We go through an interesting paradox every year at college sports seasons. On one hand, many people argue for a tournament in college football, recognizing the importance of conferences and strong at large teams. On the other hand, many of those people do not like the automatic berths that cause only the top ten percent or so of D-1 basketball schools to get an at-large berth. This in many ways is comparing apples to oranges, but the same principles apply to both. That means the 65 team setup right now? It’s just fine. Here’s why:
People have argued that if we are going to have this “fairness” of inviting one team from each conference, then just invite everyone. In case you didn’t think about it, you already do! The conference tournaments provide the perfect way for all teams, even if you are winless, to a least have a nominal chance to make the tournament. Heck, compared to 30 years ago, where winning your conference was essentially the only way to qualify, the mix now is perfect. You are guaranteed to get the top teams but also get the conference champs. Give me the best schools AND ones wbo have actually won something.
The argument is made that it would be a better tournament if the true top 65 schools were in. I could not disagree more. Imagine this. There are 31 conference champs, and 32 NIT qualifiers. While I understand that many of the 31 would qualify anywAys, watch a round or two of the NIT and think about whether you would rather watch some 17-15 middle of the road big school or a conference champ who has actually (gasp) won something. No doubt in my mind, give me the 25-6 no name school.
The charm and allure of this tournament is built as much now around the small school everyone can get bebind as much as it is the big schools too. Cincinnati at a putrid 18-14 and a horrible ending wouldn’t make you care, but a cinderella school in the Sweet 16? Now you’re watching!
Let’s not forget the final factor; money and gambling. The NCAA will never admit it, but gambling and bracket pools are a large part of the current success of the tournament. These brackets are far more fun and challenging with the current setup than they would be with a 1 seed playing, say, an ACC school that went 5-11 in conference but was still one of the best 64.
There is merely one rule I would enact, also built around conferences. That any team who wins their conference regular season title gets at minimum an NIT berth. Constant success for teams across the board should be rewarded and seeing some of these smaller schools might give the NIT a boost too.
So there you have it. The tournament formula is fine. Please do NOT change it!
The NCAA Tournament Is Just Fine!
We go through an interesting paradox every year at college sports seasons. On one hand, many people argue for a tournament in college football, recognizing the importance of conferences and strong at large teams. On the other hand, many of those people do not like the automatic berths that cause only the top ten percent or so of D-1 basketball schools to get an at-large berth. This in many ways is comparing apples to oranges, but the same principles apply to both. That means the 65 team setup right now? It’s just fine. Here’s why:
People have argued that if we are going to have this “fairness” of inviting one team from each conference, then just invite everyone. In case you didn’t think about it, you already do! The conference tournaments provide the perfect way for all teams, even if you are winless, to a least have a nominal chance to make the tournament. Heck, compared to 30 years ago, where winning your conference was essentially the only way to qualify, the mix now is perfect. You are guaranteed to get the top teams but also get the conference champs. Give me the best schools AND ones wbo have actually won something.
The argument is made that it would be a better tournament if the true top 65 schools were in. I could not disagree more. Imagine this. There are 31 conference champs, and 32 NIT qualifiers. While I understand that many of the 31 would qualify anywAys, watch a round or two of the NIT and think about whether you would rather watch some 17-15 middle of the road big school or a conference champ who has actually (gasp) won something. No doubt in my mind, give me the 25-6 no name school.
The charm and allure of this tournament is built as much now around the small school everyone can get bebind as much as it is the big schools too. Cincinnati at a putrid 18-14 and a horrible ending wouldn’t make you care, but a cinderella school in the Sweet 16? Now you’re watching!
Let’s not forget the final factor; money and gambling. The NCAA will never admit it, but gambling and bracket pools are a large part of the current success of the tournament. These brackets are far more fun and challenging with the current setup than they would be with a 1 seed playing, say, an ACC school that went 5-11 in conference but was still one of the best 64.
There is merely one rule I would enact, also built around conferences. That any team who wins their conference regular season title gets at minimum an NIT berth. Constant success for teams across the board should be rewarded and seeing some of these smaller schools might give the NIT a boost too.
So there you have it. The tournament formula is fine. Please do NOT change it!