NCAA tourney, because of being a relatively poor school from a relatively unknown conference, and a bad strength of schedule, with the best teams that we played this year being Texas Tech and College of Charleston (which is also our best win), unless we win the CAA tournament.

So, something needs to be done, whether it lies in the NCAA Selection Committee, or helping the good, unknown teams to be able to go up against the big boys from the big conferences.
 
2003-03-05 09:08:38 AM  
Why, oh why do people with absolutely no interest in sports just HAVE to post something idiotic on sports threads? Not liking sports just means that you don't like sports, that's it. In fact, it may show lack of a well-rounded personality.

I don't think it would be all that hard to find the 128 top teams. The NCAA basketball tournament is probably second only to the Super Bowl in terms of popularity. I think it could survive one more round. Maybe bring some much needed revenue and exposure to smaller programs in the process.
 
2003-03-05 09:10:37 AM  
InfidelCastro:

Your Tigers would just be a middle of the pack team if they played in the SEC. They will probably end up with a #4 seed and lose in the second round, then it's off to UCLA for Mr. Calipari.
 
2003-03-05 09:11:58 AM  
I can't really argue with the system. It rewards teams for doing ok (i.e. 18-12 or something) against a really tough schedule. Your record isn't the only thing that counts in telling how good you are. If you're 22-4 but don't beat any really good teams, not to mention lose to the likes of Marist, Yale, and American (you figure out which team I'm talking about), then you better win your conference tournament, unless you can make up for it with a win over...oh, let's say Kansas. They had one game against a Kansas and they got blown out. Way to show them how much you kick ass.

"But we can only get 1, maybe 2 games against teams like that!"
Can you blame them for not playing you? They have their own resume to worry about. Losing to you guys would put a serious dent in their hopes for a bid.

That's the way it is. Want in? Quit losing to sucky teams. The team I was talking about would be 25-1 without those crappy losses, and would easily get an at-large. I don't like how much the Big 10's, 12's, East's, etc. gobble up the bids, but I can't really argue with it either based on how they do against their schedule.

Hey, they could be using the BCS (whether you Colorado fans like it or not, it works pretty well), so just be happy. At least you have a shot at the national title in this format.

My solution (patent pending):
All 31 automatic bids get 1st round byes. 66 at-large teams square off in play-in games. I'd rather have 2 at-larges in that extra game we have now rather than 2 teams that earned a bid the hard way. This would make the at-larges have to win a "mini-tournament" to make up for losing their conference's tournament.

Duke sucks.
 
2003-03-05 09:13:45 AM  
College of Charleston will scramble for crumbs.

Hey at least they are scrambling..

Go cougs!!

And as far as an easy schedule, well we aren't exactly a huge school, and the College of Charleston did sweep the Great Alaska Shootout. Not bad for a southern school Ya'll
 
2003-03-05 09:14:19 AM  
Yosarian I think it's a decent idea, but I question how much exposure a team is going to get if it plays in one out of 64 games in a 2 or 3 day period. They will only get big exposure if they beat a top 25 team, which is unlikely, because a top 25 team would be at worst a 7 seed, which means they would be playing a 25 seed! (somewhere around the 100th ranked team.)

I think the way to go is to do more Bracket Buster weekends, where some the big fishes in the small ponds play each other, with ESPN televising the whole thing like this year. That will sort out who the real big fishes are.
 
2003-03-05 09:19:02 AM  
[image from totaltapeservices.com too old to be available]
 
2003-03-05 09:22:30 AM  
Ask a simple question: Do teams that fail to finish in the top four on their own block deserve to take a leap at the Final Four? Heck no.
Thats going to piss off a bunch of Missouri fans, MU wouldn't ever make the tourney if they went that way. And as much as I hate MU - MU ranking 5th or 6th in the Big 12 is still better than some shiate team from a no name conference thats ranked 2nd in their conference.
 
2003-03-05 09:27:08 AM  
I really don't see the point in a 128-team tournament, either. If you're not in the top 75 or so, you really don't have any business even being discussed as a possible national champion.

Your Tigers would just be a middle of the pack team if they played in the SEC. They will probably end up with a #4 seed and lose in the second round, then it's off to UCLA for Mr. Calipari.

Hah. Memphis is 2-0 against the $EC so far this season(and I would LOVE to meet up with a Sorry Ethics Conference school in the tourney, especially UT-K... too bad they'll be in the "Calipari Invitational," as their genius of a coach called it). Then again, that's not saying much, though, since the wins came over Old Mrs. and at Arkansas. Those damn $EC schools are dragging our RPI down. Still, the Tigers are 20-5, on a 9-game winning streak, and have defeated three Top-15 teams this season, one at a neutral site to open the season minus several key players and one on the road.

As for the Cal to UCLA remark... It's not happening, and all it really says is that you wish the team you support had a coach like him, and you wish he wasn't in the area. Tough luck, Shirley.
 
2003-03-05 09:29:56 AM  
Strength of schedule should play a big part in the decision making. Teams that do well through a tough season should have a better chance at going to the big dance than a team that spent a season whippin' up on a bunch of cupcakes.

/obvious
 
2003-03-05 09:34:44 AM  
There are many options avialable to allow the smaller teams to get in to the tournament. Personally I think that they should have more play-in games for the little guys. Let them fight amougst each other to see who gets in that way nobody can say they got the shaft. The problem with this is scheduling for these games and they have no marketable value beyond students and alumni.


/Go Louisville Cards
 
2003-03-05 09:45:13 AM  
But still, what do good schools gain by playing crappola schools. Absolutely nothing. A really good school will not play many crappola schools in its out of conference schedule because it kills the rpi, and come tournament time the guys that make the brackets will be like hey look at (insert name of good team here). They beat up on a bunch of weak scrubs like (insert name of crappola team here). They probably don't need to be ranked as high as they are. Another thing to look at is it doesn't generate as much money for the bigger schools, and as such doesn't make too much sense econmically. I mean seriously, it is easier to sellout Duke Vs. Arizona or UK vs.Syracuse than Stanford vs. Prarie View AM or Notre Dame vs. Morehead State. It's all about the money and revenue flow, simple as that. More often than not the real quality programs will have a pretty strong out of conference schedule, and the few crappola teams they play will be rivalry games that have a little bit of history, usually in-state or bordering state universities. Mid-majors do get the chance to play some decent opponents, especially since the onset of "Bracket Buster weekends", but haven't really seemed to help themselves out this year. I think that 75% of the mid-major schools that were showcased got beat, but my reckoning might be a bit off. The bottom line is this: if you are a school in a mid-major conference and want to play with the big boys, you're going to have to play at their place and on their terms--whatever those terms may be. It may require some sacrifice, but them's the breaks.

As for the idea of 128 teams? Jesus P. There is actually something that is called spreading yourself too thin. As someone mentioned before a 16 seed has never made it into the second round so it would be even less likely that a 17 seed or below would make it. There would be some craptacular games, and while they would be on tv, I doubt anyone would watch. Not sure that it would gain much reveune for these schools either, especially if they were playing really far from home. Oh well, off to work now.
 
2003-03-05 09:45:18 AM  
Why play a season if 128 teams get to go? most experts agree that the NCAA tournament is like capitalism. There's a couple of flaws, but its pretty good for now.

The reason why teams from small conferences get shut out is because chances are a 6 place SEC team could hand the ass to the best 5 players from a small conference like the Atlantic sun, or the SWAC. Every now and again, one of them gets lucky in the tourney, but until one of them gets to the final 4 I won't give cinderellas much respect
 
2003-03-05 09:49:51 AM  
128 teams???? isn't that what the NIT is for, the best of the rest..... (coming from a Penn Stater whose team is there much too often)
 
2003-03-05 09:56:48 AM  
Freakin' idiotic.

A system that invites seventh- place teams from leagues with big bank accounts while ignoring good squads from meager means is fundamentally flawed. It's neither fair nor right.

If you don't like it, move to Russia!

/I told him
 
2003-03-05 10:01:46 AM  
Southern Illinois...are you ready?? Get up and make some noise!

[image from graphics.fansonly.com too old to be available]

Go Dawgs!
 
2003-03-05 10:01:59 AM  
every team has the chance to earn their way in.. if these teams are so good. they would all be 25-2.. and still losing by 81 to MD Duke Sucks
 
2003-03-05 10:03:05 AM  
[image from graphics.fansonly.com too old to be available]
 
2003-03-05 10:03:31 AM  
Honestly guys, you'd only be adding one more game, or round, by expanding. There are always teams left out because conference winners are automatic. Truth is, some of the teams left out are better than some conf. winners. This way nobody can biatch, with the exception of the aforementioned 129th team. The wheat gets separated from the chaff pretty quickly either way.

But I like the bracket-buster formula, short of expanding the NCAA tourney.

Some of the teams that go to the NIT are better than some of the tourney teams.
 
2003-03-05 10:43:15 AM  
All I have to say is Creighton is grossly overrated.
 
2003-03-05 10:45:32 AM  
UNC-whaaaaaaat?

[image from sportsmed.starwave.com too old to be available]

UNC-Duuuuub

/giddy Heckler fanboy
 
2003-03-05 10:58:38 AM  
WarmBeer
All I have to say is Creighton is grossly overrated.

Amen to that!
 
2003-03-05 11:13:36 AM  
At the risk of sounding rude, fark all Creighton shiats.
 
2003-03-05 11:22:37 AM  
ReverendNewp
At the risk of sounding rude, fark all Creighton shiats.

At the risk of sounding just as rude....Amen (again)!
 
2003-03-05 11:26:45 AM  
TreeSurgeon is right. It seems like UT is underrated. Still, they haven't been as consistent as they should have been. When it comes to ranked teams tho, they definitely have been showing up.
 
2003-03-05 12:01:09 PM  
quick, somebody call the whambulance...

duke sucks, go terps
 
2003-03-05 12:05:57 PM  
[image from suathletics.com too old to be available]

Fear Carmelo Anthony and Syracuse!

If they get a good draw they will be a Final Four team. I don't think they would beat a Kentucky or Arizona, but if they get in a bracket with a weak #1 as a #2 or even a #3, I think there's a great chance of them getting to New Orleans. And if Carmelo Anthony returns next season, they WILL be a Final Four team.
 
2003-03-05 12:16:42 PM  
ElwoodCuse - Color Anthony gone. He'll trade the orange for green. So it will have to be this year.
And there really isn't a big powerhouse team this year. Arizona and Kentucky can both be beat, as can any other team. It's open to whoever puts together the best streak from here on out. It's kind of getting like the NFL. Parity, baby!
Go Terps!
 
2003-03-05 12:37:14 PM  
ACC will barely get 3 teams in the tourney this year, and I'm pretty sure you can call them a "Big Conference".
 
2003-03-05 12:49:54 PM  
Fear Carmelo Anthony and Syracuse!

Even Memphis?

Heh. Seriously though, it's nice to see you guys kicking serious ass, and it's a hell of a nice win to have on Memphis' resume(especially when considering how they won without Antonio Burks and Chris Massie, the two best players on the team). The Orangemen can play with anyone in the country, and beat a significant portion of those teams.
 
2003-03-05 01:04:34 PM  
Sucks that Mid-majors always get the shaft -- I love the MAC -- but that's ok cause most of the time you'd expect that someone like Indiana is going to be better than someone like Bowling Green or Central Michigan. What sucks is shiat like what happened to Butler last year. 20 wins shouldn't be a guaranteed in to the tourney, but what were they, 26-4 or something? That's a damn good record. Plus 65 teams is just stupid. Cut out an at large bid or make two at large teams play-in against each other. I felt really bad for Alcorn St. last year, when they won their automatic bid, only to get eliminated by ... SIENA! The whole point of going to the dance for those small school is that they have the opportunity to get blown out by a Kansas or a Duke and be like "Wow, I got to play Kansas in the NCAA tournament." At least there's a chance that way.
 
2003-03-05 02:04:34 PM  
Fark this guy for bringing up Richmond over Syracuse...GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Seriously if they went to top 4 teams in each conference, in the misaligned Big East, it would be conclusive that the top two teams from each division would be included. IF tthat's the case then Notre Dame wouldn't make the field due to a stacked West divsion, not a good idea.

GO CUSE!!!
 
2003-03-05 02:53:27 PM  
don't bash syracuse for losing to memphis. they started two freshmen (top 2 guys) playing their 1st game EVER! plus billy edelin wasn't playing. Now, their starting to get it together. PS- word on the campus of syracuse apparantly is that Carmelo has a 50/50 chance of staying. He should be making an announcement soon.
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report