Jump to content
Pedro Cerrano

I hate mid-majors and lesser conferences

Recommended Posts

Sorry, but I have to vent.

The NCAA tournament should have the 65 best teams in the country. The fact that each conference receives an automatic bid is silly enough but when you add in the fact that these automatic bids take up roughly 50% of the total bids, it's just ridiculous.

Granted, I understand that most of these conferences would never get any bid and if they don't get the automatic bid there is nothing for them to play for but it's still dumb. Why have a tournament if you're not going to put in the 65 best teams?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but I have to vent.

The NCAA tournament should have the 65 best teams in the country. The fact that each conference receives an automatic bid is silly enough but when you add in the fact that these automatic bids take up roughly 50% of the total bids, it's just ridiculous.

Granted, I understand that most of these conferences would never get any bid and if they don't get the automatic bid there is nothing for them to play for but it's still dumb. Why have a tournament if you're not going to put in the 65 best teams?

The mid majors and lessor teams earn the right to be there by winning their conference. What makes College Basketball great is that every team in the country has a shot at getting to the tournament and then the opportunity to play for a title. The smaller conference teams have had enough success over the years that it's hard to argue against it being a good system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The mid majors and lessor teams earn the right to be there by winning their conference. What makes College Basketball great is that every team in the country has a shot at getting to the tournament and then the opportunity to play for a title. The smaller conference teams have had enough success over the years that it's hard to argue against it being a good system.

And there are some who would argue that MidMajors are not getting enough at large bids considering their success in the tourney especially in recent years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but I have to vent.

The NCAA tournament should have the 65 best teams in the country. The fact that each conference receives an automatic bid is silly enough but when you add in the fact that these automatic bids take up roughly 50% of the total bids, it's just ridiculous.

Granted, I understand that most of these conferences would never get any bid and if they don't get the automatic bid there is nothing for them to play for but it's still dumb. Why have a tournament if you're not going to put in the 65 best teams?

You’re unbelievable; yes some lesser conference teams are just awful and get blown out every year by the #1 seeds in the first round of the NCAA tourney. I really hope you are talking about some of the teams that seem so out of the place going up against “major” teams. If you’re talking about teams like Creighton, Dayton, Butler, BYU, Sienna as well then you are a complete idiot. If not, simply ignore.

Over the last couple of years alone:

-I guess the 05-06 George Mason Final 4 team was terrible.

-So was Davidson in their run to the Elite 8 last year, should have never happened, real boring and almost killed college basketball as we know it.

-Western Kentucky, sweet 16 last year, yes just awful for basketball.

-Maybe VCU should of never been able to beat Duke in the first round of the NCAA tourney 2 years ago as they probably were not even worthy of facing the almighty Dukies.

-Last year - Sienna beating Vanderbilt in the first round, San Diego beating UCONN -shame on you for taking away from Coach Calhoun’s postseason prowess.

This is what makes college basketball great, the upsets and the unexpected, yes there are a lot of bad teams out there but there are a ton of great mid major teams as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but I have to vent.

The NCAA tournament should have the 65 best teams in the country. The fact that each conference receives an automatic bid is silly enough but when you add in the fact that these automatic bids take up roughly 50% of the total bids, it's just ridiculous.

Granted, I understand that most of these conferences would never get any bid and if they don't get the automatic bid there is nothing for them to play for but it's still dumb. Why have a tournament if you're not going to put in the 65 best teams?

This is a bit irrational, but I can see a point for more teams getting in. They added a play in game to add a 65th team. That made no sense to me. How about all 15th and 16th seeded teams need to be play-ins. That would add more quality teams to the tourney. Then again, there would still be a debate about who is in and who is out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree. It really sucks that we have to see the champion of the MEAC and Atlantic Sun over the 11th-ranked ACC team and the 14th-ranked Big East team.

Well when you put it that way.... It does suck! Without the mid majors maybe the Big East would rightfully get the 16 teams in the tourney the conference deserves. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but I have to vent.

The NCAA tournament should have the 65 best teams in the country. The fact that each conference receives an automatic bid is silly enough but when you add in the fact that these automatic bids take up roughly 50% of the total bids, it's just ridiculous.

Granted, I understand that most of these conferences would never get any bid and if they don't get the automatic bid there is nothing for them to play for but it's still dumb. Why have a tournament if you're not going to put in the 65 best teams?

I have a good source that says mid-majors don't like you :D

I do think that the 65th team is not a good idea. 64 teams in the tourney in a three week single elimination competition is the best thing in sports. Period.

Go Mason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record I was not talking about any one team in particular. If George Mason and Creighton etc etc are a top 65 team then yes they deserve to be in.

I'm talking about a team like Delaware State, who has an awful RPI (just an example from a few years ago) getting a bid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You’re unbelievable; yes some lesser conference teams are just awful and get blown out every year by the #1 seeds in the first round of the NCAA tourney. I really hope you are talking about some of the teams that seem so out of the place going up against “major” teams. If you’re talking about teams like Creighton' date=' Dayton, Butler, BYU, Sienna as well then you are a complete idiot. If not, simply ignore.

Over the last couple of years alone:

-I guess the 05-06 George Mason Final 4 team was terrible.

-So was Davidson in their run to the Elite 8 last year, should have never happened, real boring and almost killed college basketball as we know it.

-Western Kentucky, sweet 16 last year, yes just awful for basketball.

-Maybe VCU should of never been able to beat Duke in the first round of the NCAA tourney 2 years ago as they probably were not even worthy of facing the almighty Dukies.

-Last year - Sienna beating Vanderbilt in the first round, San Diego beating UCONN -shame on you for taking away from Coach Calhoun’s postseason prowess.

This is what makes college basketball great, the upsets and the unexpected, yes there are a lot of bad teams out there but there are a ton of great mid major teams as well.[/quote']

Perhaps you have reading comprehension problems because this is not hard to understand. I believe that a tournament of 65 teams to decide the National Champion should be composed of the best 65 teams in the country (if you want to use top 65 RPI or whatever is fine).

I further argue that many many many teams receive a bid to the Dance who are way outside the top 65 teams simply because they won their lousy conference.

If that philosophy makes me a "complete idiot" (in your eyes at least) oh well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree. It really sucks that we have to see the champion of the MEAC and Atlantic Sun over the 11th-ranked ACC team and the 14th-ranked Big East team.

It only sucks if the 11th best ACC team is better than the Atlantic Sun champion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine you think that way.

I think the tournament as it is is beautiful. There is nothing better than watching a mid or low major take a team to the wire in the Dance. If you want to get rid of that, ok, but it seems silly to me.

The only thing I'd change about the tournament is that instead of making teams 64 and 65 play in the play-in game (teams that won their conference tournaments and should be able to experience a true NCAA experience). I would have at-large bids 33 and 34 play a play-in game. Those teams had their chances, and barely got in. Make them play for a chance to actually play in the tournament. Make the winner be a 12 seed and you're good to go. Then the game on Tuesday night would actually be interesting, rather than watching the two worst teams in the tournament play in front of nobody in a total non-NCAA environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I do think A team like DePaul (0-14 in the Big East) and Georgia Tech would destroy a team like Delaware State, the beauty of Championship Week and the beauty of upsets like Hampton over Iowa State and dare I say it, Weber State over North Carolina make seeing those teams get in well worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind the mid majors at all...I get the idea that Delaware St isn't good but as has been said, that is the beauty of the tourney and championship week.

That being said, i do think there should be more teams in the tourney now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's fine you think that way.

I think the tournament as it is is beautiful. There is nothing better than watching a mid or low major take a team to the wire in the Dance. If you want to get rid of that, ok, but it seems silly to me.

The only thing I'd change about the tournament is that instead of making teams 64 and 65 play in the play-in game (teams that won their conference tournaments and should be able to experience a true NCAA experience). I would have at-large bids 33 and 34 play a play-in game. Those teams had their chances, and barely got in. Make them play for a chance to actually play in the tournament. Make the winner be a 12 seed and you're good to go. Then the game on Tuesday night would actually be interesting, rather than watching the two worst teams in the tournament play in front of nobody in a total non-NCAA environment.

My favorite part of march is watching the fans storm the court after watching their team win their "lowly" conferences like the American East or Big Sky. As for your second point I agree, the teams earned the right to be in the proper tournament, and besides the play in game between the two last at larg bids would be a much more enticing match up. Sounds to me like the OP is a fan of a mediocre power conference team who probably wont be getting an at large bid. FWIW so am I and I still wouldnt change a thing, in fact I think mid majors near the top of their conference like Rhode Island or Siena should be given the at larges over .500 power conference teams (again including over my team)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • It seems like that the only possible way that the O’s (or most teams for that matter) can compete is by building an elite farm system.  Given how hard and how slow that process is, I wanted to ask the O’s experts on here a few simple question for discussion:   1. how long would you estimate that it takes for a team to go from a mediocre/poor farm system, to a system that has produced enough major league talent to win in the AL east?  Additionally, how long in your opinion does the pro club need to suck while building the farm. 2. is there a team that you would prefer that the O’s model their approach after?  Is it Tampa?  Toronto? St. Louis?  I think the Tampa model is the most brutally efficient, but I can’t see many people truly being happy with that model in the long haul (getting rid of good players while value is high, rarely spending a dollar in FA). 3. do you like the financial model of baseball as opposed to other professional leagues?  Baseball has always been my favorite sport, but it really seems to favor the larger market teams in the end.  Not that smaller market teams can’t compete, it’s just that every year it seems the larger market teams win.  I know there are some poor large market orgs, but I personally get disinterested when I see how imbalanced the competitive landscape can be at times.  
    • Same chance of getting you a championship in 2022.
    • o   lllllllllllllllllllllll. (vs. MARINERS, 12:35 PM)       llllllllllllllll lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll        llllllllllllllllllllll.l (vs. MARINERS, 4:05 PM)     llllllllllllllll lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll    o
    • Contracts like Davis really hurts the game overall more than it hurts the individual team. Typically teams that have a bad contract just pick up and move on from the player...meanwhile the fans hold a grudge towards the player. Baltimore is doing a disservice to the game by not releasing him and moving on.
    • Yikes. Here's what the O's gave up in 24 hrs.:     WAR, 1991 ff.     Finley        43.5     Harnisch    17.6     Schilling    80.2     Tettleton    17.9     Total lost: 159.2 Davis        0.2     Robinson    -0.6     Total gained: -0.4         Total, net: 159.6 10 yrs    16 WAR/yr.     16 yrs.    10 WAR/yr.    
    • My wife and I went to Sunday's game with another couple and had a great time. A couple observations: - Bottom line up front is that I'd very much encourage folks to go. We've been relatively cautious during Covid, but really at no point felt cramped or uncomfortable. Certainly some of that is that now most of the folks I was with were fully vaccinated, but there's plenty of space in between seats and really not that many people. Even coming into the stadium and in concession lines, people were generally respectful of distance and it was no issue. I'm sure, anecdotally, there will always be someone messing up, but it wasn't an issue for us. Just wanted to start with that context for those that harbor understandable apprehensions, acknowledging everyone has different circumstances/risk perceptions. - Definitely make sure you read the modified regulations before you go - the issue with purses and parking, as some folks noted above, are definitely present. You've just got to be aware of them and plan (my wife switched out her purse just before leaving the house, and my friend's wife had a borderline-sized purse that got waved through after a little negotiation). I can't speak for parking, as we just did a garage on Pratt. - Mobile ticketing and electronic payments were all fully in use, so do recommend just coming prepared. If you're comfortable with using them, it's no issue, but understand some people aren't as tech savvy. Just a pretty minor planning factor. - Regarding masks, most people were good about wearing them, though clearly some of that slipped when people were sitting at their seats. I did see a few times where ushers enforced the masking at your seat rule, but it didn't seem overly draconian (it wasn't that if your beer left your lips for more than two seconds and your mask wasn't up, ushers would descend on you). Those patrons I observed were mostly compliant when directed (except the stray Phillies fan who decided to be difficult). Although I know some folks aren't crazy about it, to be honest, I've been at work every day for the last year wearing a mask the entire time for 8+ hours, so I'm not especially sympathetic. Little bit of a pain, but won't kill ya for a couple hours. - As others have stated, most but not all concessions appeared to be open. Prices did feel a touch on the steep side, but I'd bet they're comparable to what they were in 2019. The O's clearly haven't moved to the Ravens modified pricing. - Lastly, the bar scene before the game was of course quite different than normal, but still very workable and pleasant. Pickles, Sliders, etc have taken over huge spaces in front of their buildings, with plentiful tables well-spaced out. We got to Sliders at maybe 11:45 before a 1 o'clock game on a Sunday, and we had no issue getting a table. Again, overall would recommend folks go, if you're comfortable. I'll tell you it was absolutely great to get back out there and do something normal after having been cooped up for so long.
    • One last thought. When the reserve clause died in court and all players could become free agents every year, the players union was smart and agreed to a service requirement. It was good for salaries and good for the sport to control supply/demand, even if it seemed like a giveaway by the players. If there was a non-performance clause built into free agent contracts that gave some level of relief to owners, it would benefit salaries and the sport. Small to mid size teams would have more ability to chase top talent because the affect of a bad contract would be less calamitous to their limited payroll means if it was discounted by some percentage for non-performance. Ask Scott Boras if he’d rather have three teams bidding for his client or six. Our very own Albert Belle contract made insuring contracts fairly cost prohibitive (though it kinda seems like we’re keeping Davis on the roster for some reason other than insanity). But that practice of insuring contracts showed that there’s more money to spend on players if you give owners some level of protection from disaster contracts like Davis. Owners used to pay huge amounts to insure contracts before they became cost prohibitive. So if it’s good for competitiveness by allowing smaller teams to be more aggressive, and it’s good for player salaries, and it’s good for owners by protecting their investments, by what principle is a player entitled to the full value of a contract that they have essentially defaulted on for non-performance? 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...