blungld said:
mbBear said:
blungld said:
It would be a real shame (and unjust) if after the season this team has had if they were placed as an 8 seed in the overall #1 seed in their hometown. This team has earned a shot at the Sweet Sixteen not to be screwed over by regionality and a poor seeding.
Also what gives with teams having losing records in their conference and still making the NCAA? That should be a disqualifier. I don't care how strong your conference is, if you are not over .500 you should not be in the tourney. You already get enough perks being in that conference with strength of schedule, multiple qualifiers, advantages in dollars and recruiting, you don't also get to "win" when you lose--there has be some risk and downside to joining a tough conference and its not good for the sport either.
What seed have they earned if you were doing the seeding?
Why does there "have to be" some risk and downside? Either you want the best teams in the tournament, or you don't. Congrats to the Vermont Catamounts for being 12-3 in the America East, and anything can happen in the conference tournament as they breath down the neck of those Albany Great Danes!!
They are 17-12, and only win of note was their first game, against Missouri who is 12th in the SEC, (so I think you don't have to worry about the Tigers sneaking in)...but come on, that's the hill you are going to die on, Vermont doing great in conference without playing anyone???? While someone has had games against ranks teams week in and week out??!
Who said anything about dying on any hills? Take it down a few notches. I stated an opinion.
You might disagree, but I think there needs to be systemic "fairness" built into competitive sports. Having 13 projected teams from one conference I think is a joke and a lopsided embarrassment to competition. The idea is to have a nationwide championship with a set criteria for entrance. We already say you get automatic if you win your conference or win your conference tournament, I see no reason not to also have automatic disqualification if you are not over .500 in your conference (unless you win your tournament). And the whole "best teams" argument is such a fan fiction. You do not know who the 64/68 best teams are and neither does anyone else--so don't pretend like this is a hard fact and so it would be such a terrible miscarriage of justice and sports wherewithal if a lowly 3rd place Vermont got in over say a mighty 11th place SEC school. Here's an idea, since experts like you already can rank the 68 teams in order of bestness, just skip the tournament all together because you already know the pecking order and the guaranteed results...oh wait--with literally millions of people doing NCAA pools how many get all the picks right.
If I am talking about "dying on hills" then I am certainly having fun with your opinion...I guess I have lived on the East coast too long.... it's about arguing over beers, not tofu, it's just basketball...if you were offended, I'm blaming my gin and tonic, but sorry.
I'm not arguing for changing the system...my point about Vermont is that they are the second best team in their conference...I'm good with automatic bids...I"m just against punishing playing a good conference
schedule, and rewarding a good conference record for not playing anyone.
The "no one gets all the picks right" is part of the lovely Cinderella hype. 154-2 of the 1 vs 16 match up...six 11 seeds have made the Final Four, no one lower(2 in the last few years, and they were from the Pac-12 and ACC). An 8th seed won once, nothing lower. Looking back over the Final Four list for the last number of years- who isn't from a power hoop conference? Gonzaga?
The tough conferences are exactly that.... and for football, a 4 loss SEC team might still be a top 12 team in the country. I'm not a fan of consolidation, but here we are... .
