(03-10-2013 08:22 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 08:02 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 02:40 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  I'm probably in the minority, but I prefer giving the automatic bid to the regular season champ. Winning a regular season conference title is a much bigger feat than winning a three or four day tournament. But, the conferences love their conference tournaments and without the automatic bid attached to them, they would be meaningless. If they did give the automatic bids to the conference regular season champions, you could have a stronger NCAA tournament, mainly because the participants from the middle level and lower level conferences would be the best from those leagues.

The why even have an NCAA tourney?

Gonzaga National Champs

Right, everyone gets upset that football doesn't have a playoff but then gets upset that basketball teams that have no business being in the tournament win a conference tournament and get in. Hard to have it both ways.

This, ECU would have no NCAA Appearances to it's record. Both times we got in by winning our conference tournament.

Middle Tenn won the Sun Belt regular season and now have to settle for NIT since they didn't win the tournament

(03-10-2013 08:40 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  Middle Tenn won the Sun Belt regular season and now have to settle for NIT since they didn't win the tournament

I see them going to the NCAA. No outstanding wins, but a very good record, and an RPI above 30.

(03-10-2013 08:51 PM)monarchman Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 08:40 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  Middle Tenn won the Sun Belt regular season and now have to settle for NIT since they didn't win the tournament

I see them going to the NCAA. No outstanding wins, but a very good record, and an RPI above 30.

I hope they get in, but the selection committee tends to screw teams that aren't from big conferences

(03-10-2013 08:52 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 08:51 PM)monarchman Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 08:40 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  Middle Tenn won the Sun Belt regular season and now have to settle for NIT since they didn't win the tournament

I see them going to the NCAA. No outstanding wins, but a very good record, and an RPI above 30.

I hope they get in, but the selection committee tends to screw teams that aren't from big conferences

If I'm a MTSU fan, I'd be rooting for FIU to win the Sun Belt. It would only make this look like less of a bad loss and help MTSU's resume, although marginally.

(03-10-2013 09:07 PM)monarchman Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 08:52 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 08:51 PM)monarchman Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 08:40 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  Middle Tenn won the Sun Belt regular season and now have to settle for NIT since they didn't win the tournament

I see them going to the NCAA. No outstanding wins, but a very good record, and an RPI above 30.

I hope they get in, but the selection committee tends to screw teams that aren't from big conferences

If I'm a MTSU fan, I'd be rooting for FIU to win the Sun Belt. It would only make this look like less of a bad loss and help MTSU's resume, although marginally.

we should all be going for FIU anyway because they will be in CUSA next season

MTSU will probably get in. La Tech should get in regardless of the tourney, but I'm less optimistic. USM might get in, but likely needs to reach the finals. But really all 3 deserve it.

(03-10-2013 09:32 PM)DrBox Wrote:  MTSU will probably get in. La Tech should get in regardless of the tourney, but I'm less optimistic. USM might get in, but likely needs to reach the finals. But really all 3 deserve it.

I've seen a few predictors that have all three out if they don't win their respective tourneys.

One bracketologist had them as three of the last four out actually.

(03-10-2013 08:51 PM)monarchman Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 08:40 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  Middle Tenn won the Sun Belt regular season and now have to settle for NIT since they didn't win the tournament

I see them going to the NCAA. No outstanding wins, but a very good record, and an RPI above 30.

They deserve to be in.

Conference tournaments are legit. The regular season serves a very important and scary purpose: resume building.

The big reason the resume is so important is because of the selection committee. A team like Liberty would not be sniffing the NCAA without that tournament auto bid. But if Liberty can beat schools in its conference with a winning record in a tournament-style setting, then that would suggest to me that under that kind of pressure to perform, they stand a better chance than a team who doesn't perform.

(03-10-2013 08:02 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 02:40 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  I'm probably in the minority, but I prefer giving the automatic bid to the regular season champ. Winning a regular season conference title is a much bigger feat than winning a three or four day tournament. But, the conferences love their conference tournaments and without the automatic bid attached to them, they would be meaningless. If they did give the automatic bids to the conference regular season champions, you could have a stronger NCAA tournament, mainly because the participants from the middle level and lower level conferences would be the best from those leagues.

The why even have an NCAA tourney?

Gonzaga National Champs

Weak example.

Gonzaga would be number 1 based on what? Polls. No valid comparison between any teams outside of the same conference due to schedules. Conference teams play similar schedules.

I am mixed on the whole debate. A while back I would have said it should be the regular season champ, hands down. The problem is that the conferences are so big now and many are divided into two divisions, so everyone in the conference plays a different schedule. Take the OVC, for example (12 teams, 2 divisions, 16 game schedule)

On the other hand, I look at conferences like the Ivy where everyone plays one another twice Those conferences should take the regular season champ as the auto bid. If two teams are tied at the top (like the Summit) and split head-to-head, have them play an extra game.

At the very least, I think conference tourneys should be dropped to only having four teams if they are going to be used for auto bids. I know they will probably not win a game, but it is a shame when you see a team from a one-bid conference dominate and they slip up once in the conference tourney and lose their bid to a bad team they drubbed two times in the season.

(03-10-2013 08:40 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  Middle Tenn won the Sun Belt regular season and now have to settle for NIT since they didn't win the tournament

That's exactly what I am talking about. Middle Tennessee had an incredible run in the Sun Belt regular season. They go 19-1 in league play and win many of those 19 in blowout fashion. They have a bad game in the Sun Belt tournament and now they are probably headed to the NIT. The NCAA tournament would have been stronger with Middle in the Dance instead of a terribly mediocre FIU or Western Kentucky that will most likely get bounced quickly. Plus, the Sun Belt stood a decent chance of Middle winning a game or two in the Dance which means more tournament money for the league.

Quite frankly my dear, I couldn't give a damn.

(03-11-2013 01:54 AM)eaglenjxn Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 08:02 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 02:40 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  I'm probably in the minority, but I prefer giving the automatic bid to the regular season champ. Winning a regular season conference title is a much bigger feat than winning a three or four day tournament. But, the conferences love their conference tournaments and without the automatic bid attached to them, they would be meaningless. If they did give the automatic bids to the conference regular season champions, you could have a stronger NCAA tournament, mainly because the participants from the middle level and lower level conferences would be the best from those leagues.

The why even have an NCAA tourney?

Gonzaga National Champs

Weak example.

Gonzaga would be number 1 based on what? Polls. No valid comparison between any teams outside of the same conference due to schedules. Conference teams play similar schedules.

I am mixed on the whole debate. A while back I would have said it should be the regular season champ, hands down. The problem is that the conferences are so big now and many are divided into two divisions, so everyone in the conference plays a different schedule. Take the OVC, for example (12 teams, 2 divisions, 16 game schedule)

On the other hand, I look at conferences like the Ivy where everyone plays one another twice Those conferences should take the regular season champ as the auto bid. If two teams are tied at the top (like the Summit) and split head-to-head, have them play an extra game.

At the very least, I think conference tourneys should be dropped to only having four teams if they are going to be used for auto bids. I know they will probably not win a game, but it is a shame when you see a team from a one-bid conference dominate and they slip up once in the conference tourney and lose their bid to a bad team they drubbed two times in the season.

Settle down there, pilgrim. Conference Tournaments are more "Chamber of Commerce Events", much like bowl games. There are intended to motivate outside $s and weary travelers to enter other cities and stay in hotels, eat at restaurants, drink in bars, and visit local site. Oh yeah, and win a bid into the NCAA Tourney. This whole "only top teams" stuff is not even in the equation. Thank you for attending cBad's Conference Tournament 101 class. My next seminar will be held TBA on Bowl Game Bids and You: Why Large Land Grant U will be Chosen Over Your Team Even Though You Beat Them and Have 2 More Wins.

cBad

(03-11-2013 07:18 AM)cBad Wrote:  

(03-11-2013 01:54 AM)eaglenjxn Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 08:02 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(03-10-2013 02:40 PM)JMSTiger Wrote:  I'm probably in the minority, but I prefer giving the automatic bid to the regular season champ. Winning a regular season conference title is a much bigger feat than winning a three or four day tournament. But, the conferences love their conference tournaments and without the automatic bid attached to them, they would be meaningless. If they did give the automatic bids to the conference regular season champions, you could have a stronger NCAA tournament, mainly because the participants from the middle level and lower level conferences would be the best from those leagues.

The why even have an NCAA tourney?

Gonzaga National Champs

Weak example.

Gonzaga would be number 1 based on what? Polls. No valid comparison between any teams outside of the same conference due to schedules. Conference teams play similar schedules.

I am mixed on the whole debate. A while back I would have said it should be the regular season champ, hands down. The problem is that the conferences are so big now and many are divided into two divisions, so everyone in the conference plays a different schedule. Take the OVC, for example (12 teams, 2 divisions, 16 game schedule)

On the other hand, I look at conferences like the Ivy where everyone plays one another twice Those conferences should take the regular season champ as the auto bid. If two teams are tied at the top (like the Summit) and split head-to-head, have them play an extra game.

At the very least, I think conference tourneys should be dropped to only having four teams if they are going to be used for auto bids. I know they will probably not win a game, but it is a shame when you see a team from a one-bid conference dominate and they slip up once in the conference tourney and lose their bid to a bad team they drubbed two times in the season.

Settle down there, pilgrim. Conference Tournaments are more "Chamber of Commerce Events", much like bowl games. There are intended to motivate outside $s and weary travelers to enter other cities and stay in hotels, eat at restaurants, drink in bars, and visit local site. Oh yeah, and win a bid into the NCAA Tourney. This whole "only top teams" stuff is not even in the equation. Thank you for attending cBad's Conference Tournament 101 class. My next seminar will be held TBA on Bowl Game Bids and You: Why Large Land Grant U will be Chosen Over Your Team Even Though You Beat Them and Have 2 More Wins.

cBad

I'd rather see the regular season champ go because often the best team from the conference does not get to go and the conference takes a hit rep. wise

I might actually be in the minority here, but I like the tourneys and auto bids attached to them. We cheer for Cinderellas in the NCAA tournament, yet lament a team nutting up and making a Cinderella run in their conference tournaments? It doesn't add up.

...and it doesn't make the regular season meaningless, you're still trying to get the favorable spot in the tournament.

Don't worry people, in a few years they'll be 96 teams making the tourney and every conference's regular season AND tourney champs will be getting in.

conference tourneys SHOULD NOT decide NCAA bids

edit: unless UTEP wins

Torn on this one. I do feel the conference champ should get the NCAA birth, but at the same time, the conference tourny gives the underdogs one last shot. Remember 2008 when a last place 4-12 Georgia team ran through the SEC Tourny beating Ole Miss, Kentucky, Miss State, and then Arkansas? They even played two games in one day due to the tornado hitting the Georgia Dome. That kind of thing makes the conference tournaments worthwhile in my opinion.

(03-10-2013 08:32 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  Look at Grambling who hasn't won a game all season and hasn't been within 10 points in any loss is still eligible to get into the tournament if they should do a miracle run in the SWAC

I'd rather see Grambling that the sixth or seventh best team from the acc, big 12 or sec.
I mean its not like 17-14 Texas southern played their way in.