The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

from twitter:

Mountain West tourney cut to 8 teams, will remain in Thomas & Mack http://abqjournal.com/693385 #mwbb via @abqjournal

Mountain West is a better conference than CUSA and in many ways is a trendsetter. I don't think I would have a problem with CUSA cutting to 8 teams. Playing teams in the bottom of the conference is another RPI killer and those teams generally don't bring anyone to the tournament.

It would save the conference money, that's for sure. It probably doesn't hurt the bottom line for the host city, either, considering how few of the bottom half teams' fans actually travel.

It's something that should have been instituted a good while back.

It just never really made sense to have the tournament be that inclusive when it doesn't do anyone any good for real. It's just more RPI damage. Even if one of the bottom teams were to go on a run, all it does is hurt the conference as a whole. If the conference was deeper, I'd be all about keeping things the same but most of the conference is under 200 RPI.

As far as the location goes, I think it'd be better for it to actually go shift around several cities instead of just staying in Birmingham. I wonder if it'd be reasonable to just split the men and women and start having the tournament winner host the next one.

(12-18-2015 05:03 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  from twitter:

Mountain West tourney cut to 8 teams, will remain in Thomas & Mack http://abqjournal.com/693385 #mwbb via @abqjournal

Mountain West is a better conference than CUSA and in many ways is a trendsetter. I don't think I would have a problem with CUSA cutting to 8 teams. Playing teams in the bottom of the conference is another RPI killer and those teams generally don't bring anyone to the tournament.

I've been begging for this for years. Our top team having even a chance of losing to a bottom feeder is not good for the conference.

Likewise teams that finish 6-6 in football and/or finish in the lower level of their conference should not get bowl bids.

Does the MWC give the host city an automatic bid? That could be a potential problem.

(12-18-2015 06:53 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote:  Does the MWC give the host city an automatic bid? That could be a potential problem.

reading the article, the tourney every year is on UNLV's home court, which they have decided to continue. That is acontention with some members. I suspect that UNLV is going to be top 8 most years.

I suspect CUSA will rotate the tourney with the idea of Birmingham being a consistent every-two-or-three-year site - similar to Memphis when they were in CUSA...

Have some conferences in the past had a round or two of the conference tournament at various sites with the higher seed hosting?

Yes, the real small conferences do that. I hope CUSA doesn't sink that far.

(12-18-2015 10:01 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Have some conferences in the past had a round or two of the conference tournament at various sites with the higher seed hosting?

On top of mb's reply, I believe some have the entire tournaments this way of I'm not mistaken. The thing that makes no sense for cusa is having a game between number 11 fiu vs number 14 utsa in Birmingham. Those fans aren't going. None of us give a damn. I would literally prefer watching a high school game.

(12-18-2015 10:41 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(12-18-2015 10:01 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Have some conferences in the past had a round or two of the conference tournament at various sites with the higher seed hosting?

The thing that makes no sense for cusa is having a game between number 11 fiu vs number 14 utsa in Birmingham. Those fans aren't going. None of us give a damn. I would literally prefer watching a high school game.

How about seeds 10 @ 7 and 9 @ 8, play at the respective high seeds then the survivors play at the tournament host location?

(12-18-2015 10:41 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(12-18-2015 10:01 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Have some conferences in the past had a round or two of the conference tournament at various sites with the higher seed hosting?

On top of mb's reply, I believe some have the entire tournaments this way of I'm not mistaken. The thing that makes no sense for cusa is having a game between number 11 fiu vs number 14 utsa in Birmingham. Those fans aren't going. None of us give a damn. I would literally prefer watching a high school game.

We wouldn't have gotten to witness a half court buzzer beater if we weren't fortunate enough to watch FIU-UTSA last year though!

(12-18-2015 11:41 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote:  

(12-18-2015 10:41 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(12-18-2015 10:01 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Have some conferences in the past had a round or two of the conference tournament at various sites with the higher seed hosting?

The thing that makes no sense for cusa is having a game between number 11 fiu vs number 14 utsa in Birmingham. Those fans aren't going. None of us give a damn. I would literally prefer watching a high school game.

How about seeds 10 @ 7 and 9 @ 8, play at the respective high seeds then the survivors play at the tournament host location?

I still don't like it. Why even create the potential of having the 9 or 10 seed knock off the 1 or 2? There is no reason a top team should be forced to play an additional game that can lower their rpi. If you can't finish top 8 over the course of the regular season, you don't deserve an opportunity to represent the conference in the big dance.

(12-18-2015 10:41 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(12-18-2015 10:01 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Have some conferences in the past had a round or two of the conference tournament at various sites with the higher seed hosting?

On top of mb's reply, I believe some have the entire tournaments this way of I'm not mistaken. The thing that makes no sense for cusa is having a game between number 11 fiu vs number 14 utsa in Birmingham. Those fans aren't going. None of us give a damn. I would literally prefer watching a high school game.

LaTech would have gone to the Final Four last year if only CUSA had held its tournament that way.

(12-19-2015 09:48 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(12-18-2015 11:41 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote:  

(12-18-2015 10:41 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  [quote='the_blazerman' pid='12803804' dateline='1450494085']
Have some conferences in the past had a round or two of the conference tournament at various sites with the higher seed hosting?

The thing that makes no sense for cusa is having a game between number 11 fiu vs number 14 utsa in Birmingham. Those fans aren't going. None of us give a damn. I would literally prefer watching a high school game.

How about seeds 10 @ 7 and 9 @ 8, play at the respective high seeds then the survivors play at the tournament host location?

I still don't like it. Why even create the potential of having the 9 or 10 seed knock off the 1 or 2? There is no reason a top team should be forced to play an additional game that can lower their rpi. If you can't finish top 8 over the course of the regular season, you don't deserve an opportunity to represent the conference in the big dance.

+1


Stop rewarding mediocre programs, I say make it a ten team tournament two play ins.

(12-19-2015 11:31 AM)Big Dee Wrote:  I still don't like it. Why even create the potential of having the 9 or 10 seed knock off the 1 or 2?

In the mid 80's, Old Dominion had a really good team, with the conference player of the year (Gattison) and another guy who might have been better (Davis?). They went 14-0 through the conference. Jacksonville came into the tournament at 0-14, and beat Old Dominion at like 10 in the morning on Day One.

(12-19-2015 11:31 AM)Big Dee Wrote:  

(12-19-2015 09:48 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(12-18-2015 11:41 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote:  

(12-18-2015 10:41 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  [quote='the_blazerman' pid='12803804' dateline='1450494085']
Have some conferences in the past had a round or two of the conference tournament at various sites with the higher seed hosting?

The thing that makes no sense for cusa is having a game between number 11 fiu vs number 14 utsa in Birmingham. Those fans aren't going. None of us give a damn. I would literally prefer watching a high school game.

How about seeds 10 @ 7 and 9 @ 8, play at the respective high seeds then the survivors play at the tournament host location?

I still don't like it. Why even create the potential of having the 9 or 10 seed knock off the 1 or 2? There is no reason a top team should be forced to play an additional game that can lower their rpi. If you can't finish top 8 over the course of the regular season, you don't deserve an opportunity to represent the conference in the big dance.

+1


Stop rewarding mediocre programs, I say make it a ten team tournament two play ins.

The "I say make it a ten team tournament two play ins" is exactly what I said, except I propose having the play in games at the 7 and 8 seeds' home turf where there might actually be attendance, and it rewards them for not being seeded 14-9 and makes it more difficult for seeds 9 and 10.

If you think it should be an 8 team tournament with all of it played at the host city, that is a fair argument with pro's and cons.

(12-19-2015 12:53 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(12-19-2015 11:31 AM)Big Dee Wrote:  I still don't like it. Why even create the potential of having the 9 or 10 seed knock off the 1 or 2?

In the mid 80's, Old Dominion had a really good team, with the conference player of the year (Gattison) and another guy who might have been better (Davis?). They went 14-0 through the conference. Jacksonville came into the tournament at 0-14, and beat Old Dominion at like 10 in the morning on Day One.

Kenny Gattison was player of the year in 1986. That year ODU finished the regular season with 3 conference losses. They did lose to Jacksonville, in their 2nd tournament game. Jacksonville was 9-5 (with a regular season win over ODU) and went on to win the conference tournament

(12-19-2015 01:40 PM)LairDweller Wrote:  

(12-19-2015 12:53 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(12-19-2015 11:31 AM)Big Dee Wrote:  I still don't like it. Why even create the potential of having the 9 or 10 seed knock off the 1 or 2?

In the mid 80's, Old Dominion had a really good team, with the conference player of the year (Gattison) and another guy who might have been better (Davis?). They went 14-0 through the conference. Jacksonville came into the tournament at 0-14, and beat Old Dominion at like 10 in the morning on Day One.

Kenny Gattison was player of the year in 1986. That year ODU finished the regular season with 3 conference losses. They did lose to Jacksonville, in their 2nd tournament game. Jacksonville was 9-5 (with a regular season win over ODU) and went on to win the conference tournament

I like the way I remember it better.