(03-03-2016 05:54 PM)gobaseline Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 05:38 PM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 01:03 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  They should refrain from naming regular season champions if the regular season does not matter besides seeding... You should play the regular season for the seed... to be rewarded as the 1 seed. That's all.... no trophy, nothing. Not even an automatic NIT bid. The tourney matters. Play for seeding, and win win the bracket to advance.

If the regular season matters so much, then don't have a tourney. Honestly if we won the MAC tourney, as happy as I would be... it wouldn't be too fair considering we finished 4 or 5 games out of 1st place.... it's the rules, so it's fair. But how many games is enough to determine superiority? Obviously 21/22 according to our conference.

That's why I like the setup for the tourney the last few years. 1 & 2 seed automatically to the semi's, 3 & 4 go to the quarter finals. Everyone else would need to win 5 game in 6 days(IIRC). THAT made the regular season matter.

Bingo! Ding Ding Ding. We have a winner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Evidently most MAC coaches don't see it that way and that is exactly why the MAC went back to the old system this year. Some have argued that the week layoff that comes with a double bye plus having to play your first game in the Q against a team that just played a game there can actually work to the detriment of the top seeds.

http://www.bcsn.tv/news_article/show/621576

I agree that the regular season championship which recognizes a team's performance over a 4 month period is probably more meaningful than a tournament championship that recognizes a team's performance over a one week period, yet a tournament is justifiable only if it is used to determine who gets the automatic NCAA tournament bid.....so the tourney champion is the one who is best rewarded, not the regular season champ. This is particular devastating for the mid-major conferences almost all of whom are 1-bid conferences.

Of course the major conferences make tons of money from their respective tournaments (which is of course why they exist in the first place) whereas the mid major conferences don't, but then that is business as usual and consistent with the mid-major compulsion to always try to mimic what the BIG BOYS are doing with the hope that it will make them look like big boys too.