Howellmania
New member
BradleyBrave said:
I guess your right, but doing that just starts the slippery slope and people will call for more expansions. I wouldn't mind seeing a tournament with just 2 teams from every conference only.
-
Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.
NCAA Expansion
- Thread starter thefish7
- Start date
I guess your right, but doing that just starts the slippery slope and people will call for more expansions. I wouldn't mind seeing a tournament with just 2 teams from every conference only.
Dubl R 1
Active member
I'm sure many people disagree with this but I think there should be some REQUIREMENTS to make the NCAA field as an at large:
1. Must be at least .500 in your own conference.(regular season)
2. Must have an overall win% of .580
3. Anyone who cracks the top 25 SOS and top 50 RPI is an
Automatic Bid. (as long as no. 1 and 2 are met)
There should also be a reward/limit system for Conference RPI. This would apply to the top 5 Conferences as far as RPI ratiings, and would apply to At-large selections. The previous 3 stipulations still apply.
1.Number 1 ranked Conference(SEC this year received 4 AL bids)
A. Minimum 4 At large bids, maximum of 6 bids
2.Number 2 ranked Conference(ACC this year received 6 AL bids)
A. Minimum 4 AL bids, Max of 5 AL bids
3.Number 3 ranked Conference(Pac-10 received 5 AL bids)
A. Minimum 3 Al bids, Max of 5 AL bids.
4.Number 4 ranked Conference(Big Ten received 5 AL bids)
A. Min of 3 AL bids, Max of 4 AL bids.
5.Number 5 ranked Conference(Big East received 5 AL bids)
A. Min of 3 AL bids, Max of 4 AL bids.
This system would guarantee the top 5 conferences a minimum of 17 AL bids, and a maximum of 24 AL bids. Counting the automatic qualifier from these Conference tournaments this would guarantee the top 5 conferences a minimum of 22 total bids, and a maximum of 29 total bids.
This year for example the top 5 RPI conferences produced a total of 30 bids. 25 of those were At Large selections.
Under the Conference RPI reward/limit system, 1 of these teams would have to have been left out. I think a couple more would have been weeded out due to the second requirement listed above. Let's face it, if you don't finish at least .500 in your conference, chances are you aren't going to win the NCAA tournament anyway, why do they wast a selection on a team just because they play in a "power conference". If you are going to reap all the benefits of being in a BCS conference, the least you could do is go .500 in conference play to earn your bid.
These 3-4 new spots could then be awarded to "Mid-Majors" who had a deserving resume.
I know a lot of people say that these teams from the power conferences are tournament quality teams despite having worse records than alot of the mid majors, and they are right.
However the NCAA needs to get away from AWARDING teams the right to play in the NCAA for mediocre seasons just because they play in a so called tough conference, and start REWARDING
teams who win 20+ games, have a good conference record, and play a tough non conference schedule.
Finally I think by putting a premium on Conference RPI, and that partially determining how many teams are REWARDED with the right to play in the NCAA tournament will force the power conferences to try and outdo each other as far as RPI ratings go to get those last few coveted At Large bids. This would lead to those conferences going out and hopefully scheduling tougher Non Conference Schedules, thus further opening the door for Mid Majors to prove themselves.
Of course this will probably never happen, but I just think some sort of concrete guidelines are needed for the selection committee. They then can still seed the teams however they deem fit, but at least these rules would give other deserving teams a chance to play in the tournament, rather than just speculating on who should be in and who shouldn't be.
1. Must be at least .500 in your own conference.(regular season)
2. Must have an overall win% of .580
3. Anyone who cracks the top 25 SOS and top 50 RPI is an
Automatic Bid. (as long as no. 1 and 2 are met)
There should also be a reward/limit system for Conference RPI. This would apply to the top 5 Conferences as far as RPI ratiings, and would apply to At-large selections. The previous 3 stipulations still apply.
1.Number 1 ranked Conference(SEC this year received 4 AL bids)
A. Minimum 4 At large bids, maximum of 6 bids
2.Number 2 ranked Conference(ACC this year received 6 AL bids)
A. Minimum 4 AL bids, Max of 5 AL bids
3.Number 3 ranked Conference(Pac-10 received 5 AL bids)
A. Minimum 3 Al bids, Max of 5 AL bids.
4.Number 4 ranked Conference(Big Ten received 5 AL bids)
A. Min of 3 AL bids, Max of 4 AL bids.
5.Number 5 ranked Conference(Big East received 5 AL bids)
A. Min of 3 AL bids, Max of 4 AL bids.
This system would guarantee the top 5 conferences a minimum of 17 AL bids, and a maximum of 24 AL bids. Counting the automatic qualifier from these Conference tournaments this would guarantee the top 5 conferences a minimum of 22 total bids, and a maximum of 29 total bids.
This year for example the top 5 RPI conferences produced a total of 30 bids. 25 of those were At Large selections.
Under the Conference RPI reward/limit system, 1 of these teams would have to have been left out. I think a couple more would have been weeded out due to the second requirement listed above. Let's face it, if you don't finish at least .500 in your conference, chances are you aren't going to win the NCAA tournament anyway, why do they wast a selection on a team just because they play in a "power conference". If you are going to reap all the benefits of being in a BCS conference, the least you could do is go .500 in conference play to earn your bid.
These 3-4 new spots could then be awarded to "Mid-Majors" who had a deserving resume.
I know a lot of people say that these teams from the power conferences are tournament quality teams despite having worse records than alot of the mid majors, and they are right.
However the NCAA needs to get away from AWARDING teams the right to play in the NCAA for mediocre seasons just because they play in a so called tough conference, and start REWARDING
teams who win 20+ games, have a good conference record, and play a tough non conference schedule.
Finally I think by putting a premium on Conference RPI, and that partially determining how many teams are REWARDED with the right to play in the NCAA tournament will force the power conferences to try and outdo each other as far as RPI ratings go to get those last few coveted At Large bids. This would lead to those conferences going out and hopefully scheduling tougher Non Conference Schedules, thus further opening the door for Mid Majors to prove themselves.
Of course this will probably never happen, but I just think some sort of concrete guidelines are needed for the selection committee. They then can still seed the teams however they deem fit, but at least these rules would give other deserving teams a chance to play in the tournament, rather than just speculating on who should be in and who shouldn't be.
RocketWatcher
New member
NCAA expansion is another example of the pussification of the United States. Affirmative action, political correctness, and all the other liberal crap needs to stop.
PS: You're entitled to the pursuit of happiness, not guaranteed (nor should anyone be) to be provided by for the government.
rant off
PS: You're entitled to the pursuit of happiness, not guaranteed (nor should anyone be) to be provided by for the government.
rant off
yourbradleybraves!
New member
RocketWatcher said:
Love it!!! :lol: 8)