What if you had to be .500 in your conference to get At Large Bid?

Page 2 of NCAA would never do it, but it would at least be a BRIGHT LINE for selection. Kinda like having to be .500 to go to a bowl game. Regardless of how toug... 20 comments | 667 Views | Go to page 1 →

  1. #16
    Jumper_Dad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 06
    Location
    To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible
    Posts
    46,444

    Quote Originally Posted by jpa2825 View Post
    Just trying to put some objective criteria into a system that is brutally flawed currently. (Although, many will argue that the media loves the flaws so they can generate so much content about the flaws - just look at all the OU, ASU, etc. discussion.)

    Even with an unbalanced schedule where you play UVa, Duke and UNC 2x and Pitt and GaTech only 1x, do you really belong in the tournament if you are UNDER .500 in your league? Show me a team that truly "belongs" / "belonged" in the tournament that was UNDER .500 in conference.

    Also, knowing this requirement in advance would expand the "bubble" into FEB and late JAN and make conference games more exciting. ("X team is 3 under .500 going into their last 7 conference games. In order to be postseason eligible, they'll need to go 5-2 on those games.")
    But does the team that didn't play UVA, Duke and UNC and barely hits .500 deserve to get in over the team that did and fell just short?
    Let's say NC State goes undefeated out of conference and has 2 top 20 wins out of conference but because they had the tougher Conf draw they are 8-10 or 7-9 in conference...they'd deserve a shot, right?

    We can play out scenarios all day and I agree teams should be over .500, but I also think it shouldn't be a hard fast rule. Sometimes a team under .500 in conference deserves to get in.
    Advertisement

  2. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 08
    Location
    In the Garden
    Posts
    20,192

    First thing that needs done is caping each conference with 5 entries max.

  3. #18
    TheDeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 04
    Location
    “It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am." - Muhammad Ali
    Posts
    51,006

    Quote Originally Posted by plantmanky View Post
    First thing that needs done is caping each conference with 5 entries max.
    That sounds like a good idea if you want to drastically water down the field of 68.

  4. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 03
    Location
    The City of Beautiful Homes
    Posts
    2,339

    Quote Originally Posted by Jumper_Dad View Post
    <snip>but I also think it shouldn't be a hard fast rule. Sometimes a team under .500 in conference deserves to get in.
    That's where we disagree (which is fine and healthy). Given the awful job the committee has proven it will do, I want as many reasonable "guardrails" on them as possible.

    As to when a team under .500 in conference DESERVES to be in, let me know when it happens and I will re-think.

  5. #20
    Jumper_Dad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 06
    Location
    To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible
    Posts
    46,444

    Quote Originally Posted by jpa2825 View Post
    That's where we disagree (which is fine and healthy). Given the awful job the committee has proven it will do, I want as many reasonable "guardrails" on them as possible.

    As to when a team under .500 in conference DESERVES to be in, let me know when it happens and I will re-think.
    How about Notre Dame or Oklahoma St. this season? DESERVES is comparative to others that are in the tournament, not just in a vacuum.

  6. #21

    Join Date
    Nov 03
    Location
    The City of Beautiful Homes
    Posts
    2,339

    Quote Originally Posted by Jumper_Dad View Post
    How about Notre Dame or Oklahoma St. this season? DESERVES is comparative to others that are in the tournament, not just in a vacuum.
    I'm looking more for a "wow, they got hosed" example rather than a "they probably don't deserve to be in, but they're as good or better than these other hacks they let in."

    Although the ND example warrants consideration. Say ND played great in non-conference (they didn't - losses v. Ball St. and @ IU), then Colson got hurt right at the beginning of conference play and they struggled, then Colson returned at the end of conference play and they returned to their prior great form over a few games, including the tournament, but still ended up at 8-10 or 7-9. Maybe that would be worth an exception to the hard rule.

    For me, I like the certainty and knowing what you have to do to even be considered. I also like some objective criteria limiting the pool of teams the Committee can screw up with!!!

Top