×
Rock Chalk Talk: Basketball
Anything pertaining to basketball: college, pro, HS, recruiting, TV coverage
Anything pertaining to basketball: college, pro, HS, recruiting, TV coverage
NCAA considering eliminating automatic qualifiers?
- HawkErrant
-
Topic Author
- Offline
- Moderator
-
- b82, g84 Lift the chorus...
Less
More
- Posts: 7056
- Thank you received: 5542
7 months 1 week ago #32661
by HawkErrant
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime." - Mark Twain "Innocents Abroad"
Stupid idea!
I was not aware such a proposal was being considered.
Not only no but H*** NO!
First of all, let’s define the new P5, and what arguably for hoops was the P6…
ACC
B1G
Big 12
Big East
SEC
Pac12 (not in group after 2023-24)
National interest in the NCAAT will drop dramatically if such a money grab — because that’s what it is, a greedy money grab attempt by the “big” conferences — if such a money grab takes place. The NCAAT is HUGE right now because of the David v Goliath stories. They fuel the first two weekends of the tournament, and occasionally send it into weekend 3 to see if the UNDERDOG mid major can pull it off.
Shoot, the 2023 tourney saw half of the Final Four being mid majors.
In the first 20 tournaments held in the 21st Century (2001 thru 2021) the 80 Final Four openings were filled by 12 non-P6 teams.
That’s 15% of the possible participants.
Granted, today some of those once non-P6 programs are in the new P5 ( Houston, Louisville, Marquette). Even UConn in 2014 was in the AAC for a spell before returning to the Big East. But that still leaves 10% of those 80 spots filled by what next year will still be other than “new P5” programs.
That possibility draws a LOT of eyeballs on TV screens from small college America.
The David v Goliath battles.
Go the proposal route so more P5 schools get in (more $ to the big boys by cutting out the little guy), and the appeal — and the eyeballs — will drop.
Literally throttling the goose that lays the golden eggs.
I was not aware such a proposal was being considered.
Not only no but H*** NO!
First of all, let’s define the new P5, and what arguably for hoops was the P6…
ACC
B1G
Big 12
Big East
SEC
Pac12 (not in group after 2023-24)
National interest in the NCAAT will drop dramatically if such a money grab — because that’s what it is, a greedy money grab attempt by the “big” conferences — if such a money grab takes place. The NCAAT is HUGE right now because of the David v Goliath stories. They fuel the first two weekends of the tournament, and occasionally send it into weekend 3 to see if the UNDERDOG mid major can pull it off.
Shoot, the 2023 tourney saw half of the Final Four being mid majors.
In the first 20 tournaments held in the 21st Century (2001 thru 2021) the 80 Final Four openings were filled by 12 non-P6 teams.
That’s 15% of the possible participants.
Granted, today some of those once non-P6 programs are in the new P5 ( Houston, Louisville, Marquette). Even UConn in 2014 was in the AAC for a spell before returning to the Big East. But that still leaves 10% of those 80 spots filled by what next year will still be other than “new P5” programs.
That possibility draws a LOT of eyeballs on TV screens from small college America.
The David v Goliath battles.
Go the proposal route so more P5 schools get in (more $ to the big boys by cutting out the little guy), and the appeal — and the eyeballs — will drop.
Literally throttling the goose that lays the golden eggs.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime." - Mark Twain "Innocents Abroad"
The following user(s) said Thank You: hairyhawk, Bayhawk, boulderhawk
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Share this page:
- replayloungehawk
-
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 411
- Thank you received: 420
7 months 1 week ago #32662
by replayloungehawk
Yeah, that would be really dumb. It wouldn't even make the tourney fun anymore. It's cool to see all these mid-majors upset the big conference schools (except when it's KU LOL). I have this sneaking suspicion that eventually sports just isn't going to be the same, heck it's there already in many ways. Like everything else, people just can't understand "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
The following user(s) said Thank You: HawkErrant, boulderhawk
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- NotOstertag
-
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 1957
- Thank you received: 2162
7 months 1 week ago - 7 months 1 week ago #32666
by NotOstertag
"When I was a freshman, I remember Coach Naismith telling us how important it was to play good defense." - Mitch Lightfoot
You can always trust the NCAA to screw up a good thing. NIL and the portal are recent examples. The play-in games are a bad idea, and they keep talking about further expanding the field.
Notice that the play-in games get almost no interest, and you'll see how that mini-expansion worked out.
The beauty of the tournament is that all the conferences are guaranteed at least one slot. So even though nobody is expecting the Ivy League to be cutting down nets, the fact that a school like Princeton occasionally knocks off a top team makes things exciting. Who WASN'T rooting for Saint Peter's (#15 seed that made it to the elite 8 ) in 2022? For some of these kids and their fans, just getting into the tournament is a HUGE deal. Why take that away?
But yeah, there's nothing that the NCAA can't screw up.
Notice that the play-in games get almost no interest, and you'll see how that mini-expansion worked out.
The beauty of the tournament is that all the conferences are guaranteed at least one slot. So even though nobody is expecting the Ivy League to be cutting down nets, the fact that a school like Princeton occasionally knocks off a top team makes things exciting. Who WASN'T rooting for Saint Peter's (#15 seed that made it to the elite 8 ) in 2022? For some of these kids and their fans, just getting into the tournament is a HUGE deal. Why take that away?
But yeah, there's nothing that the NCAA can't screw up.
"When I was a freshman, I remember Coach Naismith telling us how important it was to play good defense." - Mitch Lightfoot
Last Edit: 7 months 1 week ago by HawkErrant.
The following user(s) said Thank You: HawkErrant, boulderhawk
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- USAF Jayhawk
-
- Offline
- Elite Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 291
- Thank you received: 314
7 months 1 week ago #32667
by USAF Jayhawk
I heard an expansion proposal that would give byes to the big fish and let the little fish fight for the right to play them. Granted the little fish ain't gonna win the tournament, but they clearly change the dynamics by knocking off contenders. I'd hate to see that change. Plus, how many teams each year get snubbed that probably deserved to get in...half dozen at most? Usually only a couple. Adding another 32 teams means inviting a bunch of folks that really don't deserve to be there.
Here's some funny match that few people think about. Doubling the number of team invites only adds one more game to the tournament.
Not that I'm for change, I like it the way it is. Adding teams is just a money grab.
Here's some funny match that few people think about. Doubling the number of team invites only adds one more game to the tournament.
Not that I'm for change, I like it the way it is. Adding teams is just a money grab.
The following user(s) said Thank You: HawkErrant, boulderhawk
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- NotOstertag
-
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 1957
- Thank you received: 2162
7 months 1 week ago #32668
by NotOstertag
"When I was a freshman, I remember Coach Naismith telling us how important it was to play good defense." - Mitch Lightfoot
I'd rather see an argument about a handful of bubble teams than adding rounds or bumping small confernce champs. As much as I hate the thought of losing to a 15 or 16 seed, for any team from outside of the Lawrence KS city limits, I'm absolutely pulling for the bottom barrel seed teams.
"When I was a freshman, I remember Coach Naismith telling us how important it was to play good defense." - Mitch Lightfoot
The following user(s) said Thank You: HawkErrant, boulderhawk
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- HawkErrant
-
Topic Author
- Offline
- Moderator
-
- b82, g84 Lift the chorus...
Less
More
- Posts: 7056
- Thank you received: 5542
7 months 1 week ago #32671
by HawkErrant
I hate teams getting byes. Everyone should have to play the same # of games to win an NC.
Which is why I’m not really crazy about the First Four. It’s just a small money grab disguised as a band aid for what really is a perfectly fine setup of 64.
I think 64 is the perfect #.
It leads to everyone having to play 6 to win it all.
It allows for 3 expanded weekends of 2 tournament games.
If they insist on making it bigger, just double it to keep everyone having to win 7 to win it all, get all the automatic bids and the conference-tournament-bumped-off regular season champs in from every conference, and the strongest remaining schools that did not meet either of those metrics.
Can you imagine the pain and embarrassment experienced by any 1 seed that lost to a 32 seed?
Nah, just keep it at 68. No mas.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime." - Mark Twain "Innocents Abroad"
USAF Jayhawk wrote: I heard an expansion proposal that would give byes to the big fish and let the little fish fight for the right to play them. Granted the little fish ain't gonna win the tournament, but they clearly change the dynamics by knocking off contenders. I'd hate to see that change. Plus, how many teams each year get snubbed that probably deserved to get in...half dozen at most? Usually only a couple. Adding another 32 teams means inviting a bunch of folks that really don't deserve to be there.
Here's some funny match that few people think about. Doubling the number of team invites only adds one more game to the tournament.
Not that I'm for change, I like it the way it is. Adding teams is just a money grab.
I hate teams getting byes. Everyone should have to play the same # of games to win an NC.
Which is why I’m not really crazy about the First Four. It’s just a small money grab disguised as a band aid for what really is a perfectly fine setup of 64.
I think 64 is the perfect #.
It leads to everyone having to play 6 to win it all.
It allows for 3 expanded weekends of 2 tournament games.
If they insist on making it bigger, just double it to keep everyone having to win 7 to win it all, get all the automatic bids and the conference-tournament-bumped-off regular season champs in from every conference, and the strongest remaining schools that did not meet either of those metrics.
Can you imagine the pain and embarrassment experienced by any 1 seed that lost to a 32 seed?
Nah, just keep it at 68. No mas.
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime." - Mark Twain "Innocents Abroad"
The following user(s) said Thank You: boulderhawk
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.