CSNbbs

Coach K and some of the other ACC coaches are pushing for every team to be in the March Madness tournament for the upcoming season.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaabk/...r-BB18S3u3

This reminds me of an old idea that I had suggested.
As soon as the regular season ends, have the selection committee pick the top 32 teams in the nation. Those teams get an automatic bid to the field of 64, and seeded 1-8, without having to participate in their conference tournament. The other 314 teams would all be required to participate in their conference tournaments. The winners of the 32 conference tournaments would get an automatic bid to the field of 64, and get seeded 9-16. So the conference tournaments would basically become the early rounds of the NCAA tournament, and it would be like having a single elimination tournament with all 346 teams.

(09-10-2020 04:30 AM)andy98 Wrote: [ -> ]Coach K and some of the other ACC coaches are pushing for every team to be in the March Madness tournament for the upcoming season.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaabk/...r-BB18S3u3

This reminds me of an old idea that I had suggested.
As soon as the regular season ends, have the selection committee pick the top 32 teams in the nation. Those teams get an automatic bid to the field of 64, and seeded 1-8, without having to participate in their conference tournament. The other 314 teams would all be required to participate in their conference tournaments. The winners of the 32 conference tournaments would get an automatic bid to the field of 64, and get seeded 9-16. So the conference tournaments would basically become the early rounds of the NCAA tournament, and it would be like having a single elimination tournament with all 346 teams.

There is a flaw in your thinking here. Conference tournaments are big moneymakers, especially for the power conferences whose teams would tend to dominate the Top 32 seeds. Removing those teams from their conference tournaments would be a major downer, and substantially reduce their monetary value to the media partners and cities that host those tourneys.

It would also increase the likelihood that a relatively weak team could win its tournament with such a depleted field, at the expense of a team that had performed much better during the regular season. It could even have the effect of making the round of 64 even less competitive than it is now.

I was confused at first why the were 346 instead of 357.

To clarify, the link above provides another link to the Raleigh-based News and Observer site. That says that 11 programs would be ineligible because they are either still transitioning to D1 or they are barred from participating due to low APR scores or NCAA sanctions.

(09-10-2020 06:53 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote: [ -> ]I was confused at first why the were 346 instead of 357.

To clarify, the link above provides another link to the Raleigh-based News and Observer site. That says that 11 programs would be ineligible because they are either still transitioning to D1 or they are barred from participating due to low APR scores or NCAA sanctions.

Imagine if this had been in place last year. Vanderbilt would have been praying that one of those 11 ineligible teams was ranked ahead of them so they could avoid the ignominy of having to play in to the round of 256. Or worse, to be Nebraska and knowing you have to play in. How embarrassing.

(09-10-2020 07:24 AM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020 06:53 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote: [ -> ]I was confused at first why the were 346 instead of 357.

To clarify, the link above provides another link to the Raleigh-based News and Observer site. That says that 11 programs would be ineligible because they are either still transitioning to D1 or they are barred from participating due to low APR scores or NCAA sanctions.

Imagine if this had been in place last year. Vanderbilt would have been praying that one of those 11 ineligible teams was ranked ahead of them so they could avoid the ignominy of having to play in to the round of 256. Or worse, to be Nebraska and knowing you have to play in. How embarrassing.

That would assume the seedings followed the metrics, and that usually isn’t the case. I would wager that, even as bad as they were, Nebraska would seed higher than thought (they ended at 199 in NET?). It would be due to the overall strength of that Big Ten schedule, and I’m sure it would probably get the nod above some others along the way. For some reason, the committee seems to put more or double weight/consideration on SOS. Heck, how can UNL be that bad and STILL not be below the 200 line? Thank the strength of the rest of the Big Ten...

(09-10-2020 04:30 AM)andy98 Wrote: [ -> ]Coach K and some of the other ACC coaches are pushing for every team to be in the March Madness tournament for the upcoming season.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaabk/...r-BB18S3u3

This reminds me of an old idea that I had suggested.
As soon as the regular season ends, have the selection committee pick the top 32 teams in the nation. Those teams get an automatic bid to the field of 64, and seeded 1-8, without having to participate in their conference tournament. The other 314 teams would all be required to participate in their conference tournaments. The winners of the 32 conference tournaments would get an automatic bid to the field of 64, and get seeded 9-16. So the conference tournaments would basically become the early rounds of the NCAA tournament, and it would be like having a single elimination tournament with all 346 teams.

Good idea for next March/April - - if it isn't going to turn into a "super-spreader" event. Hopefully, everyone can be vaccinated by then, to make that possible.

Silly idea.

Not surprisingly, the NCAA has rejected the idea:

Thank God. The ACC "proposal" was not only flawed in concept and execution, but agenda-driven as well. The ACC does not care about the smaller schools and "the love of basketball". If they all did, then Duke would travel to Davidson, UNC to UNC-Wilmington, Virginia to VCU, etc. The 2021 ACC Men's Basketball Tournament is also in D.C.; if it was scheduled to be in Greensboro, I highly doubt that they would be so quick to eliminate it (and/or eliminate non-conference play).

I just told my 89-year-old father of the ACC proposal and he was dumbfounded — and fully opposed to it.

For some odd reason, I rather like the idea.

(09-10-2020 04:30 AM)andy98 Wrote: [ -> ]Coach K and some of the other ACC coaches are pushing for every team to be in the March Madness tournament for the upcoming season.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaabk/...r-BB18S3u3

This reminds me of an old idea that I had suggested.
As soon as the regular season ends, have the selection committee pick the top 32 teams in the nation. Those teams get an automatic bid to the field of 64, and seeded 1-8, without having to participate in their conference tournament. The other 314 teams would all be required to participate in their conference tournaments. The winners of the 32 conference tournaments would get an automatic bid to the field of 64, and get seeded 9-16. So the conference tournaments would basically become the early rounds of the NCAA tournament, and it would be like having a single elimination tournament with all 346 teams.

(09-10-2020 01:04 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]I just told my 89-year-old father of the ACC proposal and he was dumbfounded — and fully opposed to it.

For some odd reason, I rather like the idea.

That's because as affable as you are, you are the perfect reverse barometer. The concept stinks and the ACC coaches know it. They also know it will push the P5 schools closer towards a basketball breakaway. There will be 1/6th the tournament revenue per school to be paid out and the regular seasons & any conference tournaments (should they even be held) become totally meaningless.

With the pandemic issue, I would give a waiver to the ineligible schools so that can recoup money lost. Imagine Dixie State goes all the way to the Sweet 16, or Bellarmine going to the field of 8?

(09-10-2020 09:11 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: [ -> ]Thank God. The ACC "proposal" was not only flawed in concept and execution, but agenda-driven as well. The ACC does not care about the smaller schools and "the love of basketball". If they all did, then Duke would travel to Davidson, UNC to UNC-Wilmington, Virginia to VCU, etc. The 2021 ACC Men's Basketball Tournament is also in D.C.; if it was scheduled to be in Greensboro, I highly doubt that they would be so quick to eliminate it (and/or eliminate non-conference play).

The ACC does things for one reason: for the good of the ACC.

For one year I'd be fine with it

A more realistic idea, for this season only, would be to have every team in the nation compete in their conference tournament. Then have all 32 conference tournament winners go to the NCAA tournament, which would only consist of those 32 champions, rather than have 68 teams. So the conference tournaments would basically be the early rounds of the NCAA tournament, and it would still be like having a single elimination tournament with every team in the nation.

(09-10-2020 04:30 AM)andy98 Wrote: [ -> ]Coach K and some of the other ACC coaches are pushing for every team to be in the March Madness tournament for the upcoming season.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaabk/...r-BB18S3u3

This reminds me of an old idea that I had suggested.
As soon as the regular season ends, have the selection committee pick the top 32 teams in the nation. Those teams get an automatic bid to the field of 64, and seeded 1-8, without having to participate in their conference tournament. The other 314 teams would all be required to participate in their conference tournaments. The winners of the 32 conference tournaments would get an automatic bid to the field of 64, and get seeded 9-16. So the conference tournaments would basically become the early rounds of the NCAA tournament, and it would be like having a single elimination tournament with all 346 teams.

Why not? The tourney nis pretty much garbage at this point. Why not make it worse?

(09-10-2020 02:38 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020 01:04 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]I just told my 89-year-old father of the ACC proposal and he was dumbfounded — and fully opposed to it.

For some odd reason, I rather like the idea.

That's because as affable as you are, you are the perfect reverse barometer. The concept stinks and the ACC coaches know it. They also know it will push the P5 schools closer towards a basketball breakaway. There will be 1/6th the tournament revenue per school to be paid out and the regular seasons & any conference tournaments (should they even be held) become totally meaningless.

I shall have a T-shirt made that reads: "Affable Yet a Perfect Reverse Barometer." We will see how the ladies respond.

(09-11-2020 08:31 AM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020 02:38 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020 01:04 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]I just told my 89-year-old father of the ACC proposal and he was dumbfounded — and fully opposed to it.

For some odd reason, I rather like the idea.

That's because as affable as you are, you are the perfect reverse barometer. The concept stinks and the ACC coaches know it. They also know it will push the P5 schools closer towards a basketball breakaway. There will be 1/6th the tournament revenue per school to be paid out and the regular seasons & any conference tournaments (should they even be held) become totally meaningless.

I shall have a T-shirt made that reads: "Affable Yet a Perfect Reverse Barometer." We will see how the ladies respond.

Think of the possibilities that opens to you. You can tell a woman she has no chance of marriage and she'll love you for it. You can tell her not to play the lotto and she'll buy $100 worth of tickets. If you want to ditch her you can tell her that some other guy will never make it big and isn't interested in her and she'll leave immediately for him. It's really quite the shield and weapon at the same time.

You can't get mad with affable and if she believes you to be a reverse barometer you can still make anything happen you wish.

You can tell one that if she makes love to you tonight her life will be ruined and she'll hop on you like a slow moving freight train bound for Vegas.

It's all a matter of perspective Bill.

(09-11-2020 11:09 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-11-2020 08:31 AM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020 02:38 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-10-2020 01:04 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]I just told my 89-year-old father of the ACC proposal and he was dumbfounded — and fully opposed to it.

For some odd reason, I rather like the idea.

That's because as affable as you are, you are the perfect reverse barometer. The concept stinks and the ACC coaches know it. They also know it will push the P5 schools closer towards a basketball breakaway. There will be 1/6th the tournament revenue per school to be paid out and the regular seasons & any conference tournaments (should they even be held) become totally meaningless.

I shall have a T-shirt made that reads: "Affable Yet a Perfect Reverse Barometer." We will see how the ladies respond.

Think of the possibilities that opens to you. You can tell a woman she has no chance of marriage and she'll love you for it. You can tell her not to play the lotto and she'll buy $100 worth of tickets. If you want to ditch her you can tell her that some other guy will never make it big and isn't interested in her and she'll leave immediately for him. It's really quite the shield and weapon at the same time.

You can't get mad with affable and if she believes you to be a reverse barometer you can still make anything happen you wish.

You can tell one that if she makes love to you tonight her life will be ruined and she'll hop on you like a slow moving freight train bound for Vegas.

It's all a matter of perspective Bill.

JRsec with words of wisdom as always.

The key is that when I note to the lady that I find antipodism (also called "foot juggling") fascinating ... she not only does not recoil but, instead, wants to plant a big kiss on my chinless visage.

I posted this previously:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfhvM5AoFsg