Where the tourney gets it wrong...

is mizzou better than norfolk st? yes. but when you rely on the 3 you die by the 3. mizzou relies too much on that and doesnt have a balanced team. they basically play 5 guards. you need an inside presence at the very least. i could see iowa beat mizzou because we would dominate them down low (not that it would actually happen but i could see it).

b12 teams are the most up and down teams in bball this yr. baylor is arguably one of the most talented teams in all of bball and i thought they would lose to sdsu. the b12 schools will have games where they show they are possibly the most talented conference but a couple days later those same teams are making jr high mistakes. that is why people consider other conferences better than the b12...not talent but consistency.
 
Here is the last 10 years; looks like a lot of #1 seeds to me. As the Duff man said, teams that get through 2 weeks are usually the best teams



2010
 Duke (1)
2009
 North Carolina (1)
2008
 Kansas (1)

 2007
 Florida (1)

2006
 Florida (3)

2005
 N. Carolina (1)

 2004
 UConn (2)

 2003
 Syracuse (3)

 2002
 Maryland (1)

 2001
 Duke (1)

 2000
 Michigan St. (1)

 1999
 Connecticut (1)
 
the NCAA tournament is one of the best sporting events around, if not the best.

all a "better" team needs to do is win. there is not a more exciting time in sports than the first four days of this tournament.
 
Here, I would advocate something like this and then have maybe 3 game series since there is half as many teams. I just used committee's seedings for this tournament but it would probably change. Since the 8-9 seed game is the only real "toss-up" game statistically in the tournament now they would play-in for the 8 seed. I like the match-ups that this would provide...and any team that could get through this is the best team in the NCAA.

NCAANew.jpg


Sorry for stretching the page.
 
HawkForce said:
The NCAA tourney is too big...Mizzou is one of the best teams in the nation and they don't get a shot to really play for a national title...we know Norfolk is NOT better than Mizzou...yet one bad game and the season is worthless.
Click to expand...

Did you take a page from Okeefe?

When March comes rolling around you better be prepared to play. Any team can win, which is what makes March Madness the greatest sporting event ever.

Norfolk IS better than Missouri today.
 
The tourney is too big and should be contracted. It won't be, but should be. Here's why:
Attendance and viewership for the regular season is down. I believe it is because the post season is watered down with 68 teams.
32 teams would make a much more meaningful regular season. And a truer national champion.
I do think the bigger tourney leads to more upsets and is more fun to watch. But does it mean the truest national champion? No.
 
1hawkeye1 said:
The tourney is too big and should be contracted. It won't be, but should be. Here's why:
Attendance and viewership for the regular season is down. I believe it is because the post season is watered down with 68 teams.
32 teams would make a much more meaningful regular season. And a truer national champion.
I do think the bigger tourney leads to more upsets and is more fun to watch. But does it mean the truest national champion? No.
Click to expand...

Exactly!
 
1hawkeye1 said:
The tourney is too big and should be contracted. It won't be, but should be. Here's why:
Attendance and viewership for the regular season is down. I believe it is because the post season is watered down with 68 teams.
32 teams would make a much more meaningful regular season. And a truer national champion.
I do think the bigger tourney leads to more upsets and is more fun to watch. But does it mean the truest national champion? No.
Click to expand...

There's no way teams like ISU are the best team in the country, yet they are in the top 32. Any tournament bigger than four teams is not going to find you a true national champion.
 
hawkfan33 said:
There's no way teams like ISU are the best team in the country, yet they are in the top 32. Any tournament bigger than four teams is not going to find you a true national champion.
Click to expand...

That could be flawed too though considering not every team plays each other.
 
hawkfan33 said:
There's no way teams like ISU are the best team in the country, yet they are in the top 32. Any tournament bigger than four teams is not going to find you a true national champion.
Click to expand...

I'd say a 32 team (maybe 36 with 4 play ins) and 3-game series would no doubt name a true champion.
 
1hawkeye1 said:
The tourney is too big and should be contracted. It won't be, but should be. Here's why:
Attendance and viewership for the regular season is down. I believe it is because the post season is watered down with 68 teams.
32 teams would make a much more meaningful regular season. And a truer national champion.
I do think the bigger tourney leads to more upsets and is more fun to watch. But does it mean the truest national champion? No.
Click to expand...

you can make the argument that the BCS doesn't necessarily determine the "true" champion all the time either though. But the majority of the time it does, just like the NCAA tourney.

I dont know about you, but it seems to me like regular season viewership of NCAA is all based on the success of the local rooting interest. just look at our state for example. ISU and Iowa are both drawing way more TV viewers and better crowds at games because the basketball is better. that's really the main factor in regular season NCAA interest.
 
bcl20 said:
That could be flawed too though considering not every team plays each other.
Click to expand...

It's much better than having a 32 team tournament. Why have 32 teams in when most of them have already proven they aren't the best team in the country? Is there any way K-State or Notre Dame have any claim as being the best team in the country? Of course not, so what good does it do having them in the tournament.
 
hawkfan33 said:
There's no way teams like ISU are the best team in the country, yet they are in the top 32. Any tournament bigger than four teams is not going to find you a true national champion.
Click to expand...

ISU was ranked #25 going into the big XII tourney. they have an RPI of 30 and now they've played their way into the round of 32. I dont see how you have any argument against them being one of the best 32 teams in the nation.

and what? how would a four team tourney determine a true champ? that is completely moronic if you think that's legit
 
hawkfan33 said:
It's much better than having a 32 team tournament. Why have 32 teams in when most of them have already proven they aren't the best team in the country? Is there any way K-State or Notre Dame have any claim as being the best team in the country? Of course not, so what good does it do having them in the tournament.
Click to expand...

why have a playoff at all then? In your world the #1 at the end of the regular season is the national champ.
 
The rules of the sport and the tournament are arbitrary, and the concept "best basketball team" is subjective. It is literally impossible to objectively determine a "true champion" under such conditions.
 
you can't improve on the 64 team model. the ncaa has tried in the name .of the almighty dollar and has failed. the tournament is as fair a way to determine a champ as there is in sports. in the NBA you can mail in playoff games and still win a title. not so in the ncaa.
 
you can't improve on the 64 team model. the ncaa has tried in the name .of the almighty dollar and has failed. the tournament is as fair a way to determine a champ as there is in sports. in the NBA you can mail in playoff games and still win a title. not so in the ncaa.
 
stevefrench said:
ISU was ranked #25 going into the big XII tourney. they have an RPI of 30 and now they've played their way into the round of 32. I dont see how you have any argument against them being one of the best 32 teams in the nation.

and what? how would a four team tourney determine a true champ? that is completely moronic if you think that's legit
Click to expand...

LOL at Clones fan's poor reading comprehension. I said ISU is one of the best 32 teams in the country but have no shot at being the best team in the country. College basketball teams play enough games to have a pretty good sample size to compare teams across conferences, this isn't football. In any given year, you have at most six teams who could make a case as being the best team in the country. If you're trying to find a true champion, why in the world would you bother inviting 32 teams?
 
stevefrench said:
why have a playoff at all then? In your world the #1 at the end of the regular season is the national champ.
Click to expand...

Have the number one play the number two team in a best of seven. I would enjoy that much better than watching craptastic final games like UConn-Butler.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top