MBB: Midwest Conference

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Let's just do away with conference tournament, throw everybody in one big tournament.  Regionalize it down to, say the top two from each region and then send those 16 teams somewhere for the weekend.  Everybody loves a tournament, why not have 406 teams involved?

[hjmphelp]

Hoops Fan-
I floated that basic idea last year to thunderous silence. But why not have a 22 game regular season with the lowest ranked 300 teams as determined by conference standings playing in to a field of 256 (top 106 teams get byes) followed by a 7 game (3-two game weekends and a monday National Final) elimination tourney? EVERYONE plays at least 23 games in a year, and the most possible would be 30 (if one of the bottom 300 somehow makes the final). Iowa HS manages this; there are seldom big surprises; everyone has a shot.

Not as complicated as my explanation sounds and certainly do-able on a regional basis.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Not as complicated as my explanation sounds and certainly do-able on a regional basis.

In fact it actually makes more sense as a regional tournament than the current "best teams without an AQ" system.

[matblake]

Not bad, except for the Monday final.  I think having the final during the week would cause the final to lose even more money than it does already.

[hjmphelp]

Hoops and matblake-
I agree with the both of ya. Probably more managable on a regional basis, and may help take care of the west region problems. The point about the Monday Final is well taken. I was thinking about how to avoid a 4th weekend, but if the idea is incorporated with hoops Fan's regional scheme, it could very easily work, IMHO.

[Greek Tragedy]

Regionalize it down to, say the top two from each region and then send those 16 teams somewhere for the weekend. 

One of the biggest issues we have each year is that some regions are always stronger than other regions.  The third team in the Midwest or Great Lakes regions could easily be a #1 or #2 team in the Northeast or South regions (for example) in some years.

[The Roop]

Just back from a weekend in the northwoods and I'm glad to see diehardfan still doesn't agree with me. The first Coach Hahn Fan Club meeting of the year proved nothing, of course none ever have, but I'll still keep having them in honor of my close personal friend and basketball guru.

Never made it to the casino but still came back $200 ahead as I had some success with the pulltab tickets in a couple local establishments. No bear confrontations to report although I did have to retrieve a bird feeder that a bear knocked over the night before. New owners at that place and they didn't know you're not supposed to feed birds until mid May as it also attracts bears in early spring.

On a basketball related note: JeffPs Americas Team mug has been shipped.

[hjmphelp]

Mr "the Roop"-Why in the world are you shipping me a Grinnell College Mug? I have PLENTY!!







thank you, Sir!

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Regionalize it down to, say the top two from each region and then send those 16 teams somewhere for the weekend.

One of the biggest issues we have each year is that some regions are always stronger than other regions.  The third team in the Midwest or Great Lakes regions could easily be a #1 or #2 team in the Northeast or South regions (for example) in some years.

Right, which is why this would work well.  Instead of holding a "fake" conference tournament to see who gets into the real tournament, we just do away with the conference tournaments all together and throw everyone into the mix.  We don't propose that each region has equal talent, just that they get an equal number of teams to the sweet sixteen.  You bring those top sixteen to a central location, seed them nationally, without using regional criteria and have at it.  That way, your precious Midwest reps can be the #1 and #2 seeds and have a chance to play in the final, if it works out that way.

This whole scheme is totally unrealistic, but that's what the offseason is for.

[Greek Tragedy]

Right, which is why this would work well.  Instead of holding a "fake" conference tournament to see who gets into the real tournament, we just do away with the conference tournaments all together and throw everyone into the mix.  We don't propose that each region has equal talent, just that they get an equal number of teams to the sweet sixteen.  You bring those top sixteen to a central location, seed them nationally, without using regional criteria and have at it.  That way, your precious Midwest reps can be the #1 and #2 seeds and have a chance to play in the final, if it works out that way.

This whole scheme is totally unrealistic, but that's what the offseason is for.

Come on now, I'm in the WEST!  So my precious WEST reps can be the #1 and #2 seeds. 

Anyway...in this case, I don't think the conference tourney really has much impact on this idea.  Like now, if those teams are really the #1 and #2 seeds in their region, if they don't win their conference tourney, the likelyhood of them getting an at-large bid is pretty good, especially since the Pool C has been increased so much.

But, there is always talk about one region being a lot stronger than another region...like Albion not getting in through the Great Lakes region as the "#7" team in the regional rankings, while there were so many other high seeds in other regions that got in despite the argument that Albion was a lot better than these teams. 

Like the D1 tourney, they really don't go by region and I think that is where your idea has faults.  Take the best 16, regardless of region, go by a NATIONAL basis and go from there. 

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Well whatever.  I just want to see a 400 team tournament, I could care less how fair it is.

[hjmphelp]

Hoops Fan-
I agree, but i don't think it is all that unrealistic...other than getting the powers-that-be to except it or something like it.

[matblake]

Therein lies the rub.  Do you think that the NCAA would be happy with this idea?  No, for the simple issue of cost.  I agree that a 400 team tournament would be amazing to behold, but as long as $ is involved, this idea is up the creek, despite our confirmation of its validity 

[hjmphelp]

matblake-
Maybe-if you consider that most schools pay for 2 or 3 more regular season games than the proposed 22-the cost wouldn't be that prohibitive if the schools are willing to pay for the first several rounds of the tourney? That gets you down to 64 teams-just what the NCAA pays for now!

[matblake]

Maybe.  It is probably just semantics, but there is something special about the fact that it is an NCAA Championship.  Some schools might not choose to participate in the "National Tournament" if they have to "pay their way" in the first several rounds.  One of the things that is attractive about the tournament now is that the NCAA pays.  Some schools, fair to the athlete or not, will choose not to play in the first several rounds for $ sake.  Therefore, you are eliminating a team from access to the tournament.  Even though I still love the idea of the 400 team plan, I think that at least theoretically every team needs to have access to the tournament if only to uphold the principles of D3. That means the NCAA pays for the tourney and our hopes the 400 team plan are set aside.