Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What if I told you the #12 Men’s Basketball Team Could Not Make the NCAA Tournament
Author Message
McKinney Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 550
Joined: Dec 2017
Reputation: 37
I Root For: UMass, Army, Rutgers
Location: New Brunswick, NJ
Post: #41
RE: What if I told you the #12 Men’s Basketball Team Could Not Make the NCAA Tournament
(11-05-2018 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Not really the same thing. E.g., in the baseball and basketball playoffs, yes, all the conference champs get in. But, a crucial point is that the playoffs are large enough for many teams from the big leagues to get in, e.g., in both baseball and basketball, it's not uncommon for the best conference to get 6,7, or even 8 teams in.

If that was possible in football, if the playoffs were such that the SEC and Big 12 and PAC could each put 5 or 6 team in, then I don't think there'd be any objection to C-USA, AAC and Sun Belt having an auto-bid.

Well the NCAAT is currently half autobid and half at large right? The autobids are to promote conference representation, the at-larges are to promote high caliber performance.

If the maximum we can do is 12, then do top six CC autobids and six at large.
11-05-2018 07:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Love and Honor Offline
Skipper
*

Posts: 6,919
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 237
I Root For: Miami, MACtion
Location: Chicagoland
Post: #42
RE: What if I told you the #12 Men’s Basketball Team Could Not Make the NCAA Tournament
(11-05-2018 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-04-2018 01:51 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  I'd be satisfied by one of two things: all conference champs make the CFP (I'd include two at-larges to get to 12 total) or the best G5 gets into an 8-team playoff with said G5 and all seedings determined exclusively via formula, not committee.

The core reason that people disapprove of the G5 getting auto-bids is the idea that due to the institutional differences between FBS conferences, it's not a "fair" way to determine a widely recognized champion in a system that includes minor conferences with objectively lesser resources, history, etc. That's unlike pro sports, where revenue sharing, professional athletes, and mutually agreed upon rules of business level the playing field and justify a standard playoff.

That's a legitimate sentiment. If you do feel that way however, I hope you're advocating for March Madness and all other college sports postseasons to switch to a similar system. I applaud your consistency if you truly believe that though imo there's no joy in rooting for Goliath, underdogs like UMBC and Loyola along with the unexpected power team like South Carolina two seasons ago make things fun instead of watching Kentucky and Duke make the Final Four for the millionth time. Not to mention that I'm not a fan of effectively disenfranchising all college football teams outside the power conferences.

Not really the same thing. E.g., in the baseball and basketball playoffs, yes, all the conference champs get in. But, a crucial point is that the playoffs are large enough for many teams from the big leagues to get in, e.g., in both baseball and basketball, it's not uncommon for the best conference to get 6,7, or even 8 teams in.

If that was possible in football, if the playoffs were such that the SEC and Big 12 and PAC could each put 5 or 6 team in, then I don't think there'd be any objection to C-USA, AAC and Sun Belt having an auto-bid.

Likewise, if the NCAA basketball playoffs were suddenly limited to 8 or 12 teams, then no way in hell would all the conferences have auto-bids as they do under the current system.

So your claim that to be consistent, those who oppose auto-bids for the G5 conferences in football should feel the same about hoops will only make sense when say a 48-team playoff for football is on the table.

And remember, about those basketball cinderellas: Those that make it to the Final 4 don't get gifted that. They have to win 4 playoff games, usually against higher seeds from Power leagues, to get there. They have to win twice to make the Sweet 16. They earn it. But a football playoffs with 16 teams that gives an auto-bid each G5 league in effect gifts those leagues Sweet 16 berth rather than them having to earn it.

Well isn't the point to make the playoffs larger to accommodate the size? FBS will have 130 teams after transitioning, a four-team CFP means about 3% (rounding) is represented. There are 347 DI basketball programs for 68 March Madness spots, so 20%. College hockey has 60 with 16 teams in their tourney for 27%. FCS football has 125 for 24 to get to 19%, or 25% if you exclude the 28 Ivy League/SWAC/MEAC schools. So we wouldn't be talking about a 48-team playoff if we used basketball proportions, we'd be at 25 and that's just essentially the FCS playoffs.

And with a sport like football you're dealing with a far shorter schedule. Hoops and hockey usually play around 30 and 35 before the tourney instead of 12 or 13, a G5 winning a first round game would basically become a Cinderella since in most cases it'd be Troy beating USC or something. The 'Terrific 12' wouldn't be a thing in a 12-team CFP, much like how you don't see hockey schools who make the tourney bragging about the Sweet 16.
11-05-2018 10:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #43
RE: What if I told you the #12 Men’s Basketball Team Could Not Make the NCAA Tournament
Status quo causes me no heartburn.

I don't think it is optimal but it is a big improvement.

Now if we are going to a system where there are autobids it needs to be all or none. It is inevitable with autobids for only some that there will be a season where a non-autobid conference champion will be ranked ahead of an autobid champion. It happened with the BCS in 2012 triggering NIU's buster situation.

Outside of a handful of schools who can pick up the phone and join basically any conference they choose most schools membership is in the best conference willing to invite them in.
(This post was last modified: 11-06-2018 12:33 AM by arkstfan.)
11-06-2018 12:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,109
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 763
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #44
RE: What if I told you the #12 Men’s Basketball Team Could Not Make the NCAA Tournament
(11-05-2018 07:36 PM)McKinney Wrote:  
(11-05-2018 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Not really the same thing. E.g., in the baseball and basketball playoffs, yes, all the conference champs get in. But, a crucial point is that the playoffs are large enough for many teams from the big leagues to get in, e.g., in both baseball and basketball, it's not uncommon for the best conference to get 6,7, or even 8 teams in.

If that was possible in football, if the playoffs were such that the SEC and Big 12 and PAC could each put 5 or 6 team in, then I don't think there'd be any objection to C-USA, AAC and Sun Belt having an auto-bid.

Well the NCAAT is currently half autobid and half at large right? The autobids are to promote conference representation, the at-larges are to promote high caliber performance.

If the maximum we can do is 12, then do top six CC autobids and six at large.
If the system was the A5 champions and the best CFP ranked Go5 champion, and the highest six CFP ranked schools from the remainder at-large, I'm thinking the Go5 would take that in a heartbeat.
(This post was last modified: 11-06-2018 04:49 AM by BruceMcF.)
11-06-2018 04:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #45
RE: What if I told you the #12 Men’s Basketball Team Could Not Make the NCAA Tournament
(11-05-2018 10:36 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  
(11-05-2018 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(11-04-2018 01:51 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  I'd be satisfied by one of two things: all conference champs make the CFP (I'd include two at-larges to get to 12 total) or the best G5 gets into an 8-team playoff with said G5 and all seedings determined exclusively via formula, not committee.

The core reason that people disapprove of the G5 getting auto-bids is the idea that due to the institutional differences between FBS conferences, it's not a "fair" way to determine a widely recognized champion in a system that includes minor conferences with objectively lesser resources, history, etc. That's unlike pro sports, where revenue sharing, professional athletes, and mutually agreed upon rules of business level the playing field and justify a standard playoff.

That's a legitimate sentiment. If you do feel that way however, I hope you're advocating for March Madness and all other college sports postseasons to switch to a similar system. I applaud your consistency if you truly believe that though imo there's no joy in rooting for Goliath, underdogs like UMBC and Loyola along with the unexpected power team like South Carolina two seasons ago make things fun instead of watching Kentucky and Duke make the Final Four for the millionth time. Not to mention that I'm not a fan of effectively disenfranchising all college football teams outside the power conferences.

Not really the same thing. E.g., in the baseball and basketball playoffs, yes, all the conference champs get in. But, a crucial point is that the playoffs are large enough for many teams from the big leagues to get in, e.g., in both baseball and basketball, it's not uncommon for the best conference to get 6,7, or even 8 teams in.

If that was possible in football, if the playoffs were such that the SEC and Big 12 and PAC could each put 5 or 6 team in, then I don't think there'd be any objection to C-USA, AAC and Sun Belt having an auto-bid.

Likewise, if the NCAA basketball playoffs were suddenly limited to 8 or 12 teams, then no way in hell would all the conferences have auto-bids as they do under the current system.

So your claim that to be consistent, those who oppose auto-bids for the G5 conferences in football should feel the same about hoops will only make sense when say a 48-team playoff for football is on the table.

And remember, about those basketball cinderellas: Those that make it to the Final 4 don't get gifted that. They have to win 4 playoff games, usually against higher seeds from Power leagues, to get there. They have to win twice to make the Sweet 16. They earn it. But a football playoffs with 16 teams that gives an auto-bid each G5 league in effect gifts those leagues Sweet 16 berth rather than them having to earn it.

Well isn't the point to make the playoffs larger to accommodate the size? FBS will have 130 teams after transitioning, a four-team CFP means about 3% (rounding) is represented. There are 347 DI basketball programs for 68 March Madness spots, so 20%. College hockey has 60 with 16 teams in their tourney for 27%. FCS football has 125 for 24 to get to 19%, or 25% if you exclude the 28 Ivy League/SWAC/MEAC schools. So we wouldn't be talking about a 48-team playoff if we used basketball proportions, we'd be at 25 and that's just essentially the FCS playoffs.

No, remember that in hoops and baseball most of those other non P5/G5 conferences get 1 bid only and they wouldn't be included in a FBS playoffs. So consider baseball and basketball. IIRC, for baseball, this past year 38 bids went to the P5/G5 conferences.

In basketball this past year, 38 bids went to the P5/G5, so we're talking a 38 team tournament, 44 if we include the Big East as an 11th power.

So as I said, we're for football to be analogous to the other big sports, we'd need about a 40 - team tournament limited to just the 130 FBS conferences to be the same.
(This post was last modified: 11-06-2018 09:03 AM by quo vadis.)
11-06-2018 09:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.