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

What do you think about making the regular seasons champ the NCAA bid winner, Phil?

(03-16-2016 12:55 PM)The Answer UAB Wrote:  What do you think about making the regular seasons champ the NCAA bid winner, Phil?

That happened at one time for C-USA ...maybe it was the Great Midwest or Sunbelt.

I think it is a great idea. Make the Tourney champ the NIT bid auto winner. Expand the NIT to 48 and kill off the other 3 tourneys.

(03-16-2016 12:55 PM)The Answer UAB Wrote:  What do you think about making the regular seasons champ the NCAA bid winner, Phil?

I'm not Phil, but I like the idea that it gives the tournament winner three or four more wins, likely at least one of them over a good team (the regular season champ) that could make the difference in landing an at-large spot.

(03-16-2016 01:05 PM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-16-2016 12:55 PM)The Answer UAB Wrote:  What do you think about making the regular seasons champ the NCAA bid winner, Phil?

That happened at one time for C-USA ...maybe it was the Great Midwest or Sunbelt.

I think it is a great idea. Make the Tourney champ the NIT bid auto winner. Expand the NIT to 48 and kill off the other 3 tourneys.

The reason given for the NCAA buying out the NIT was to avoid an antitrust suit. "Killing off" the other tournaments would just renew that possibility. The NCAA might develop its two tournaments as parallel contests with a best of three playoff for the National Championship instead of the present Final Four. Right now the two tournaments have a total of 100 teams (68+32) so dividing them into two parallel brackets could be done.

I'm all about the tournament having the automatic bid. The reward for winning in the regular season is reflected in the seeding, but, besides that, it's a relatively even playing ground to prove you deserve to go to the NCAA tournament.

I do believe winning the regular season is a healthy indicator of who is, overall, the best team in the conference, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're the best team to send to the tournament at the end of the season. What if the regular season champion had an easier conference schedule? What if they were hot earlier, but struggled down the stretch? What if a big time player got injured, but they had enough games on the closest team to still win? The tournament serves as a kind of insurance to make sure that the team that wins is coming off some momentum. Making the regular season winner the automatic bid would be a step back, make the tournament nigh useless, and, since your most likely at large bid would instead be automatic, it essentially takes away a bid that another team could have gotten.

I'm not sure how the anti-trust stuff works with the smaller tournaments, but, legal stuff aside, expanding the NIT wouldn't help anyone other than the mediocre teams in power conferences. With more space freed up in the NIT, more mid majors would get flexed into the NIT so more recognizable brands could replace them in the NCAA tournament.

Chiming in late here on the original question, but I would also rate this as our worst loss ever, mainly because of what was riding on it. We've had some uglier regular season losses, but you can always come back from those. This was a win-or-go-home game, and we went home....if we ever showed up to begin with.

I was very disappointed, but not the least bit surprised, the way we had played in a very weak conference all season. We usually played well enough to win, and had to come back--or hang on--in several of those wins. The last regular season win, over a woeful FAU team, was certainly a signal that we weren't playing well.

We looked very good a few nights, but all in all I'm not sure we put together 40 minutes of good basketball in a game all season.

Go Blazers.

(03-16-2016 01:22 PM)58-56 Wrote:  

(03-16-2016 12:55 PM)The Answer UAB Wrote:  What do you think about making the regular seasons champ the NCAA bid winner, Phil?

I'm not Phil, but I like the idea that it gives the tournament winner three or four more wins, likely at least one of them over a good team (the regular season champ) that could make the difference in landing an at-large spot.

That's something lost in this. How many years under Davis were we just a win or two away from an at large, only to choke it away. I'd rather have the opportunity.

im not opposed to giving the conference champ the auto bid, but ONLY if all teams play the same teams.

under the current model, what if we play MTSU, La Tech and ODU twice...while MTSU plays UAB, UTSA and FAU twice...and then MTSU beats us by 1 game to win the regular season title?

that would NOT be cool.
youd also have to schedule in such a manner that each team gets a mix of some of the best teams at home and some on the road

If you want to make the college basketball regular season mean something, eliminate the conference tournaments and reward a team for the whole season of success. Coach Haase even agrees with this. The postseason should start with the NCAA Tournament or NIT, not a meaningless conference tournament.

If your team isn't good enough to win a regular season title, then build a resume worthy of an at-large bid. If you can't do that then you don't belong in the Dance anyways.

I remember the conference tournament auto bid was a lot more popular around here last year than it is this year.

We shouldn't have gone to the NCAA last year. The set up should be changed.

(03-16-2016 10:06 PM)The Answer UAB Wrote:  We shouldn't have gone to the NCAA last year. The set up should be changed.

Maybe we can request to have the win vacated.

What a totally idiotic statement from a "fan".

I think the reg season conference champ should get the bid. I'm not gonna be wishy washy on my thinking about that just because it's benefitted us in the past

What this damn league needs to strive for is having both the conference regular season champ and tournament champ get an NCAA bid.

(03-16-2016 11:51 PM)BlazintheATL Wrote:  What this damn league needs to strive for is having both the conference regular season champ and tournament champ get an NCAA bid.

Agreed, but C-USA is a long ways from that right now.

(03-17-2016 12:31 AM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  

(03-16-2016 11:51 PM)BlazintheATL Wrote:  What this damn league needs to strive for is having both the conference regular season champ and tournament champ get an NCAA bid.

Agreed, but C-USA is a long ways from that right now.

Yep.

(03-17-2016 12:31 AM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  

(03-16-2016 11:51 PM)BlazintheATL Wrote:  What this damn league needs to strive for is having both the conference regular season champ and tournament champ get an NCAA bid.

Agreed, but C-USA is a long ways from that right now.

We really screwed up adding one of the fu's and utsa to the conference. If you take those two out, things are salvageable. As it is I have no hope for north Texas, utsa, and the Florida duo. I feel like the rest of the league could be moving in the right direction, outside of southern miss. We could live with a few teams over 200 at the end of the year. We can't survive over half the league being in that group.

(03-17-2016 10:09 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-17-2016 12:31 AM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  

(03-16-2016 11:51 PM)BlazintheATL Wrote:  What this damn league needs to strive for is having both the conference regular season champ and tournament champ get an NCAA bid.

Agreed, but C-USA is a long ways from that right now.

We really screwed up adding one of the fu's and utsa to the conference. If you take those two out, things are salvageable. As it is I have no hope for north Texas, utsa, and the Florida duo. I feel like the rest of the league could be moving in the right direction, outside of southern miss. We could live with a few teams over 200 at the end of the year. We can't survive over half the league being in that group.

Fourteen teams is a lot, but it should be enough for a relegation system.

Each division plays each other round-robin, for 12 games. Conference tournament has the First Division plus the winner of the Crap Division.

Next year, top Crap and bottom First teams switch places. Puts some sweat on the line for last place.

(03-17-2016 10:09 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-17-2016 12:31 AM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  

(03-16-2016 11:51 PM)BlazintheATL Wrote:  What this damn league needs to strive for is having both the conference regular season champ and tournament champ get an NCAA bid.

Agreed, but C-USA is a long ways from that right now.

We really screwed up adding one of the fu's and utsa to the conference. If you take those two out, things are salvageable. As it is I have no hope for north Texas, utsa, and the Florida duo. I feel like the rest of the league could be moving in the right direction, outside of southern miss. We could live with a few teams over 200 at the end of the year. We can't survive over half the league being in that group.

F_U's are trending in the right direction, but its not transfer season yet.