Talk about quadrants and how using them hurts mid-majors, along with a suggestion from the Baylor coach that the field be expanded to 96.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...nt-chances

Syracuse got in. Whoever decided this on the committee should be fired.

The NCAA stinks like a rotting fish. Oh, they try to shift focus to individual programs like Louisville (don’t get me wrong—there’s plenty at those programs to shine a light on), but that is largely so that nobody focuses on the corruption in the HQ. TV, Bowl playoff system, NCAA tournament, even the NIT—it’s pay to play, baby. If you can’t bring $$$ to the table, then don’t bother.

The golden rule of collegiate athletics...
- The schools with all the gold make all the rules.

The system is flawed on so many levels. The mid majors can't help what conference they reside. As we've seen, if you call the power 5 conferences and suggest a home for home series, they'll laugh at you and hang up. The only way you can maybe get an upset is on their home floor or catch one in a pre-season or holiday tourney. There is nothing forcing the power 5 conferences from scheduling any mid-majors. I cringe when you hear the powers that be criticize mid-majors on their strength of schedule, it's BS. We beat two NCAA teams and it counts for nothing, because they are mid majors. After getting close to the top if not #1 in the nation, West Virginia ended up losing 10 games. Every time I opened up the paper, they were losing, but since their loses were to in-conf teams, the committee didn't care. That St. Mary's team that was 28-5 got hosed. Last year Illinois State got screwed.

If you stick to this quadrant system, maybe divide up the nation and in those regions, the power 5 conferences are required to play a home an home series with non-power five teams within the region. Maybe we don't play UM or OSU every year, but maybe every 5 years we circle through the B10 or ACC? We beat OSU on our home floor over a decade ago and the Buckeyes will probably never come to Toledo again unless it's on the Highway to play a conf. team. I bet we've called them and they use their caller ID and don't answer.

(03-12-2018 12:10 PM)emanoh Wrote:  The system is flawed on so many levels. The mid majors can't help what conference they reside. As we've seen, if you call the power 5 conferences and suggest a home for home series, they'll laugh at you and hang up. The only way you can maybe get an upset is on their home floor or catch one in a pre-season or holiday tourney. There is nothing forcing the power 5 conferences from scheduling any mid-majors. I cringe when you hear the powers that be criticize mid-majors on their strength of schedule, it's BS. We beat two NCAA teams and it counts for nothing, because they are mid majors. After getting close to the top if not #1 in the nation, West Virginia ended up losing 10 games. Every time I opened up the paper, they were losing, but since their loses were to in-conf teams, the committee didn't care. That St. Mary's team that was 28-5 got hosed. Last year Illinois State got screwed.

If you stick to this quadrant system, maybe divide up the nation and in those regions, the power 5 conferences are required to play a home an home series with non-power five teams within the region. Maybe we don't play UM or OSU every year, but maybe every 5 years we circle through the B10 or ACC? We beat OSU on our home floor over a decade ago and the Buckeyes will probably never come to Toledo again unless it's on the Highway to play a conf. team. I bet we've called them and they use their caller ID and don't answer.

C'mon now...what do you want? They made sure that every conference champ is guaranteed a spot in the almighty NIT, for crying out loud.

But seriously--Good points, emanoh. I just keep waiting for what we now know as the "NCAA" to splinter apart so that there really isn't anything as a so called "mid-major" left. You either are allowed to run with the big dogs, or you are relegated to D-2, FCS, etc...

I am frustrated with the NCAA, as well. 9 ACC teams get in. Yes, Syracuse beat Toledo, but requiring privileged 5 teams to play home and away can cause a little more parody. If they expand to 96 teams, I am afraid more really mediocre Priviledged 5 schools get in. I watched quite a few championship games this weekend. Many conferences are not deserving of two spots. The MAC should have 3. It has to be really frustrating for players that work really all year on a good team in a competitive conference, win their division, lose in the conference tournament, and just don’t get a chance. It would be better for college basketball to have more parody. The privileged 5 schools wouldn’t like the competition. Pretty disappointing for Toledo.

We all know by know the NCAA is crooked. A gang of corporate and academic bureaucrats getting paid millions to funnel billions into the privileged programs, conferences and media partners. Blatant fraud, recruiting violations and, often, minimal emphasis on athletes being students at the top schools is allowed. Schools without power who get caught trying to cut a few corners are pummeled with sanctions. And schools that compete at a high level, have actual student athletes, and aren't huge business operations are consistently squeezed out of home games and tourneys.

Clearly, the NCAA could mandate home and away series between all levels of D1. They could organize early or mid season neutral court regional tourneys to gauge more fairly the value of teams. And they could actually follow their own guidelines and common sense in selections. I mean, forget the mid-majors, Oklahoma State getting snubbed was horrible. They beat Kansas twice, WVU on the road, swept Oklahoma, etc... all in the final half of the season. Oklahoma was good early but really fell off and didn't look like an NCAA team down the stretch. Syracuse played the vast majority of it's games at home, had a losing conf record, and lost to all the really good teams they played. Arizona St had a super start but totally fell off, had a low rpi, finished 9th at 8-10 in a 3 bid league, and lost early in their conf tournament. How do you pick them over the #2 team in that league? The team that finished 13-5 and went to conf tourney final. As for the mid majors Middle Tenn played a great mid major schedule, 5 top mid majors, 5 P5 teams on road/neutral courts, solid mid major league 16-2, but they lost 3 close games to NCAA type teams (Miami, USC, Auburn). So, even though they had a great year they are excluded because of a few close losses to strong teams. So, isn't the point of the play-in first four to give a team like that (or St Mary's) the chance to prove themselves? Clearly, they are on the borderline.

Absolutely correct. Well said.

I don't think we have a dog in this fight.

I can see several auto qualify non-P5s in the tournament, Toledo has shown probably to have the better resume but not one of the deep P5 teams. The team screwed it's own pooch as far as the NCAA argument. The NIT? EH, they don't give reasons for including or excluding teams, do they?

Earlier this year while UT was on their hot streak in conference, I looked to see where we stood in the computer rankings. We were in the 70's, prompting me to be thinking back on the Cornell/Syracuse/Marshall games, where with a few good bounces going in our favor could have had us in the At Large conversation. Then I noticed Buffalo was I believe #32 in the Rpi. I went over to read the Bubble Watch on Espn, which used to be an excellent read, twice a week examining a wide array of programs from all conferences and how their resume stands in the 'bubble' conversation. This year however, they only mentioned like 5 or 6 programs categorized as playing in "other conferences", and Buffalo wasn't even one of them. I mean, the #32 RPI in the country can't even extract an *explanation* as to why they wouldn't be selected at large if the situation arised.

That's when I read about the quadrant system which is actually the most ludicrously unbalanced action I've ever seen when it comes to collegiate athletics. Absolutely pathetic, and between that, and the constant scandals that'll probably never go away, the one & done rules which are just stupid, and UT opting out of postseason play with Major League Baseball season getting closer by the day, my interest in this tournament, and in college basketball outside of the Mid-American Conference, is at an all time low.

(03-13-2018 10:21 AM)therockets046 Wrote:  Earlier this year while UT was on their hot streak in conference, I looked to see where we stood in the computer rankings. We were in the 70's, prompting me to be thinking back on the Cornell/Syracuse/Marshall games, where with a few good bounces going in our favor could have had us in the At Large conversation. Then I noticed Buffalo was I believe #32 in the Rpi. I went over to read the Bubble Watch on Espn, which used to be an excellent read, twice a week examining a wide array of programs from all conferences and how their resume stands in the 'bubble' conversation. This year however, they only mentioned like 5 or 6 programs categorized as playing in "other conferences", and Buffalo wasn't even one of them. I mean, the #32 RPI in the country can't even extract an *explanation* as to why they wouldn't be selected at large if the situation arised.

That's when I read about the quadrant system which is actually the most ludicrously unbalanced action I've ever seen when it comes to collegiate athletics. Absolutely pathetic, and between that, and the constant scandals that'll probably never go away, the one & done rules which are just stupid, and UT opting out of postseason play with Major League Baseball season getting closer by the day, my interest in this tournament, and in college basketball outside of the Mid-American Conference, is at an all time low.

AT SOME POINT THE NCAA HAS TO GET 2-3 'HARD' RULES FOR SELECTION AND LET THE METRICS BUILD AROUND THAT ... NO TEAMS W/SUB.500 LEAGUE RECORDS ... NO TEAMS W/SUB-275 RPI LOSSES ... TEAMS THAT PLAY SPLIT LEAGUE SKEDS (ACC/B10) MUST HAVE AT LEAST HALF OF THEIR WINS VS. TEAMS THAT FINISH IN FRONT OF THEM IN THE STANDINGS ...

Syracuse beat us and UB. Why have mid major auto qualifiers if mediocre Power teams have proved to be INDEED better than midmajor title winners?

Syracuse may not deserve to get in over ND? But over a Toledo or a random midmajor runner up? Come on.

On 106.5 the radio yesterday they really made the point that its "Amazing" the MAC isn't a 2 bid league. Really? Do you watch basketball? We did not do anything but beat 150-300 teams regularly. We have ZERO quality wins. If I was on a committee looking for a reason to choose Toledo over LSU I wouldn't find one either! We played easier teams. They beat at least a couple decent squads??? We did NOTHING but beat 16 seed Penn and EMU x1. Wright State and Marshall at home are step 1.

(03-13-2018 11:17 AM)cleveland Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 10:21 AM)therockets046 Wrote:  Earlier this year while UT was on their hot streak in conference, I looked to see where we stood in the computer rankings. We were in the 70's, prompting me to be thinking back on the Cornell/Syracuse/Marshall games, where with a few good bounces going in our favor could have had us in the At Large conversation. Then I noticed Buffalo was I believe #32 in the Rpi. I went over to read the Bubble Watch on Espn, which used to be an excellent read, twice a week examining a wide array of programs from all conferences and how their resume stands in the 'bubble' conversation. This year however, they only mentioned like 5 or 6 programs categorized as playing in "other conferences", and Buffalo wasn't even one of them. I mean, the #32 RPI in the country can't even extract an *explanation* as to why they wouldn't be selected at large if the situation arised.

That's when I read about the quadrant system which is actually the most ludicrously unbalanced action I've ever seen when it comes to collegiate athletics. Absolutely pathetic, and between that, and the constant scandals that'll probably never go away, the one & done rules which are just stupid, and UT opting out of postseason play with Major League Baseball season getting closer by the day, my interest in this tournament, and in college basketball outside of the Mid-American Conference, is at an all time low.

AT SOME POINT THE NCAA HAS TO GET 2-3 'HARD' RULES FOR SELECTION AND LET THE METRICS BUILD AROUND THAT ... NO TEAMS W/SUB.500 LEAGUE RECORDS ... NO TEAMS W/SUB-275 RPI LOSSES ... TEAMS THAT PLAY SPLIT LEAGUE SKEDS (ACC/B10) MUST HAVE AT LEAST HALF OF THEIR WINS VS. TEAMS THAT FINISH IN FRONT OF THEM IN THE STANDINGS ...

Delete 8 leagues from the NCAA tourney then. UMBC and Southern suck. Southern has a record of like 15-19? They were 3-13 before league play. Why are they even a conference that competes for a "National title." Its the 16 seed leagues that take bids away from good midmajors like St. Mary's. Not Cuse.

(03-13-2018 10:21 AM)therockets046 Wrote:  Earlier this year while UT was on their hot streak in conference, I looked to see where we stood in the computer rankings. We were in the 70's, prompting me to be thinking back on the Cornell/Syracuse/Marshall games, where with a few good bounces going in our favor could have had us in the At Large conversation. Then I noticed Buffalo was I believe #32 in the Rpi. I went over to read the Bubble Watch on Espn, which used to be an excellent read, twice a week examining a wide array of programs from all conferences and how their resume stands in the 'bubble' conversation. This year however, they only mentioned like 5 or 6 programs categorized as playing in "other conferences", and Buffalo wasn't even one of them. I mean, the #32 RPI in the country can't even extract an *explanation* as to why they wouldn't be selected at large if the situation arised.

That's when I read about the quadrant system which is actually the most ludicrously unbalanced action I've ever seen when it comes to collegiate athletics. Absolutely pathetic, and between that, and the constant scandals that'll probably never go away, the one & done rules which are just stupid, and UT opting out of postseason play with Major League Baseball season getting closer by the day, my interest in this tournament, and in college basketball outside of the Mid-American Conference, is at an all time low.

Look up the RPI definition. It doesnt even consider point scores. The more you win against teams with also good winning records, you prosper by their metrics. The problem is... those teams can also be midmajors. MAJOR teams with better SOS's will usually have a worse RPI, but many more games against top 50 teams and top 50 wins as well. You can go 30-2 and play 1 top 50 team and lose that game, do you deserve in with the RPI of 21 and the worst scheule in the nation? Do you deserve to get in the field playing texas southern christian academy???? You be the judge???

I'm not saying mid majors dont get screwed... they do. But you have to make it to your finals game if you are going to be a "screwed" midmajor. Its always been that way. BYU knocked off St. Mary's in the semi-final and that was their demise.