(03-18-2014 05:22 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I think the league has a bigger beef with three teams ending in same region as stated above that hurts the amount of units we might get
Going forward the ....

It does limit our possible credit-ceiling, but it also raises our likely floor.

In this case, the only way we actually bump into that ceiling is if Memphis beats #1 Virginia and Cincy beats Michigan State. Both have to happen. Likely? Not very.

(03-18-2014 08:24 AM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 08:21 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 10:09 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 07:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 07:07 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  Sounds like you haven't read the P5 football plans. It was clear that they are moving toward a model where the P5 playoffs exclude all other conferences, and the best way to do that is to snuff out the others and starve them of cash.

UConn's budget ex-TV is still in the top 3rd of the NCAA. The question is, how long can Uconn and schools like it hold out while the P5 try to cordon themselves from the rest.

In the case of this basketball tournament, for the reasons I've given, it is absolutely not clear at all whether having 3 AAC teams in one region and 1 in another increases or decreases the expected AAC money value compared to having 1 team in each region. It does reduce the theoretical ceiling, but also tends to increase the theoretical floor.

Bottom line: If two AAC teams play in the tourney, yes, it prevents both from winning and thus earning max credits, but it also prevents both from losing and thus earning minimum credits.

The AAC was given less chance than anyone in tournament history to maximize revenue from the tournament on a per team basis.

You can't argue with that.

You want to advance as far as possible and earn those credits.

You shoot for the stars.

Well, maybe I could argue it, if i was willing to look at every tournament and every conference ever (I assume you did, to make that blanket statement?).

But here's the bottom line: No conference can legitimately complain about teams meeting from the Elite 8 or onwards, as that is extremely deep in the tournament (87.5% of all teams have been eliminated), and an Elite 8 meeting guarantees a conference team in the coveted Final 4.

So the only possible complaint here is Cincy and Memphis meeting in the Sweet 16. But, for that to happen, Memphis will have to beat #1 Virginia, AND Cincy will have to beat eyeball-test king Michigan State. EITHER one of those will be a BIG upset, and yet BOTH have to happen for the AAC to get "screwed" by a Sweet 16 matchup.

So let's wait until it happens before whining about it, eh?

Someone on the UConn board went back to the 64 team expansion. Never happened since they were at 48 and 32.

The problem is the principle here.

First round NCAA unit: $240k.
Final 8 victory? $10 million.

Let's talk about this again after Memphis beats Virginia and Cincy beats Michigan State (after both winning their first round games too, of course), because then the "principle" will have become a practical reality.

(03-17-2014 03:32 PM)upstater1 Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 01:41 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 12:44 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  What I don;t understand is that the committee failed to explain how they factored in that SMU got unlucky with their non-conf as Ark, Rhode Island, A&M and TCU had down years.

1) There are two lessons, schedule OOC cupcakes destroys RPI and leaves you vulnerable if the better OOC teams you schedule have down years.

It's really no different than in football: A team like Auburn can schedule OOC cupcakes and still be strong in the BCS rankings because their conference is so strong their overall SOS will still be strong.

What hurt SMU was not just the OOC cupcakes, but the fact that the AAC was the #8 RPI conference. If your conference is weak, you HAVE to schedule strong OOC to compensate.

Tell that to UConn, because UConn scheduled Florida, Maryland, Indiana, Stanford and Washington. What we really should have done is scheduled low majors who ended up 75 to 150 instead of Maine and Loyola at 300! That apparently impresses people more.

My suggestion in future years would be to schedule Eastern Michigan, Georgia St., Cleveland St., Towson, Canisius, Vermont (instead of Maine), Quinnipiac, etc., because all these schools have better RPIs than Indiana and Washington, which shows you what a joke all this is.

The only thing I learned this season after losing to a middle of the road ACC team (Clemson) in the NIT is that like it or not there is a lot to this RPI thing. We bellowed and moaned from mid season on about RPI but they had us right where we belonged.

The whining about 3 teams in one region is hard to comprehend. The way the AAC is scheduled now, it's possible to get all 4 teams to the Sweet 16, 3 to the Elite. 8, and 2 to the Final 4.

Does anyone seriously think that these 4 teams could possibly do any better than that? Because if you do, throw away your brackets now. They're worthless.

Any idea how many times in the entire history of the tournament one conference has actually done that? Seriously, it's not like they matched these teams up in the first or second round.

They also put the 3 teams in what is generally considered the weakest region, giving them every opportunity to maximize their wins in a region with very beatable teams. It's not like these teams have been matched up against tournament favorites. Some posters here are going to look very foolish if these 3 teams don't post some big wins after the pages and pages of complaining here.