1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Running 2018 college rings postseason thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Cosmo, Mar 1, 2018.

  1. Jake_Taylor

    Jake_Taylor Well-Known Member

    Poor Vermont. That's a good team that won't get in now.
     
  2. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Hell of a shot by that UMBC guy.

    Looks like Vermont is going to head to the NIT with 27 wins.
     
  3. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    That may be the most annoying trait of the selection committee--its penchant for screwing over mid-majors that had great seasons and were regular season conference champs, just so they can instead put in yet another 13 loss team that finished around 8th place in a power conference.

    Seems to me a basic requirement for earning an at large bid should be that you had a successful season. I've no interest in seeing teams that couldn't even finish in the top half of their conference in the tourney to determine the national champion.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2018
    Neutral Corner likes this.
  4. LanceyHoward

    LanceyHoward Well-Known Member

    I think it is unfair that a school from a low major conference can have a hell of a season, dominate a conference, and not go the the tournament because of a last second buzzer beater. I acknowledge the interest a tournament creates.

    So I would expand the field to 96 and give each conference two slots, one for the regualr season winner and one for the tournament. When a team wins both then the conference would send one more. This would have the practical effect of expanding the at-large field by about eight schools. There are roughly 30 conferences and 68 current slots so an additional 28 teams would go. Normally about 10 conferences get multiple slots so another eight large teams would go. The play-in games could be played the site of the regional.
     
  5. Jake_Taylor

    Jake_Taylor Well-Known Member

    They gave some teams, Kentucky included, fits in the nonconference, but couldn't quite get a signature win. Sucks for them.
     
  6. tapintoamerica

    tapintoamerica Well-Known Member

    Alabama will become the first at-large team to lose 15 or more games overall and finish with a losing record in its regular-season conference play.
     
  7. trifectarich

    trifectarich Well-Known Member

    I don't know, can a conference tournament be profitable just because the final is on ESPN?
     
  8. Jake_Taylor

    Jake_Taylor Well-Known Member

    It could be interesting to see if this affects the way teams schedule in the coming years. UNC’s win at Davidson is now a Q1 win, beating a Top 75 team on the road. Of course, Davidson played that home game at the Spectrum Center in Charlotte in front of mostly UNC fans.
     
  9. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    That's another thing I hate, big teams that play all but their conference road games either at home or at a "neutral" site that will be overrun by their fans. Mid-majors have to play true road games to get a shot at the sort of games that prevent the old "Well, they didn't play anybody" treatment.
     
    Stoney likes this.
  10. Roscablo

    Roscablo Well-Known Member

    I saw a quote from Bruce Rasmussen that he'd like to see OOC SOS and the like taken off the board in the near future. That would pretty much eliminate any chance for non-power conferences to get at larges. The chance is almost gone now, but that will be the end of it. And I wonder if that would be his opinion if Creighton was still in the Valley?
     
  11. albert777

    albert777 Active Member

    My God, who did he piss off to merit that punishment?
     
  12. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page