+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: MACbbs (/forum-513.html)
+---- Forum: Mid-American Conference Talk (/forum-472.html)
+---- Thread: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures (/thread-821934.html)
NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - MileHighBronco - 07-14-2017 06:48 PM
Should help mid-major programs.
NCAA Tournament committee to emphasize road results in new bracket process
A step in the right direction and long overdue.
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - indianasniff - 07-15-2017 02:41 PM
Deeds mean more
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - cleveland - 07-15-2017 03:04 PM
Smoke and mirrors ... nothing to see here.
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - Kittonhead - 07-15-2017 09:11 PM
Didn't they try something like this already a few years ago weighting RPI?
Road wins were to account for 2/3rd and home wins were to account for 1/3 with neutral site games 1/2.
It produced some really high RPI numbers for mid-majors but they were left out because they lacked quality wins.
This new system where you only get the most credit for quality home wins ranked 1-30 should weigh against the power conferences which benefit by having so many cracks at highly rated teams. The power teams that win 18-20 a year may be left out but probably for additional A10, AAC and MWC/WCC teams. It probably won't make enough of a difference for the MAC.
Who can say if some of those Akron and Kent teams over the past decade could have pulled down some quality wins if they were in the ACC or Big East? When you have 18 cracks against the power schools in conference it makes it a lot easier.
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - cleveland - 07-17-2017 11:08 AM
(07-15-2017 09:11 PM)Kittonhead Wrote: Didn't they try something like this already a few years ago weighting RPI?
Road wins were to account for 2/3rd and home wins were to account for 1/3 with neutral site games 1/2.
It produced some really high RPI numbers for mid-majors but they were left out because they lacked quality wins.
This new system where you only get the most credit for quality home wins ranked 1-30 should weigh against the power conferences which benefit by having so many cracks at highly rated teams. The power teams that win 18-20 a year may be left out but probably for additional A10, AAC and MWC/WCC teams. It probably won't make enough of a difference for the MAC.
Who can say if some of those Akron and Kent teams over the past decade could have pulled down some quality wins if they were in the ACC or Big East? When you have 18 cracks against the power schools in conference it makes it a lot easier.
PRETTY MUCH AGREE WITH THIS ... They're really just locking in more power conference teams and top teams from BB only leagues, but not really opening the door for good mid-majors.
There needs to be a conference REGULAR SEASON championship component added to this in some way, which at least cracks the door open a bit ... somewhat like the FB ranking system that allows at least one MM team (Western Michigan/Northern Illinois) to get a quality bowl bid ... obviously the need would be for more than one team from the mid-major ranks ... but something concrete ....
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - Pulltown Falcon - 07-17-2017 05:27 PM
(07-17-2017 11:08 AM)cleveland Wrote: There needs to be a conference REGULAR SEASON championship component added to this in some way, which at least cracks the door open a bit ... somewhat like the FB ranking system that allows at least one MM team (Western Michigan/Northern Illinois) to get a quality bowl bid ... obviously the need would be for more than one team from the mid-major ranks ... but something concrete ....
If you want the regular season champion, we can have that. Each conference determines who represents them in the tournament. We just don't hold a conference tournament in March. Maybe we encourage teams to play in a tourney or two in November and December and extend the conference season a week into March.
How much do we really make in our conference tourney? Don't have to pay for the Q for the week. Are we losing out on big bucks from E$PN if we do not host a conference championship tournament?
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - cleveland - 07-17-2017 06:14 PM
(07-17-2017 05:27 PM)Pulltown Falcon Wrote:(07-17-2017 11:08 AM)cleveland Wrote: There needs to be a conference REGULAR SEASON championship component added to this in some way, which at least cracks the door open a bit ... somewhat like the FB ranking system that allows at least one MM team (Western Michigan/Northern Illinois) to get a quality bowl bid ... obviously the need would be for more than one team from the mid-major ranks ... but something concrete ....
If you want the regular season champion, we can have that. Each conference determines who represents them in the tournament. We just don't hold a conference tournament in March. Maybe we encourage teams to play in a tourney or two in November and December and extend the conference season a week into March.
How much do we really make in our conference tourney? Don't have to pay for the Q for the week. Are we losing out on big bucks from E$PN if we do not host a conference championship tournament?
Don't know the $$$ particulars for the MAC Tournament but seriously doubt the MAC is losing $$$ on this and quite probably making some from the Q .... remember this deal was initially struck when the Cavs were dog meat and grandfathered into the Cavs season ticket sales. Ever check out the suites during the MAC Tournament. ...
Also, the MAC is easily Top 10 or better in tournament attendance every year ... as for ESPN, the dollars are a part of the ENTIRE MAC package, including football and the sweet $$$ part of the latest deal that kicks in this year for the next five I believe ...
I see your point about the regular season champ vs. tournament champ ... playing devils advocate (with the ability of seeing both teams multiple times down the stretch) there is little doubt AKRON was the best 2017 team in the league last year ... But over the last 10 games (including 3 with Akron) Kent was not only the better team of the two, but the best in the league evidence by beating all the teams in front of them (Akron, UB, OU) twice each with five of the six wins road/neutral.
I think AKRON deserved to be in the NCAA Tournament ... I think Kent (based on the rules of the day) earned their way into the tournament ...
I think the selection committee should find a way to reward both (and other leagues like the MAC) instead of always rewarding the same teams over and over.
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - Kittonhead - 07-17-2017 08:40 PM
There is getting the 2nd team into the NCAAs and then there is seeding.
At least this should help the MAC with seeding if its effects won't be deep enough to help with multiple bids.
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - perimeterpost - 07-18-2017 10:09 PM
The Committee is made up of 10 Athletic Directors, here are the schools they come from-
Michigan St (chairman)
Kentucky
Duke
Stanford
BYU
Creighton
New Mexico
Ohio
UNC Asheville
Northeastern
If this was football it would be all P5 schools.
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - cleveland - 07-19-2017 09:00 PM
(07-18-2017 10:09 PM)perimeterpost Wrote: The Committee is made up of 10 Athletic Directors, here are the schools they come from-
Michigan St (chairman)
Kentucky
Duke
Stanford
BYU
Creighton
New Mexico
Ohio
UNC Asheville
Northeastern
If this was football it would be all P5 schools.
Only two of those ADs come from Leagues without at least two bids at least once for 10 years or more (UNC Ashville and guess who ...)
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - perimeterpost - 07-19-2017 09:10 PM
(07-19-2017 09:00 PM)cleveland Wrote:(07-18-2017 10:09 PM)perimeterpost Wrote: The Committee is made up of 10 Athletic Directors, here are the schools they come from-
Michigan St (chairman)
Kentucky
Duke
Stanford
BYU
Creighton
New Mexico
Ohio
UNC Asheville
Northeastern
If this was football it would be all P5 schools.
Only two of those ADs come from Leagues without at least two bids at least once for 10 years or more (UNC Ashville and guess who ...)
I'll guess Northeastern.
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - cleveland - 07-20-2017 05:18 PM
(07-19-2017 09:10 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:(07-19-2017 09:00 PM)cleveland Wrote:(07-18-2017 10:09 PM)perimeterpost Wrote: The Committee is made up of 10 Athletic Directors, here are the schools they come from-
Michigan St (chairman)
Kentucky
Duke
Stanford
BYU
Creighton
New Mexico
Ohio
UNC Asheville
Northeastern
If this was football it would be all P5 schools.
Only two of those ADs come from Leagues without at least two bids at least once for 10 years or more (UNC Ashville and guess who ...)
I'll guess Northeastern.
(GONG HORN!!!) ... Colonial got three teams in 2011.
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - Policiious - 07-25-2017 10:53 AM
Tounament is up to 68 teams now, but with all the good teams that got relegated to the NIT last year plus there were 20 win teams in the other post season tournaments they should just open it up to 128. That leaves plenty of slots for the good non power conference teams and with about 350 programs playing D1 hoops the NIT and other tournaments can still fill out a bracket or allow NCAA Tourney 1st round losers into their tournament.
RE: NCAA Tournament Committee making changes to Bracketing Procedures - Policiious - 07-25-2017 11:03 AM
128 teams, bigger crowds, more fans watching the broadcasts, possiblity even more $ from the networks.
ANd most of all, no excuses from anybody not picked, if you can't land in the top 128 teams yuo do not deserve a bid
Why not