NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:05 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:59 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:06 am
Posts: 151
I know people have allot of views on the March tournament. I want to know what do you people think of of forcing the play-in games to be amongst the non automatic quantifiers?(Any conference tournament champ is guaranteed at least a 15 seed. All #16 seeds will be in through the play in games. They could have a fluctuating play in game that basically is as follows:

Average out the two opponents RPI and place the play in game to which they would rank the play in game for. (if one would be a #7 seed while the opponent would be #13 then the play in game would be for the #10 position.)

Add lower division games to RPI.(Division 2,3 and Naia.) (divide the wighted win percentage by half and increase the loss weight by half.) In this way there is is some addition to playing lower divisions but a huge blow if you lose. This will help teams to try and get a better schedule even if it's a 2 for 1 games.(Florida getting 2 home games for 1 away game at Florida Gulf Coast.)

For transition teams in the RPI they could increase the weight of their games after each successful transition year.(a Third year transition team will be worth more then a First year transition team)

The rason for the change is that if a team wins their conference tournament then i believe they deserve to be in the actual tournament not a play in game. I know that they lose the spot light for the lower ranked teams as there are only 4 games played on that day.

_________________
Fan of:
Sun Belt Conference
Summit League
Us National Soccer Team


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:36 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 1650
I'd be for that, but in the end, politics will rule the day....

If you suggest to the "power conferences" that their #7 or #8 team is less important than another conference's champion, they'll throw a hissy-fit and threaten to take their ball home....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:06 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:06 am
Posts: 151
The leagues #7 or #8 teams will still make the tournament They will just be regulated into the play in games. Money won't change as the play in games give the same amount of money to the loser as the first round. To ease travel they could have the play in games at the sites of that brackets first round game.

_________________
Fan of:
Sun Belt Conference
Summit League
Us National Soccer Team


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:52 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3802
It's probably in the NCAAs best interest for playin games to have "names". Face it, Texas Southern vs Kennesaw St. as a play in is hardly the draw that Kennesaw St. vs South Carolina would be.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:53 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3802
It's probably in the NCAAs best interest for playin games to have "names". Face it, Texas Southern vs Kennesaw St. as a play in is hardly the draw that Kennesaw St. vs South Carolina would be.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:52 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm
Posts: 1650
I was just reading something that Freaked posted, when over in a side-bar, this cought my eye....

May require a subscription..... https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Dai ... urner.aspx

(CBS talking to Turner about handing the Final Four telecasts over to Turner (TBS ? TNT ?))....
Surprising, I would think viewership in your oh-so-desirable beer-and-car-buying 25-49 male category is HUGE, and advertising sales for those 3 games must fetch a nice chunk of change !

CBS seems to have no issues showing sports (such as SEC football) on Saturday late afternoon & evening - Monday night it would bump off some crappy sitcoms.... (what is CBS's thinking ?)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:11 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7292
WinAD blog article discussing 2013 NCAA BB Tourney Unit Payouts at http://winthropintelligence.com/2013/04 ... outs-after


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:18 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:04 pm
Posts: 368
Awwwhhhhh, Louisville !!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 4:04 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1429
louisvillecard01 wrote:
Awwwhhhhh, Louisville !!!!!


2014 and Louisville is still in for the sweet 16. But it does not count for the ACC yet.

Let's see, 3 SEC bids and 3 SEC teams in sweet sixteen including a #1 seed. No ACC.

Looks like a pattern the NCAA selection committees continue under-valuing the SEC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 4:30 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:45 am
Posts: 153
sec03 wrote:
2014 and Louisville is still in for the sweet 16. But it does not count for the ACC yet.

Let's see, 3 SEC bids and 3 SEC teams in sweet sixteen including a #1 seed. No ACC.

Looks like a pattern the NCAA selection committees continue under-valuing the SEC.


The SEC did catch a break with Tennessee having Iowa (lost like 6 of last 7 games), Massachusetts (decent but entirely overrated), and Mercer.

As far as no ACC, there is Virginia as a #1 seed. But in all honesty, before the season started, if you were told that only one ACC school would be in the Sweet 16, would anyone really have said Virginia? I would have easily said 6-7 schools before even considering Virginia. Good for them!

Louisville is definitely not an ACC school yet, but the ACC is a better conference for adding the Cardinals!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 5:04 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1324
Eventually this will lead to more expansion of the tournament.

The next expansion will be 2 play-in games in every region (#12 at large and #16 AQ).

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 5:38 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:45 am
Posts: 153
Does anyone have an over/under on how many seasons it will take for a double-digit seeded school to win the championship?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 6:11 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1429
sec03 wrote:
louisvillecard01 wrote:
Awwwhhhhh, Louisville !!!!!


2014 and Louisville is still in for the sweet 16. But it does not count for the ACC yet.

Let's see, 3 SEC bids and 3 SEC teams in sweet sixteen including a #1 seed. No ACC.

Looks like a pattern the NCAA selection committees continue under-valuing the SEC.


Yeah, I said that wrong; needed to proof; meant No ACC with three teams in sweet 16.

The B12, BIG, ACC, and Pac12 did double the SEC's invites. Those conferences and BE were ranked ahead of the SEC in Sagarin ratings; but Sagarin is also weighed heavy with its base start which never really gets factored out. Control for 'reputation' is not complete. Of course one can argue about 'bubble' teams such as NCSU till the cows come home.

PAC12, BIG, and the SEC have 3 remaining each. The B12 and AAC (including Louisville) have 2 each. And of course the ACC and the A10 each have a representative in the sweet 16.

If the argument is that Tennessee, for example, had it easy given their lower seed, then that, in itself, would imply the selection process has flaws. If the number of SEC entries are determined to be appropriately deserved, then it would suggest that the selection process was balanced and the SEC has so far done particularly well with having 100% there at the number 16 level.

It may not be so much the is SEC under-rated (looking at multi-years), but that certain other conferences/schools are over-rated.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2014 5:23 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:04 pm
Posts: 368
Wonder if it's reality that Dick Vitale is going to overcome depression and stress about "Dook" losing at the start? Oh baby, Mercer!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group