Just now, nikeman49 said:

“And adjust as needed” is exactly what the selection committee does as teams play the season out. Your computer theory is something we don’t have to worry about anytime soon.

"Adjust as needed" doesn't mean consider a game here or a game there... It means including different metrics in the formula to rank the teams accordingly.

There is zero reason to use a selection committee when any data you'd ever need to figure out who the best teams are is available. There will always be bias, there will always be human influence. It's unnecessary. 

Just now, TheDeuce said:

"Adjust as needed" doesn't mean consider a game here or a game there... It means including different metrics in the formula to rank the teams accordingly.

There is zero reason to use a selection committee when any data you'd ever need to figure out who the best teams are is available. There will always be bias, there will always be human influence. It's unnecessary. 

I'm a big fan of the Massey Composite Ratings. They take about 60 different ratings and basically average them together. To me that gives a really clear indication of who should be ranked where. It eliminates the ability to manipulate ratings like the RPI did and the now the NET does. Plus it takes away any personal bias. The only task would then be to place teams in the bracket according to seeding principles - something that could be done by a computer or by the head of the NCAA Tournament. Selection committee should have left years ago.

26 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

I get that mid-majors getting in a is a feel good story for many, but it doesn't make the tournament any better most years. If mid-majors want to get in, schedule better opponents where you can. 

Do we want the best 68 teams in, or do we want a feel good basketball tournament?

That's all well and good, but I just still don't see the purpose of a conference tournament if the NCAA would switch to only the best 68 computer selected teams. 

13 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

I get that mid-majors getting in a is a feel good story for many, but it doesn't make the tournament any better most years. If mid-majors want to get in, schedule better opponents where you can. 

Do we want the best 68 teams in, or do we want a feel good basketball tournament?

I want excitement across college basketball.  Having your "best" 68 teams, realistically means, choosing from an annual field of probably about 100 schools, and that's it.  A school like Wake Forest would have such a huge advantage over one like Morehead it's not even funny, regardless of what OOC games Morehead could schedule.  We'd be right smack dab back in the middle of the whole football playoff mess, where you've got to be from one of the 5 conferences to even get a sniff.  That's bad for the game.

And you keep pointing to letting the computers figure it out, because you say it removes the human bias...but, you do realize the computers are actually reflecting the human bias put into programming them, right?  Someone has already determined which aspect is to be looked at, and/or weighted more than others.  The only thing the computer does is calculate the math quicker.

I say keep it as is.  I'd rather have a minor discussion about which also-ran deserves the 37th or 38th at large bid, than to say sorry to teams that took care of business and won when they had to.

10 minutes ago, CincySportsFan said:

I want excitement across college basketball.  Having your "best" 68 teams, realistically means, choosing from an annual field of probably about 100 schools, and that's it.  A school like Wake Forest would have such a huge advantage over one like Morehead it's not even funny, regardless of what OOC games Morehead could schedule.  We'd be right smack dab back in the middle of the whole football playoff mess, where you've got to be from one of the 5 conferences to even get a sniff.  That's bad for the game.

And you keep pointing to letting the computers figure it out, because you say it removes the human bias...but, you do realize the computers are actually reflecting the human bias put into programming them, right?  Someone has already determined which aspect is to be looked at, and/or weighted more than others.  The only thing the computer does is calculate the math quicker.

I say keep it as is.  I'd rather have a minor discussion about which also-ran deserves the 37th or 38th at large bid, than to say sorry to teams that took care of business and won when they had to.

Mid-majors do absolutely nothing for me. At all. I guess that is the difference in opinion. I couldn't care less about a mid-major getting into the NCAA tournament. Games are plenty exciting without that, for me. 

37 minutes ago, B-Ball-fan said:

That's all well and good, but I just still don't see the purpose of a conference tournament if the NCAA would switch to only the best 68 computer selected teams. 

I would still have conference tournament champions getting the 32 automatic bids. The computer formula would choose the 36 at-large bids and do the seeding.

18 minutes ago, gchs_uk9 said:

I would still have conference tournament champions getting the 32 automatic bids. The computer formula would choose the 36 at-large bids and do the seeding.

If we get rid of the selection committee, I can concede the automatic qualifiers. 

44 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

Mid-majors do absolutely nothing for me. At all. I guess that is the difference in opinion. I couldn't care less about a mid-major getting into the NCAA tournament. Games are plenty exciting without that, for me. 

If I did my math correct...

Six "major" conferences (ACC, Big East, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 12 and SEC) are comprised of 76 teams.  So, you'd rather see the 13th place team in the ACC or the 12th place team in the SEC play?!?

 

Just now, CincySportsFan said:

If I did my math correct...

Six "major" conferences (ACC, Big East, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 12 and SEC) are comprised of 76 teams.  So, you'd rather see the 13th place team in the ACC or the 12th place team in the SEC play?!?

 

If they are better than a 14-16 mid major team that gets in because they won their tourney, absolutely. 

10 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

If they are better than a 14-16 mid major team that gets in because they won their tourney, absolutely. 

Just for the record, the 13th place team in the ACC this year was Miami, who was 10-17 (4-15 in conference) and South Carolina was 12th in the SEC, who was 6-15 (4-12).  Who do you want to kick out to see them?

 

1 hour ago, CincySportsFan said:

Just for the record, the 13th place team in the ACC this year was Miami, who was 10-17 (4-15 in conference) and South Carolina was 12th in the SEC, who was 6-15 (4-12).  Who do you want to kick out to see them?

 

I don't want anybody kicked out if Miami is ranked behind them... 

That’s what makes the NCAA Tourney great. The little schools get their chance to take down Goliath. I remember when people said a 16 would never beat a 1. Well it did happen and all the upsets are what make it March Madness.

2 hours ago, Tomcats1990 said:

That’s what makes the NCAA Tourney great. The little schools get their chance to take down Goliath. I remember when people said a 16 would never beat a 1. Well it did happen and all the upsets are what make it March Madness.

Yes and no. It is cool to watch a little school knock off a big time program, I am with you there. But most of these mid-majors are out by the next round and if they do make a run, nobody is watching. Check out the Final Four when George Mason made it. It was cute and all, but it was also the lowest rated Final Four ever. People like Cinderella until she shows up to the ball and is covered in warts ?

Mid majors definitely make the NCAA tournament and that will not change anytime soon. The tournament is for all, not just Power 5 conferences.

2 hours ago, nikeman49 said:

Mid majors definitely make the NCAA tournament and that will not change anytime soon. The tournament is for all, not just Power 5 conferences.

Who said it was only for Power 5 conferences?