(02-17-2021 09:35 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 09:26 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've been an Indiana Hoosier fan for many years and recall the days that Coach R. M. Knight contended the winners of Big Ten tournament should not be the automatic rep of the league in the NCAA tourney. He argued such an arrangement cheapened the regular season and minimized the achievement of the Big Ten regular season champion — and I agree. I would be OK with seeing the end of post-season league tourneys but realize that's not going to happen.

My problem with this is twofold. Unless you're in a conference that does a double round robin with each playing all the others H&H then someone will have a scheduling advantage for regular season play. And second, I loathe the idea of an NCAA bid being awarded based on some tiebreaker rule.

Regular season championship should get you a #1 seed in the conference tournament and an NIT autobid. In March, you win and move on.

Both your points are valid. There is no perfect system. But the question is simple: Which of the two options is "the lesser evil"? R. Montgomery Knight and Bill Dazzle agree that sending the regular-season champ to the Big Dance is "less bad" than having the league tourney winner be the rep.

(02-17-2021 09:26 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've been an Indiana Hoosier fan for many years and recall the days that Coach R. M. Knight contended the winners of Big Ten tournament should not be the automatic rep of the league in the NCAA tourney. He argued such an arrangement cheapened the regular season and minimized the achievement of the Big Ten regular season champion — and I agree. I would be OK with seeing the end of post-season league tourneys but realize that's not going to happen.

Well, that's because the culture in the B1G, like the PAC, was along the lines of what Knight described - revering the regular season and not having a conference tournament. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, it was a tradition that on the weekend most other major conferences were holding their tournaments, the B1G would have a final slate of regular season games with often the championship being on the line. The B1G and PAC have only been holding tournament for 20 or so years now.

The B1G could just abandon its tournament again any time it wants, but the NCAA rule is that if you hold a tournament the winner must be the auto-bid receiver. You can't have a tournament but give your auto-bid to the regular season champ. So that rule prevents the B1G from honoring its regular season champ the way its culture might want to, with the auto-bid. And that culture is not strong enough to overcome the money and exposure of having a tournament.

(02-17-2021 09:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 09:26 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've been an Indiana Hoosier fan for many years and recall the days that Coach R. M. Knight contended the winners of Big Ten tournament should not be the automatic rep of the league in the NCAA tourney. He argued such an arrangement cheapened the regular season and minimized the achievement of the Big Ten regular season champion — and I agree. I would be OK with seeing the end of post-season league tourneys but realize that's not going to happen.

Well, that's because the culture in the B1G, like the PAC, was along the lines of what Knight described - revering the regular season and not having a conference tournament. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, it was a tradition that on the weekend most other major conferences were holding their tournaments, the B1G would have a final slate of regular season games with often the championship being on the line. The B1G and PAC have only been holding tournament for 20 or so years now.

The B1G could just abandon its tournament again any time it wants, but the NCAA rule is that if you hold a tournament the winner must be the auto-bid receiver. You can't have a tournament but give your auto-bid to the regular season champ. So that rule prevents the B1G from honoring its regular season champ the way its culture might want to, with the auto-bid. And that culture is not strong enough to overcome the money and exposure of having a tournament.

This is all accurate, indeed, QV.

I liked the day when the Big Ten had no tourney. But, admittedly, IU was much better back then (than it is now), and it was to the program's advantage for the league to not have a postseason event. Now it actually helps Indiana (at least in theory) that there is a Big Ten tourney.

Maybe I'm a hypocrite on this topic.

That's some old school 11 team Big 10 co champions (who didn't play each other) level thinking by the WCC

(02-17-2021 08:42 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:16 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 07:56 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  Yeah, if the Zags don't play the conference shouldn't get an autobid. Clearly gaming the system.

Or, the NCAA could simply say that any team that opts out of its conference tournament is ineligible for the NCAAT. Why penalize St Mary's for something Gonzaga chooses to do?

Everyone - we're not getting any "fire and brimstone" responses from the NCAA this year. Anyone that thinks that's happening is going to be sorely mistaken. Ohio State made the CFP this year only playing 6 regular season games and the powers that be didn't bat an eyelash. No one is excluding the possible #1 overall seed. For the purposes of this particular season where we have very clearly defined top 2 teams (Gonzaga and Baylor), Gonzaga basically has the power here to whatever it wants.

That being said, the original report seems like more of an "internal weighing and discussions" exercise (which all ADs do regularly) as opposed to being anything close to a decision, so my guess is that Gonzaga and BYU end up going to the WCC Tournament as normal.

I didn't say what the NCAA would do. Just that they could, and IMO, should. The NCAA is nothing if not hypocritical. This speculation (and that's all it is for now) exposes a loophole in the NCAA's selection method which gives an autobid to every conference, whether deserved or not.

If, in this unusual year, a team like Gonzaga opts out of its conference tournament ostensibly for the safety of its players and coaches, and then plays in a larger tournament that poses at least as much risk to those same players and coaches, they are clearly gaming the system. That is a precedent that the NCAA should not set.

Next year, without COVID, that same highly ranked Gonzaga team the NCAA desperately wants in its tournament could opt out again, citing the risk of injury to its players if they were to participate in a tournament that is essentially meaningless to them. They could even do this with the blessing of their conference (whose tournament probably isn't much of a moneymaker anyway) in order to ensure that the WCC gets an additional bid they might not otherwise have gotten. Or, they could play in their conference tournament and tank by withholding all their starters and accomplish the same thing.

Of course, another way to close this loophole would be to do away with autobids entirely, and just invite the top 64 teams by whatever metric feels right. I would expect, if the NCAA were to do that, half the conference tournaments would be permanently canceled. But they would never do that, because the NCAA is too beholden to all those voting presidents.

(02-17-2021 09:40 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 09:35 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 09:26 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've been an Indiana Hoosier fan for many years and recall the days that Coach R. M. Knight contended the winners of Big Ten tournament should not be the automatic rep of the league in the NCAA tourney. He argued such an arrangement cheapened the regular season and minimized the achievement of the Big Ten regular season champion — and I agree. I would be OK with seeing the end of post-season league tourneys but realize that's not going to happen.

My problem with this is twofold. Unless you're in a conference that does a double round robin with each playing all the others H&H then someone will have a scheduling advantage for regular season play. And second, I loathe the idea of an NCAA bid being awarded based on some tiebreaker rule.

Regular season championship should get you a #1 seed in the conference tournament and an NIT autobid. In March, you win and move on.

Both your points are valid. There is no perfect system. But the question is simple: Which of the two options is "the lesser evil"? R. Montgomery Knight and Bill Dazzle agree that sending the regular-season champ to the Big Dance is "less bad" than having the league tourney winner be the rep.

I like the idea that starting in March, every NCAA team still has a shot to win the title.

But Coach Knight had a good point. But there is a way to reward the regular season champ while still giving everyone a shot at the conference tourney: give the regular season champ a double-bye (or even a triple-bye) in the conference tournament.

I also really like how the NIT now takes all regular season conference champs. That's a huge incentive for over half of D1 conferences. That's been the best change to postseason play since the expansion to 64 teams in the 80s.

I expect more of this come. Houston could do this in the AAC to open up another bid.

(02-17-2021 08:46 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Imagine an NCAA tournament where every “lock” opted out of their conference tournament.

Maybe the way it should be since the Conference Tournament is fun but ridiculous. Play 30 games between Nov-March that don't really count; get hot and win 3-4 games and you're in the NCAAT? SMH. Dumb.

(02-17-2021 09:30 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  Send Gonzaga to the NIT

yeah, that ain't happening.

(02-17-2021 10:46 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 09:40 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 09:35 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 09:26 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've been an Indiana Hoosier fan for many years and recall the days that Coach R. M. Knight contended the winners of Big Ten tournament should not be the automatic rep of the league in the NCAA tourney. He argued such an arrangement cheapened the regular season and minimized the achievement of the Big Ten regular season champion — and I agree. I would be OK with seeing the end of post-season league tourneys but realize that's not going to happen.

My problem with this is twofold. Unless you're in a conference that does a double round robin with each playing all the others H&H then someone will have a scheduling advantage for regular season play. And second, I loathe the idea of an NCAA bid being awarded based on some tiebreaker rule.

Regular season championship should get you a #1 seed in the conference tournament and an NIT autobid. In March, you win and move on.

Both your points are valid. There is no perfect system. But the question is simple: Which of the two options is "the lesser evil"? R. Montgomery Knight and Bill Dazzle agree that sending the regular-season champ to the Big Dance is "less bad" than having the league tourney winner be the rep.

I like the idea that starting in March, every NCAA team still has a shot to win the title.

But Coach Knight had a good point. But there is a way to reward the regular season champ while still giving everyone a shot at the conference tourney: give the regular season champ a double-bye (or even a triple-bye) in the conference tournament.

I also really like how the NIT now takes all regular season conference champs. That's a huge incentive for over half of D1 conferences. That's been the best change to postseason play since the expansion to 64 teams in the 80s.

They all have a shot but an undeserved one.

(02-17-2021 10:07 AM)solohawks Wrote:  That's some old school 11 team Big 10 co champions (who didn't play each other) level thinking by the WCC

Why wouldn't they play each other? Everyone should have each team on their schedule at least once.

(02-17-2021 10:10 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:42 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:16 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 07:56 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  Yeah, if the Zags don't play the conference shouldn't get an autobid. Clearly gaming the system.

Or, the NCAA could simply say that any team that opts out of its conference tournament is ineligible for the NCAAT. Why penalize St Mary's for something Gonzaga chooses to do?

Everyone - we're not getting any "fire and brimstone" responses from the NCAA this year. Anyone that thinks that's happening is going to be sorely mistaken. Ohio State made the CFP this year only playing 6 regular season games and the powers that be didn't bat an eyelash. No one is excluding the possible #1 overall seed. For the purposes of this particular season where we have very clearly defined top 2 teams (Gonzaga and Baylor), Gonzaga basically has the power here to whatever it wants.

That being said, the original report seems like more of an "internal weighing and discussions" exercise (which all ADs do regularly) as opposed to being anything close to a decision, so my guess is that Gonzaga and BYU end up going to the WCC Tournament as normal.

I didn't say what the NCAA would do. Just that they could, and IMO, should. The NCAA is nothing if not hypocritical. This speculation (and that's all it is for now) exposes a loophole in the NCAA's selection method which gives an autobid to every conference, whether deserved or not.

If, in this unusual year, a team like Gonzaga opts out of its conference tournament ostensibly for the safety of its players and coaches, and then plays in a larger tournament that poses at least as much risk to those same players and coaches, they are clearly gaming the system. That is a precedent that the NCAA should not set.

Next year, without COVID, that same highly ranked Gonzaga team the NCAA desperately wants in its tournament could opt out again, citing the risk of injury to its players if they were to participate in a tournament that is essentially meaningless to them. They could even do this with the blessing of their conference (whose tournament probably isn't much of a moneymaker anyway) in order to ensure that the WCC gets an additional bid they might not otherwise have gotten. Or, they could play in their conference tournament and tank by withholding all their starters and accomplish the same thing.

Of course, another way to close this loophole would be to do away with autobids entirely, and just invite the top 64 teams by whatever metric feels right. I would expect, if the NCAA were to do that, half the conference tournaments would be permanently canceled. But they would never do that, because the NCAA is too beholden to all those voting presidents.

Oh I think they're going to change the rules in the offseason to close off this loophole....

Hopefully there won't be another situation like this for another 100 years and so it's a really moot point.

(02-17-2021 08:50 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:44 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:42 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:16 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 07:56 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  Yeah, if the Zags don't play the conference shouldn't get an autobid. Clearly gaming the system.

Or, the NCAA could simply say that any team that opts out of its conference tournament is ineligible for the NCAAT. Why penalize St Mary's for something Gonzaga chooses to do?

Everyone - we're not getting any "fire and brimstone" responses from the NCAA this year. Anyone that thinks that's happening is going to be sorely mistaken. Ohio State made the CFP this year only playing 6 regular season games and the powers that be didn't bat an eyelash. No one is excluding the possible #1 overall seed. For the purposes of this particular season where we have very clearly defined top 2 teams (Gonzaga and Baylor), Gonzaga basically has the power here to whatever it wants.

That being said, the original report seems like more of an "internal weighing and discussions" exercise (which all ADs do regularly) as opposed to being anything close to a decision, so my guess is that Gonzaga and BYU end up going to the WCC Tournament as normal.

The NCAA explicitly does not govern the CFP.

Correct, but the institutions that control the NCAA also control the CFP.

The point is that no one is locking out a team that has a legit shot at winning the National Championship. That's just not happening. They're moving hell and highwater to hold this NCAA Tournament in one metro area for TV purposes so they sure as heck aren't going to lock out one of the biggest TV draws in Gonzaga (a school that clearly deserves to be there on merit, anyway).

And why couldn't they do this in 2020? 32 teams.

(02-17-2021 12:39 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 12:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  Well, that’s fine I guess. I just don’t want to see teams try this during normalcy. Sorry, you’re dropping seeds.

Gonzaga won't drop a seed line this year- they'll still be a 1 seed.

Oh, I know. This year everybody gets a pass. I’m saying during normalcy if teams try to pull this they should be penalized.

(02-17-2021 08:43 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 07:56 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  Yeah, if the Zags don't play the conference shouldn't get an autobid. Clearly gaming the system.

In fairness, the system deserves to be gamed. Having preliminary brackets to mimic what the CFP does is just asking for this kind of trouble. We will see it during "normalcy" too, as a result.

Right, those brackets are so ****ing stupid. It’s putting Joey Brackets out of a job for crying out loud!!!

(02-17-2021 11:25 AM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 10:07 AM)solohawks Wrote:  That's some old school 11 team Big 10 co champions (who didn't play each other) level thinking by the WCC

Why wouldn't they play each other? Everyone should have each team on their schedule at least once.

2002 under the old BCS system - Big 10 had two teams finish 8-0 - Iowa and Ohio St.

Because there was no Big 10 championship game, Ohio St (13-0) played Miami in the Fiesta Bowl that year for the national title and Iowa (11-1) played USC in the Orange Bowl.

Had they played each other
Ohio St might have been knocked out of the Championship game in favor of #3 Georgia

OR

Iowa might have been been knocked out of the Orange Bowl in favor of Notre Dame

Having co-champions provided the best possible outcome for the Big 10

(02-17-2021 11:23 AM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:46 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Imagine an NCAA tournament where every “lock” opted out of their conference tournament.

Maybe the way it should be since the Conference Tournament is fun but ridiculous. Play 30 games between Nov-March that don't really count; get hot and win 3-4 games and you're in the NCAAT? SMH. Dumb.

If you get beat by some scrub in your conference and haven't already built a resume for an at large by then is your team really an NCAA level team? So what if you're 2 games up in your conference standings.

(02-17-2021 11:25 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 10:10 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:42 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:16 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 07:56 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  Yeah, if the Zags don't play the conference shouldn't get an autobid. Clearly gaming the system.

Or, the NCAA could simply say that any team that opts out of its conference tournament is ineligible for the NCAAT. Why penalize St Mary's for something Gonzaga chooses to do?

Everyone - we're not getting any "fire and brimstone" responses from the NCAA this year. Anyone that thinks that's happening is going to be sorely mistaken. Ohio State made the CFP this year only playing 6 regular season games and the powers that be didn't bat an eyelash. No one is excluding the possible #1 overall seed. For the purposes of this particular season where we have very clearly defined top 2 teams (Gonzaga and Baylor), Gonzaga basically has the power here to whatever it wants.

That being said, the original report seems like more of an "internal weighing and discussions" exercise (which all ADs do regularly) as opposed to being anything close to a decision, so my guess is that Gonzaga and BYU end up going to the WCC Tournament as normal.

I didn't say what the NCAA would do. Just that they could, and IMO, should. The NCAA is nothing if not hypocritical. This speculation (and that's all it is for now) exposes a loophole in the NCAA's selection method which gives an autobid to every conference, whether deserved or not.

If, in this unusual year, a team like Gonzaga opts out of its conference tournament ostensibly for the safety of its players and coaches, and then plays in a larger tournament that poses at least as much risk to those same players and coaches, they are clearly gaming the system. That is a precedent that the NCAA should not set.

Next year, without COVID, that same highly ranked Gonzaga team the NCAA desperately wants in its tournament could opt out again, citing the risk of injury to its players if they were to participate in a tournament that is essentially meaningless to them. They could even do this with the blessing of their conference (whose tournament probably isn't much of a moneymaker anyway) in order to ensure that the WCC gets an additional bid they might not otherwise have gotten. Or, they could play in their conference tournament and tank by withholding all their starters and accomplish the same thing.

Of course, another way to close this loophole would be to do away with autobids entirely, and just invite the top 64 teams by whatever metric feels right. I would expect, if the NCAA were to do that, half the conference tournaments would be permanently canceled. But they would never do that, because the NCAA is too beholden to all those voting presidents.

Oh I think they're going to change the rules in the offseason to close off this loophole....

Hopefully there won't be another situation like this for another 100 years and so it's a really moot point.

I would assume they would close it but have something about allowing teams to skip the tournaments if there's a pandemic.

(02-17-2021 12:24 PM)46566 Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 11:25 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 10:10 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:42 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 08:16 AM)ken d Wrote:  Or, the NCAA could simply say that any team that opts out of its conference tournament is ineligible for the NCAAT. Why penalize St Mary's for something Gonzaga chooses to do?

Everyone - we're not getting any "fire and brimstone" responses from the NCAA this year. Anyone that thinks that's happening is going to be sorely mistaken. Ohio State made the CFP this year only playing 6 regular season games and the powers that be didn't bat an eyelash. No one is excluding the possible #1 overall seed. For the purposes of this particular season where we have very clearly defined top 2 teams (Gonzaga and Baylor), Gonzaga basically has the power here to whatever it wants.

That being said, the original report seems like more of an "internal weighing and discussions" exercise (which all ADs do regularly) as opposed to being anything close to a decision, so my guess is that Gonzaga and BYU end up going to the WCC Tournament as normal.

I didn't say what the NCAA would do. Just that they could, and IMO, should. The NCAA is nothing if not hypocritical. This speculation (and that's all it is for now) exposes a loophole in the NCAA's selection method which gives an autobid to every conference, whether deserved or not.

If, in this unusual year, a team like Gonzaga opts out of its conference tournament ostensibly for the safety of its players and coaches, and then plays in a larger tournament that poses at least as much risk to those same players and coaches, they are clearly gaming the system. That is a precedent that the NCAA should not set.

Next year, without COVID, that same highly ranked Gonzaga team the NCAA desperately wants in its tournament could opt out again, citing the risk of injury to its players if they were to participate in a tournament that is essentially meaningless to them. They could even do this with the blessing of their conference (whose tournament probably isn't much of a moneymaker anyway) in order to ensure that the WCC gets an additional bid they might not otherwise have gotten. Or, they could play in their conference tournament and tank by withholding all their starters and accomplish the same thing.

Of course, another way to close this loophole would be to do away with autobids entirely, and just invite the top 64 teams by whatever metric feels right. I would expect, if the NCAA were to do that, half the conference tournaments would be permanently canceled. But they would never do that, because the NCAA is too beholden to all those voting presidents.

Oh I think they're going to change the rules in the offseason to close off this loophole....

Hopefully there won't be another situation like this for another 100 years and so it's a really moot point.

I would assume they would close it but have something about allowing teams to skip the tournaments if there's a pandemic.

yeah exactly.

(02-17-2021 09:55 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 09:42 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-17-2021 09:26 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've been an Indiana Hoosier fan for many years and recall the days that Coach R. M. Knight contended the winners of Big Ten tournament should not be the automatic rep of the league in the NCAA tourney. He argued such an arrangement cheapened the regular season and minimized the achievement of the Big Ten regular season champion — and I agree. I would be OK with seeing the end of post-season league tourneys but realize that's not going to happen.

Well, that's because the culture in the B1G, like the PAC, was along the lines of what Knight described - revering the regular season and not having a conference tournament. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, it was a tradition that on the weekend most other major conferences were holding their tournaments, the B1G would have a final slate of regular season games with often the championship being on the line. The B1G and PAC have only been holding tournament for 20 or so years now.

The B1G could just abandon its tournament again any time it wants, but the NCAA rule is that if you hold a tournament the winner must be the auto-bid receiver. You can't have a tournament but give your auto-bid to the regular season champ. So that rule prevents the B1G from honoring its regular season champ the way its culture might want to, with the auto-bid. And that culture is not strong enough to overcome the money and exposure of having a tournament.

This is all accurate, indeed, QV.

I liked the day when the Big Ten had no tourney. But, admittedly, IU was much better back then (than it is now), and it was to the program's advantage for the league to not have a postseason event. Now it actually helps Indiana (at least in theory) that there is a Big Ten tourney.

Maybe I'm a hypocrite on this topic.

As someone who grew up in ACC territory and is a fan of a Big East team, I have always loved conference tournaments. IMO they are the gemstones of the ACC and Big East seasons.

But I agree, for the B1G and PAC they still feel out of place, twenty years later. A diversity of traditions and cultures is one of the things that makes college athletics interesting, and sadly, the economics forced monolithic adoption of these tournaments by all conferences, even those where it is a poor fit.

I too miss the days when say, circa 1988, Georgetown would be playing Syracuse in the Big East tournament final and on the same afternoon Indiana would be facing Iowa in their final regular season game for the Big 10 title.

As for the impact on making the NCAA tournament, I think the conference tournaments are a double-edge sword. They can allow a team on the bubble to make a run and seal the deal, or an early exit can knock a bubble team out. It just depends.