|
Post by gtvbjt on Oct 24, 2007 11:39:59 GMT -5
I will be posting this soon, but the short answer is that it's not a good idea to base the cutoff on RPI. I'm pretty sure it's just a starting point. However - you should have seen how some ACC fans reacted last season when several SEC teams made the NCAA Tournament compared to only one for the ACC. There were claims that either the RPI was flawed (duh), or that the Pablo Rankings must be flawed if no other ACC teams besides Duke were ranked higher than any of the SEC teams that made the NCAAs. Many people get irrational when they start talking about their team or league. Dude even hoped for a limit on the number of teams in a conference making the NCAAs, so that the ACC might get more teams in. The strangest request was that the NCAA Tournament committee should watch as much game video as possible, because they'd better see how good teams are beyond just records. That was funny. I'm sure the RPI is used as just one point of comparison. I might be halfway decent to determine which teams are "slam dunks" for inclusion in the tournament field. Selecting a tournament field is hard enough as it is. Just wondering who you are talking about... If you are "mentioning" me, you are completely off basis...
|
|
|
Post by Chance on Oct 24, 2007 11:52:13 GMT -5
Dont forget the part where they went on to try and use SPRING game results to justify that they had been hosed. One of the biggest reaches ever. Aww. Chance, don't be bitter that your team sucked it up at Georgia Tech (losing to all 4 ACC schools: Georgia Tech, Duke, Florida State and Virginia). Oh yeah, how's your team doing this year? Ouch... pretty bad... You are proving my point. You can't even talk smack without bringing up SPRING games. That's really sad. It's offseason. Teams tend to have more people than normal out, they are missing freshman, they dont take winning serious but instead sometimes do "bad" things in order to improve on something, etc... As for the "bitter" suggestion, I actually said the entire concept of a conference challenge in the spring was stupid BEFORE the event even took place.
|
|
|
Post by Chance on Oct 24, 2007 11:57:18 GMT -5
There already is a system where every team plays off to get into the NCAA tournament. They call it "conference tournaments". (OK, I'm overlooking that it's left to the conferences how they decide to hand out their autobid, and I see a subsequent follow-up from p-dub has raised the point that some conferences don't have a tournament, but my overall point is, every team does have access to the tournament by winning their conference's autobid.) The objection to that, however, is that some teams get a second chance, while others do not. Who cares if they do though? Florida deserves to go to the tournament regardless of what they do in their conference tournament. Some team from some of the really bad conferences... not so much. If EVERY single team make it in, the regular season becomes stupid and pointless.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Oct 24, 2007 12:09:34 GMT -5
The objection to that, however, is that some teams get a second chance, while others do not. Who cares if they do though? Florida deserves to go to the tournament regardless of what they do in their conference tournament. Some team from some of the really bad conferences... not so much. . Why? Why not? A lot of the regular season is already rendered insignificant. If you want to make the regular season important, then trash the conference tournaments.
|
|
|
Post by cruncher on Oct 24, 2007 12:38:50 GMT -5
Why? Why not? A lot of the regular season is already rendered insignificant. If you want to make the regular season important, then trash the conference tournaments. Amen! Let the conference champs (season) have auto bids, and a bye round or two, and let everyone else duke it out in regional competitions. The regular season should be most significant!
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Wednesday on Oct 24, 2007 17:51:40 GMT -5
The conferences choose to make their tournaments important by giving their autobid to the tournament champion. That's not something dictated by the NCAA, it's left to the conference to decide how its autobid is determined.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Wednesday on Oct 24, 2007 17:52:59 GMT -5
The objection to that, however, is that some teams get a second chance, while others do not. I don't have a problem with that.
|
|
|
Post by wsufan on Oct 25, 2007 8:58:17 GMT -5
The objection to that, however, is that some teams get a second chance, while others do not. I don't have a problem with that. The question is which teams get that second chance. I have a problem with the current selection system.
|
|
|
Post by romeo on Oct 25, 2007 11:37:35 GMT -5
The conferences choose to make their tournaments important by giving their autobid to the tournament champion. That's not something dictated by the NCAA, it's left to the conference to decide how its autobid is determined. I can't believe I'm saying this, but the NCAA should dictate this. Auto bids should all go to the regular conference season winners.
|
|