(06-05-2018 08:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-05-2018 01:40 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  This is very similar to the CUSA proposal. Is still don't see how taking your top teams and giving them 4 possible losses vs 4 probable wins is going to get another NCAA bid.

That's one issue, yeah. Take the 2018 Sun Belt standings. ULL's final RPI was 63 per realtimerpi. Next was UT Arlington at 108 and Georgia State at 120. Realistically, what a conference like the SBC is hoping for is to boost the RPI of its best team enough that it might get an at-large bid if it fails in the conference tournament.

How much does this help a team like 2018 ULL, though? It probably boosts their RPI a total of 10 places at most -- if they win at least 3 of those 4 pod games. But even if a team was boosted 30 points it might not be enough. The teams who were 33rd and 34th in realtimerpi (MTSU and USC) were not selected, while the 64th and 66th RPI teams (NC State and Arizona State) were selected. What did the committee see in those two teams? "Quality wins" is the only explanation. NC State beat teams with RPI of 7 and 13; ASU beat the #3 and 5 RPI teams.

A conference pod system can't help a team like ULL to get wins like that. If they're not scheduling and winning those games on their own, then 4, 5, or 6 games against a conference mate with a 90-100 RPI isn't going to get them an at-large berth.

Don't forget that it can also be a help for getting into/improving seed in the NIT. Even if getting a second team in the NCAAs is a stretch goal, having an NIT at-large on a reasonably regular basis helps with credibility, especially if one of those teams makes a big run and reaches the Garden.

(06-05-2018 08:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-05-2018 01:40 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  This is very similar to the CUSA proposal. Is still don't see how taking your top teams and giving them 4 possible losses vs 4 probable wins is going to get another NCAA bid.

That's one issue, yeah. Take the 2018 Sun Belt standings. ULL's final RPI was 63 per realtimerpi. Next was UT Arlington at 108 and Georgia State at 120. Realistically, what a conference like the SBC is hoping for is to boost the RPI of its best team enough that it might get an at-large bid if it fails in the conference tournament.

How much does this help a team like 2018 ULL, though? It probably boosts their RPI a total of 10 places at most -- if they win at least 3 of those 4 pod games. But even if a team was boosted 30 points it might not be enough. The teams who were 33rd and 34th in realtimerpi (MTSU and USC) were not selected, while the 64th and 66th RPI teams (NC State and Arizona State) were selected. What did the committee see in those two teams? "Quality wins" is the only explanation. NC State beat teams with RPI of 7 and 13; ASU beat the #3 and 5 RPI teams.

A conference pod system can't help a team like ULL to get wins like that. If they're not scheduling and winning those games on their own, then 4, 5, or 6 games against a conference mate with a 90-100 RPI isn't going to get them an at-large berth.

It is pissin in the wind unless the other prongs work out.
The top team needs to win that semi-final game.
The pairing in the two game cross-conference challenge needs to pan out and be a good opponent and you got to win.
The exempt tournament element has to come together.

I know Arkansas State is toying with the idea of hosting a foreign exempt tournament at the Mexico campus but it has to be an event that will draw quality.

The Sun Belt gave WKU and MTSU some seed money to play a doubleheader in Nashville. They would schedule it on a date while school was out and had some luck bringing P5's in. But they never could keep the momentum going.

You can only do this kind of thing in the Belch and C-DOA, two conferences with no history or tradition. Slam the MAC all you want, but this would never work there because the MAC has history and tradition. The East Division schools all want to play each other twice per year as do Toledo and Bowling Green and the Michigan schools.