And for the record, the NBA and NHL have both completely abandoned even the slightest pretense that their regular seasons are relevant, so they aren't very good case studies. And MLS is, well, MLS.

OT, but what a great game tonight. Would have been the best NC game ever (maybe?) if that 3 had gone it at the buzzer. Well played by both teams, although Butler sure wishes they could have a few of those FTs back.

I don't necessarily like Doug Gottlieb, but he made a statement regarding expansion that really made a lot of sense to me. The problem isn't that the NCAA brass wants to add more teams to the tourney, although he thinks 64 is just right (as do I). The problem, he says, is that there are about 150 teams in D1 that don't belong in D1. Put those teams in D2 where they should be, leave the tourney at 64 teams, and see what the percentages look like then. I would do the math, but my head hurts. Somebody want to volunteer?

Honestly if you look at the NBA and NHL they have half their teams in the post season hence it will make the regular season irrelevant.

Also, Your stating that the best teams 1/2 seeds have more hurdles? Well maybe 1 more game against a middle of the road mid-major or the bottom of a power conference. How is this a hurdle when your talking about the "best teams" in the country? Its one thing if they had to play more games but the only thing changing will be a team that can actually at least keep it to a 10 point gap instead of the 30+ point blow outs.

Finally how do you consider the regular season that relevant in any sport? Sure you need to win games in the regular season but even the NFL has it where if your somewhat relevant you will make the post season. The only thing that matters in the mind of most people is Winning the conference champion banner and going to the league championship and winning.

Hence by saying your devaluing the regular season your saying it has value in the first place. Look at the NCAA right now and tell me that Minnesota or Miss St. had that exciting of a regular season. What about Utah State or Wisconsin or Northern Iowa? Wisconsin was never really that relevant in the big 10 and N. Iowa ran away with the MVC.

From Day 1 of the season no one has doubts that Wisconsin will be in the Tourney and most people figure them to finnish 2 or 3 in the Big 10. Sure they beat MSU at one point good game but that will still be a good game next year as well. It all comes down to what you look at and regular season will still be about winning the conference as always the only difference is after getting 2 Marquee wins on the year you will probably have your ticket punched as opposed to having to win 3 or 4 marquee games.

With all the talk about how expansion would make the regular season less important, tell that to the following lower level Division I teams that won their Conference regular season, only to have a bad game in their conference tournament and therefore lose out on an NCAA Big Dance bid...

Big South winner Coastal Carolina 15-3 (28-7) - ticket went to Winthrop (12-6) (19-14)

American East winner Stony Brok 13-3 (22-10) - ticket went to Vermont 12-4 (25-10)

Independent Seattle (17-14)

Great West ?!? Winner South Dakota 11-1 (22-10) ***ESPN had this conference on their DI standings page***

Mid American Winner Kent State 13-3 (24-10) - ticket went to Ohio 7-9 (22-15)

SWAC winner Jackson State 17-1 (19-13) - ticket went to Arkansas Pine Bluff 14-4 (18-16)


Now I realize that any of the conference champs would probably have lost to, and been blown out by, their first round opponent but their seasons and many mid to lower major schools are determined by a four game stretch in early March, rather than the 25 games that lead up to it.

I do not necessarily like the idea of expansion. And although I like the idea that my Texas Tech Red Raiders would have been in the tourney instead of the NIT, I do not think they would stand a chance ion heck to win the whole thing. Each year, 20 to 25 teams have a realistic chance to win the whole thing. (Yes, Butler would have been one of those teams at the start of the year.) But it is still nice to see a little guy have a chance at the title. That's where NCAA basketball will always trump NCAA football. IN football it will always be Big 12, Pac 10, Big 10, SEC, versus each other for the title. The football Butlers of the NCAA world will never have a chance.

the past 22 NCAA basketball champions have been ranked in the top 15 in the final AP poll (prior to the tourney).

Quote: Originally Posted By dcy0827 on 4/06/2010I don't necessarily like Doug Gottlieb, but he made a statement regarding expansion that really made a lot of sense to me. The problem isn't that the NCAA brass wants to add more teams to the tourney, although he thinks 64 is just right (as do I). The problem, he says, is that there are about 150 teams in D1 that don't belong in D1. Put those teams in D2 where they should be, leave the tourney at 64 teams, and see what the percentages look like then. I would do the math, but my head hurts. Somebody want to volunteer

64 (I know its 65, but using 64) out of 197 = 32.5%

I too, relatively cannot stand D"ugh" Gottlieb.

Quote: Originally Posted By bigtexhawk on 4/06/2010With all the talk about how expansion would make the regular season less important, tell that to the following lower level Division I teams that won their Conference regular season, only to have a bad game in their conference tournament and therefore lose out on an NCAA Big Dance bid...

Big South winner Coastal Carolina 15-3 (28-7) - ticket went to Winthrop (12-6) (19-14)

American East winner Stony Brok 13-3 (22-10) - ticket went to Vermont 12-4 (25-10)

Independent Seattle (17-14)

Great West ?!? Winner South Dakota 11-1 (22-10) ***ESPN had this conference on their DI standings page***

Mid American Winner Kent State 13-3 (24-10) - ticket went to Ohio 7-9 (22-15)

SWAC winner Jackson State 17-1 (19-13) - ticket went to Arkansas Pine Bluff 14-4 (18-16)


Now I realize that any of the conference champs would probably have lost to, and been blown out by, their first round opponent but their seasons and many mid to lower major schools are determined by a four game stretch in early March, rather than the 25 games that lead up to it.

I do not necessarily like the idea of expansion. And although I like the idea that my Texas Tech Red Raiders would have been in the tourney instead of the NIT, I do not think they would stand a chance ion heck to win the whole thing. Each year, 20 to 25 teams have a realistic chance to win the whole thing. (Yes, Butler would have been one of those teams at the start of the year.) But it is still nice to see a little guy have a chance at the title. That's where NCAA basketball will always trump NCAA football. IN football it will always be Big 12, Pac 10, Big 10, SEC, versus each other for the title. The football Butlers of the NCAA world will never have a chance.

I completely agree with you that regular season conference champions should get automatic bids to the NCAA Tournament regardless. The most egregious instance of a RS CC not making the Tourney was Austin Peay in 2004...went 16-0 in its Ohio Valley Conference, lost in the conference tourney final 66-60 to Robert Morris? and ended up in the NIT...that's incredibly ridiculous.

On the flipside, my alma mater Oakland-MI in 2005 had no business making it...finished 6-10 in conference and 8 or 9-18 overall in the regular season, won the 3 CT games and made the tournament, beating Alabama A&M in the play-in game, only to get thrashed by North Carolina. I loved that team and have great respect for head coach Greg Kampe (my former sports writing professor) but they had no business dancing, regardless of how great of a story it was.

Quote: Originally Posted By Iguana1 on 4/06/2010
the past 22 NCAA basketball champions have been ranked in the top 15 in the final AP poll (prior to the tourney).

To expand on this...since 1949 when the AP began ranking NCAAB...only 3 unranked teams have won the NCAA Tournament (1951 CCNY (24-5), 1985 Villanova (25-10), 1988 Kansas (27-11)). CCNY was obviously damned good in 1951, winning both the NCAA and NIT tournaments, and the other 2 unranked teams were from BCS conferences. Also, in 1985 and 1988, the AP only ranked 20 teams, so you could make the argument that if 25 teams were ranked, that Villanova and Kansas might have eeked into those final polls.

They're expanding the tournament again why?

Expansion isn't going to help most/any of these low major regular season conference champions who lose in the conference tournament. I don't see that many conferences that are one bid leagues year in and year out are going to be producing regular season champions that are now considered worthy of an at-large bid in a 96 team field. These bids are going to go to the lower tier of the major conferences and the 2nd tier of the best mid-major conferences.

I would certainly favor giving the regular season champions the auto-bids, but that's a seperate issue from expansion - unless the committee decides to rule that auto-bids go to regular season and conference champions as a result of the additional bids. As I've said in other places, however, I don't believe that happens, because they aren't expanding the field so they can have multiple representatives from the Patriot League. I also don't like it, because it opens itself wide open for shenanigans, since it's now in the best financial interests of those bottom tier conferences to have different team win the tournament than won the regular season.

Quote: Originally Posted By AlCheez on 4/06/2010
Expansion isn't going to help most/any of these low major regular season conference champions who lose in the conference tournament. I don't see that many conferences that are one bid leagues year in and year out are going to be producing regular season champions that are now considered worthy of an at-large bid in a 96 team field. These bids are going to go to the lower tier of the major conferences and the 2nd tier of the best mid-major conferences.

I would certainly favor giving the regular season champions the auto-bids, but that's a seperate issue from expansion - unless the committee decides to rule that auto-bids go to regular season and conference champions as a result of the additional bids. As I've said in other places, however, I don't believe that happens, because they aren't expanding the field so they can have multiple representatives from the Patriot League.

I could be wrong here Al, but I believe I heard on TV that with expansion they'll now be giving auto bids to both the regular season and conference tournament champions.

You figure if you have a different RS and CT champion in each conference and the Great West Conference is included, that's 64 teams right there, allowing for 32 at-larges...2 down from the current 34. With that said, the chances that you'll see a different RS and CT champion in every conference in the same year is highly unlikely.

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 4/06/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By AlCheez on 4/06/2010

Expansion isn't going to help most/any of these low major regular season conference champions who lose in the conference tournament. I don't see that many conferences that are one bid leagues year in and year out are going to be producing regular season champions that are now considered worthy of an at-large bid in a 96 team field. These bids are going to go to the lower tier of the major conferences and the 2nd tier of the best mid-major conferences.

I would certainly favor giving the regular season champions the auto-bids, but that's a seperate issue from expansion - unless the committee decides to rule that auto-bids go to regular season and conference champions as a result of the additional bids. As I've said in other places, however, I don't believe that happens, because they aren't expanding the field so they can have multiple representatives from the Patriot League.

I could be wrong here Al, but I believe I heard on TV that with expansion they'll now be giving auto bids to both the regular season and conference tournament champions.

You figure if you have a different RS and CT champion in each conference and the Great West Conference is included, that's 64 teams right there, allowing for 32 at-larges...2 down from the current 34. With that said, the chances that you'll see a different RS and CT champion in every conference in the same year is highly unlikely.

I'm not saying for sure that you didn't hear it, but any of it is just conjecture since the NCAA hasn't really put forth a full proposal yet. They've addressed the possibility officially once, and I don't think they spoke to this.

I'm not saying it won't happen, but I am saying I'll believe that the NCAA is going to allow for the possibility that the crap conferences that annually produce the current 15/16 seeds would be able to get two representatives in each year when it's officially in writing and approved, and not before.

And it won't be every conference having different champions, but I'd be willing to bet large quantities of money that the percentage of low-tier conference regular season champions who go on to also win the conference tournament drops noticiably if this is the rule - even if there isn't anything below board going on - just because their incentive would be reduced.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally posted by AlCheez on 4/06/2010Expansion isn't going to help most/any of these low major regular season conference champions who lose in the conference tournament.  I don't see that many conferences that are one bid leagues year in and year out are going to be producing regular season champions that are now considered worthy of an at-large bid in a 96 team field.  These bids are going to go to the lower tier of the major conferences and the 2nd tier of the best mid-major conferences.I would certainly favor giving the regular season champions the auto-bids, but that's a seperate issue from expansion - unless the committee decides to rule that auto-bids go to regular season and conference champions as a result of the additional bids.  As I've said in other places, however, I don't believe that happens, because they aren't expanding the field so they can have multiple representatives from the Patriot League.  I also don't like it, because it opens itself wide open for shenanigans, since it's now in the best financial interests of those bottom tier conferences to have different team win the tournament than won the regular season.

This is a list of the next schools that missed the tourney but would be in a 96 team tourney by RPI, not exact science but it gives you an idea of who would make it in most likely.

40 Rhode Island Atl10
43 Wichita St. Mvc
45 UAB Cusa
47 Kent St. Midam
53 Memphis Cusa
54 Dayton Atl10
55 Mississippi St. Sec
58 William and Mary Coln
59 Virginia Tech Acc
60 Seton Hall Bige
61 Mississippi Sec
63 Arizona St. Pac10
64 Connecticut Bige
65 Cincinnati Bige
66 VA Commonwealth Coln
67 Marshall Cusa
68 Tulsa Cusa
71 South Florida Bige
72 Texas Tech Big12
73 Nevada Wac
74 Illinois Big10
75 Northeastern Coln
76 Illinois St. Mvc
77 Charlotte Atl10
78 Louisiana Tech Wac
79 Portland Wcc
80 Wright St. Horiz
81 Fairfield Maac
82 St. John's Bige
83 IUPUI Midco
84 Morehead St. Ovc

Run Down of Conferences In
Power Conferences (11) ACC (1), Big 10 (1), Big 12 (1), Big East (5), Pac 10 (1), SEC (2)
Mid Majors/Small Conf (20 Total) A10(3), Colonial (3), CUSA (4), MVC (2), WAC (2), Plus others with 1 bid

Really in the end the Big East would have a Million teams in each year but there would also be another 18+ mid-majors that would make it as well each year or 20 this year.

Quote: Originally posted by Iguana1 on 4/06/2010the past 22 NCAA basketball champions have been ranked in the top 15 in the final AP poll (prior to the tourney). 

If this is the argument then we should be making the tournament smaller right? Top 16 teams would be a fine tournament?

Not really, cause who actually cares about only seeing the #1 team play. I bet if you looked at the #s for this tournament the Duke games were less watched than other match-ups along the way. People watch march madness for the great games not just to crown a champ.