Bubble Watch

Mullins Revenge said:
Why are so many opposed to more teams in the tourney? That would be awesome to make this a bigger event.

It was once at 32 and went to 64. That worked. Then went from 64 to 68, still great.

Put more teams in this sucker and lets go!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Because then there is no real competition for the last spots. 68-74 are exciting but if it gets to 80 or 90 then teams just outside those numbers sure they missed but they likely didn't deserve to be there. Like all the 6 win bowl teams.
 
Mullins Revenge said:
Why are so many opposed to more teams in the tourney? That would be awesome to make this a bigger event.

It was once at 32 and went to 64. That worked. Then went from 64 to 68, still great.

Put more teams in this sucker and lets go!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Do you want 128 teams?

Because anything less is just going mean a ton of Dayton games where all mid and low majors are pitted against each other.
 
djramps said:
Its very simple there were not many Allies of the Big East on the committee. What should happen is if your conference wins a National Title the commissioner of the league should have a seat on the committee for 4 years.

Did anyone see the make up of the committee? The Butler AD should be embarrassed that he allowed this travesty to happen.

The 2023-2024 Selection Committee (the year the term is up is in parenthesis):

CHARLES MCCLELLAND (2024) – SWAC Commissioner (Chairperson)

JAMIE POLLARD (2024) – Iowa State Athletic Director

SCOTT BARNES (2024) – Oregon State Athletic Director

BUBBA CUNNINGHAM (2025) – North Carolina Athletic Director (Vice-Chairperson)

MARK COYLE (2026) – Minnesota Athletic Director

GREG BYRNE (2026) – Alabama Athletic Director

KEITH GILL (2026) – Sun Belt Commissioner

BARRY COLLIER (2026) – Butler Athletic Director

MARTIN NEWTON (2027) – Samford Athletic Director

TOM WISTRCILL (2027) – Big Sky Commissioner

ARTHUR JOHNSON (2028) – Temple Athletic Director

RENEE BAUMGARTNER (2028) – Santa Clara Athletic Director
Click to expand...
Just another kick in the gut Barry Collier is retiring in April. I'm sure that his priority is not the present and future of the Big East. Also, I barely consider Butler an Eastern School, his school was not in the mix, he is retiring , do you really think he cares about the future of the Big East?
 
eagleblue1 said:
Just another kick in the gut Barry Collier is retiring in April. I'm sure that his priority is not the present and future of the Big East. Also, I barely consider Butler an Eastern School, his school was not in the mix, he is retiring , do you really think he cares about the future of the Big East?
Click to expand...
Probably more upset about Indiana State being out.
 
Little harm with more teams.. proven.

If people are willing to pay to see games and it increases winning pool. That's good.

Who's to judge it people want to see the #5 team beat up on a SWAC or similar level team
 
eagleblue1 said:
Just another kick in the gut Barry Collier is retiring in April. I'm sure that his priority is not the present and future of the Big East. Also, I barely consider Butler an Eastern School, his school was not in the mix, he is retiring , do you really think he cares about the future of the Big East?
Click to expand...
Really on 1 person on this committee with a Northeastern School affiliation. The AD from Temple.
 
I'm actually more pro-expanding the tournament than I thought I would.

I think you keep the AQ system, they should be in the Round of 64 no matter what.

Add a play-in round for seeds 9, 10, 11. That will be 20 more teams (subtracting the four already in the play-in), closer to what the % of teams in during the 1985 change. It will still reward you for a good regular season performance, and will let the bubble teams duke it out on the court instead of a conference room.
 
SLYFOXX1968 said:
Of course RP makes a lot of sense but he has a long standing fueud

Kudos to McDermott and Hurley to a lesser extent but , still vocal about it

I’m disappointed that Ackerman didn’t mandate any BE school from taking the crumbs of a NIT bid . It’s a further insult by the Clueless Committee to invite the teams they snubbed

This whole Bubble Crap and Metrics BS is laughable . Especially presented by the boobs on the Show , including Jay Wright . Jay swallowed his pride and drink the NCAA nonsense .

It’s not a National Championship by inviting teams that belong in a weak sister tournament instead of highly competitive BE Teams . Texas is terrible , Kansas is awful , Tennessee flopped early , so did Purdue .

And , 3 of the 4 number 1 seeds just lost in their league championship games . Houston was a embarrassment . Point shaving ? They lost by what ? 29 points or something . NC looked dismal . Why ?

With Sampson as Coach anything is possible . Not saying it is but , not beyond a thought .
Click to expand...
Houston gets blown out but remains a number one seed tells you all you need to know about the f ing morons on the selection committee and that includes the asswipe AD from Butler. The more I look at their bogus selection process the more pissed off I get. UVA especially….. football rules…. BIG EAST SCREWED
 
The reality of the tournament and it's still great, the best 68 teams in the county are not playing for the National Championship. The automatic bid system is flawed with every conference getting at least 1 bid! In reality even though the NIT is basically a meaningless tournament, it's really a much better-balanced tournament from start to finish. Of course, since it's a "second fiddle event" it gets no attention!
 
Moose said:
Because then there is no real competition for the last spots. 68-74 are exciting but if it gets to 80 or 90 then teams just outside those numbers sure they missed but they likely didn't deserve to be there. Like all the 6 win bowl teams.
Click to expand...
I definitely do not want this to turn into something akin to College Football (40 plus bowls).

Going from 32 to 48 to 64 and to the present 68 made since as new conferences created a need for more automatic bids which was decreasing the number of available at large bids. While there have been changes within conferences, no new conferences requiring an automatic bid for their tournament champion are being created and with the demise of the Pac 12, another at large bid is opening. That is plenty.
 
Expanding the tournament devalues everything prior to the tournament. Remember how amped up we were for the SHU game thinking we'd be in with a win and out with a loss? That's what makes college basketball great. Now those win and in situations will happen for the 9th place team in the Big East going forward. For everybody else, individual games would matter less than an individual NBA regular season game which would kill college basketball especially with so many rivalries being dissolved by conference realignment.

The only thing that needs to change about the tournament is the committee and defining clearer measurables for selection/seeding. The committee clearly does not factor in the Saturday or Sunday games when making the bracket and probably doesn't factor in most of Friday games either. They are wildly inconsistent about which metrics they value and which they don't and even contradict themselves when explaining themselves after the bracket is revealed.

It's also completely impossible for a group of university Athletic Directors and Conference Commissioners to be even a little bit unbiased in their process. I'm also highly dubious of the claim that these committee members "watch a lot of basketball throughout the course of the season".

I'd be far more comfortable with 10-15 of the bracketology Twitter nerds actually doing the selection than the committee as currently constructed.
 
Silly Donovan said:
Houston gets blown out but remains a number one seed tells you all you need to know about the f ing morons on the selection committee and that includes the asswipe AD from Butler. The more I look at their bogus selection process the more pissed off I get. UVA especially….. football rules…. BIG EAST SCREWED
Click to expand...
"Football Rules...Big East Screwed"

Potential slogan for a t-shirt or bumper sticker.
 
MugCostanza said:
Expanding the tournament devalues everything prior to the tournament. Remember how amped up we were for the SHU game thinking we'd be in with a win and out with a loss? That's what makes college basketball great. Now those win and in situations will happen for the 9th place team in the Big East going forward. For everybody else, individual games would matter less than an individual NBA regular season game which would kill college basketball especially with so many rivalries being dissolved by conference realignment.

The only thing that needs to change about the tournament is the committee and defining clearer measurables for selection/seeding. The committee clearly does not factor in the Saturday or Sunday games when making the bracket and probably doesn't factor in most of Friday games either. They are wildly inconsistent about which metrics they value and which they don't and even contradict themselves when explaining themselves after the bracket is revealed.

It's also completely impossible for a group of university Athletic Directors and Conference Commissioners to be even a little bit unbiased in their process. I'm also highly dubious of the claim that these committee members "watch a lot of basketball throughout the course of the season".

I'd be far more comfortable with 10-15 of the bracketology Twitter nerds actually doing the selection than the committee as currently constructed.
Click to expand...
I think the conference tournaments should either go, or be an in-season tournament thing. They're clearly totally devalued for any high major program.

I disagree with it devaluing the regular season. I think getting a bye into the Round of 64 would be immensely important for diehard fans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top