(03-15-2014 02:41 PM)gobaseline Wrote: With all due respect what or who benefits from MAC programs slitting one anothers throats in a soap operat NO ONE outside the MAC cares about or watches.
Those inside the MAC, who care about them and watch them.
Those who are susceptible to sneering insidious distinctions really aren't the MAC's core target audience in any event ... they are going to be following a "power conference" school ... so pandering to them does not offer much to the MAC as a dividend.
The two arguments for more rest for the middle of the table teams at the expense of the bottom two being left out of the tournament is that the supporters of the bottom two schools are probably already in "better luck next year" mode, and that the middle of the table teams will do less damage to the RPI of the top teams than a bottom of the table team that scored an upset in their Preliminary Final. And the second argument doesn't really kick in unless the MAC gets to the point where its regular season champion is on the bubble independent of winning the auto-bid.
JUST trimming out the #11 and #12 seeds from the current tournament format yields:
Monday: PF#1, #8 hosts #9, PF#2, #7 hosts #10, #11, #12 relegated
Wednesday: SR#1: #5 vs winner PF#1; SR#2: #6 vs winner PF#2
Thursday: QF#1: #4 vs winner EF#1, QF#2, #3 vs winner EF#2
Friday: SF#1: #1 vs winner QF#1, SF#2: #2 vs winner QF#2
Saturday: Championship: Winner SF#1 vs Winner SF#2
Where today the fight at the end of the regular season is to be 1/2, then 3/4, then 5-8, and 9-12 mostly being preliminary final visiting cannon fodder, that would make every second step up the ladder a distinctive improvement ... 9/10 better than relegated 11/12, preliminary final hosts 7/8 better than 9/10, second round seeds #5/6 a step batter, quarterfinal seeds #3/4 a step better, and of course the top two teams still two wins from the big dance.