this year will be no different. The system does not allow the best to make it. Being politically correct in this country is much more important that having the best teams in the tourney. On top of being politically correct we have the illustrious and brilliant media pundits telling us who is great and who is not. Wow, aren't we lucky? Despite it all, March Madness is the absolute best time in sports.
Best 64 Never Make The Tourney...
- Thread starter jbulldog
- Start date
How in hell you just equated the tourney with political correctness is idiotic. What makes the tourney great is the small teams.
in order to ensure that all the small conferences continue to keep their automatic bids. That's what makes March so special. Without that, there's no Gonzaga, Davidson, Hampton over Iowa, Princeton taking a #1 seed to the wire, Bryce Drew, etc. And I like it that EVERY D-1 team in the country controls their own destiny to the national championship. It's not like football where some teams are eliminated before a game is ever played. Every team has their shot if they just win.
BFB
BFB
all I know is NEVER in the history of the tourney has a #16 seed defeated a #1. Take a look at who the #16 seeds have been and you may understand why I think we are being politically correct in many aspects of the tourney. Can you honestly say there will not be a number of teams left out who would easily defeat many of the #16 teams? Why not have as many #16 seeds as possible who actually have a chance to win? The answer: political correctness, in my idiotic opinion. One final comment: you state noone has ever said the best 64 make the tourney.....why is that? If they don't, shouldn't they?
Most people, including me, think that college basketball is so great because everybody has a shot when March begins. Letting the small canference champions in makes for a better event in the majority's opinion. Political correctness has nothing to do with it.</p>
used to be only the conference tournament winners got in. That meant very often the best teams weren't in.
Even if it was the best 64, you really think 16 seeds would beat 1 seeds? Hell no. That would still the 64th best team playing the number one team in the country. You just don't understand the tournament and what makes it great.
And I still don't see how political correctness has anything to do with this. Hell, this started before political correctness was a phrase. Every conference gets a team in. That's not PC, it's the damn point of the tournament.
If MSU wins the SEC tournament, but still has an RPI in the 70s, you are saying you would be in favor of turning your bid down, as it's only political correctness giving you a bid, right?
Even if it was the best 64, you really think 16 seeds would beat 1 seeds? Hell no. That would still the 64th best team playing the number one team in the country. You just don't understand the tournament and what makes it great.
And I still don't see how political correctness has anything to do with this. Hell, this started before political correctness was a phrase. Every conference gets a team in. That's not PC, it's the damn point of the tournament.
If MSU wins the SEC tournament, but still has an RPI in the 70s, you are saying you would be in favor of turning your bid down, as it's only political correctness giving you a bid, right?
Gonzaga would be on the outside looking in every year. They'd have never gotten the chance to showcase what a good basketball program they've run. They wouldn't be getting at large bids now had they not proved themselves for multiple years in the NCAA's.
BFB
BFB
IOWA STATE. Hampton beat IOWA STATE.Bulldog from Birth said:
For a fanbase that tweaks its **** everytime it is confused with OM, i figure the same respect should be given to the rest of the schools across the country.
We could have won a couple early season non-conference games and we would be set right now, but that's basketball. Is the SWAC champion a better team than us? Hell no. Do they deserve to go more than we do? Yes, because they did what it took to get to the tournament. Will they get waxed by Memphis or UNC in the first round? Of course. Would we? Probably. Sure you might see a 16 over a 1 more often, but you probably still would not have a 16 seed win the tournament. Part of the benefit of having weak teams is that the strong seeds don't have to play as hard in the first round(usually) compared to the teams they face in the second round. A 1 seed usually is well rested compared to the 8 or 9 seed they face on the weekend that hung on to play another game by the skin of its teeth.
That's not the set up of the tournament.
It's 30 or so automatic bids, and the best 30+ other at large teams. The only guarantee is that the top 34 or so teams will be in the tourney. Usually it ends up being about the top 45 or so teams, plus about 20 other automatic bids to teams that aren't in the top 45.
Every year you hear fans of bubble teams gripe about it, but the fact is, if you don't earn your automatic bid, and if you're not one of the top 40 teams in the country, then you haven't earned the right to play in the tourney.
Fortunately, for MSU's sake, you have a shot to earn your automatic bid. Unfortunately, I think that if you don't beat UT today, you'll be NIT bound, but you have your shot to earn your spot. Your team failed to do enough early in the season to lock up a spot as one of the top 40 or so teams in the country, which means now that you're left with the auto-bid as most likely your only option.
This tourney is probably the best, most fair, postseason in all of college sports, so I don't see why people continue to gripe about it.
As far as the auto-bids that aren't in the top of the country, they serve multiple purposes:
1) They create a field that allows everyone potential access (unlike football).
2) They make it that much more important to earn one of the top overall seeds in the tourney, because it means you get a much easier first round draw.
3) They create great Cinderella stories when a team pulls an upset or two and advances further than you'd expect.
Let me also add that my idea of the perfect football playoff would be a 16 team playoff with auto-bids for all 11 conferences. Would it be the top 16 teams in the country? No, but it would include everyone, and you'd typically get the top 10 teams at least, which is all you would need to have a fair playoff. The Sun Belt would get a bid to give them a chance to be a part of the system, but also it would serve as a system to reward the teams that get the 1, 2, and 3 seeds by giving them match ups that they would most likely win easily.
Do you think you really need the top 64 or 65 teams in the country to determine the true national champion? Of course not. You already have the top 40 or so teams, and that's plenty to ensure that you include all the teams that deserve a shot at the national title, and honestly it's way more than you need. If you wanted to be sure you included every teams you needed for basketball, you'd have a 16 team tournament and invite only the best 16 teams in the country. That would cover every team you needed to ensure you included all the teams that deserve a shot. Every other team that gets a bid is basically just aiming to see how many games they can win, with little consideration of actually winning the tourney.
It's 30 or so automatic bids, and the best 30+ other at large teams. The only guarantee is that the top 34 or so teams will be in the tourney. Usually it ends up being about the top 45 or so teams, plus about 20 other automatic bids to teams that aren't in the top 45.
Every year you hear fans of bubble teams gripe about it, but the fact is, if you don't earn your automatic bid, and if you're not one of the top 40 teams in the country, then you haven't earned the right to play in the tourney.
Fortunately, for MSU's sake, you have a shot to earn your automatic bid. Unfortunately, I think that if you don't beat UT today, you'll be NIT bound, but you have your shot to earn your spot. Your team failed to do enough early in the season to lock up a spot as one of the top 40 or so teams in the country, which means now that you're left with the auto-bid as most likely your only option.
This tourney is probably the best, most fair, postseason in all of college sports, so I don't see why people continue to gripe about it.
As far as the auto-bids that aren't in the top of the country, they serve multiple purposes:
1) They create a field that allows everyone potential access (unlike football).
2) They make it that much more important to earn one of the top overall seeds in the tourney, because it means you get a much easier first round draw.
3) They create great Cinderella stories when a team pulls an upset or two and advances further than you'd expect.
Let me also add that my idea of the perfect football playoff would be a 16 team playoff with auto-bids for all 11 conferences. Would it be the top 16 teams in the country? No, but it would include everyone, and you'd typically get the top 10 teams at least, which is all you would need to have a fair playoff. The Sun Belt would get a bid to give them a chance to be a part of the system, but also it would serve as a system to reward the teams that get the 1, 2, and 3 seeds by giving them match ups that they would most likely win easily.
Do you think you really need the top 64 or 65 teams in the country to determine the true national champion? Of course not. You already have the top 40 or so teams, and that's plenty to ensure that you include all the teams that deserve a shot at the national title, and honestly it's way more than you need. If you wanted to be sure you included every teams you needed for basketball, you'd have a 16 team tournament and invite only the best 16 teams in the country. That would cover every team you needed to ensure you included all the teams that deserve a shot. Every other team that gets a bid is basically just aiming to see how many games they can win, with little consideration of actually winning the tourney.