Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1

    Should D1 shrink?

    For the record, before I start let me say I am not overly sympathetic here but I want to bring the point up.

    I was just wondering if D1 should shrink after seeing what the committee did yesterday? I think the committee did not consider resume as much as they did profit. It is definitely more profitable to have ASU and Syracuse fan bases in the tournament, and it is more profitable to have Trae Young in the tournament over " mid major teams." I think this ended up being the biggest factor.

    I say this because of what I heard committee members say. I heard committee members talk about full body of work and SOS all night. Then you have MTSU who scheduled brutal in the nonconference having SOS 10 and RPI 28 get not only left out, but not even in first 4 out. If they don't lose their regular season finale I'd think they would be in. We were told they were left out cause they scheduled tough but didn't win enough of those games.

    Then you have St. Mary's who scheduled noone and won. We were told they were left out cause they didn't challenge themselves. Then not only that, you get leaked reports of teams who tried to apparently schedule them but they refused? I've never heard of that in my life. Something just does not smell right there.

    I bring this up because of all the double talk I heard. The committee says they put little emphasis based on end of year performance which they proved letting all the major fan bases with horrible finishes in while subsequently disproving by disallowing a team like MTSU who was sitting with 4 losses a high RPI and was probably an at large team a week ago. Yes, I am assuming they were an at large team before those 2 loses.

    Not only that, but Davidson knocked out the last team in Notre Dame. Notre Dame was not in a week ago, but Bonzi Colston comes back; they win a few games, and all of a sudden they shoot up the boards. Same goes for Alabama and their last gasp run that got them in. Guess they can consider end of year performance because the fan bases are large enough.

    Maybe I'm off basis here, but if I'm a smaller school I'm livid. Why be in D1 if you schedule tough and lose a bit or schedule weak and win but get left out? Oklahoma State scheduled horribly but got more consideration than most non major schools.

    It is very hard for these teams to schedule good opponents. I think eliminating the bracketbusters week was a horrible idea for this very reason. It gave these schools an opportunity for a great quality win.

    But then again maybe just the buy game money is so good for schools that they will continue to allow this. I was just surprised at how blatant committee members were going on TV and double talking left and right and noone called them out on it.

  2. #2
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7,528
    The short answer is No.

    To elaborate a little more, no school is forced to compete at the div1 level, and the fact that so many do really isn't hurting anybody. So, what's the problem??

    As far as it being for profit, the NCAA will make $1.1 billion dollars a year off the tournament until 2032 no matter who is in it. The selection committee members make no money for being on it. There is no motivation to select teams on the basis of how much money they'll make because all of the money has already been made for the next fifteen years.

    Those "reports" about Saint Mary's were more or less "leaked" over the summer. Many who work at putting schedules together know that they don't like to play good teams, so I personally don't think it smelled all that bad. I believe (for what it's worth) that Creighton, Nevada, and Rhode Island all reached out to SMC and wanted to play them. They didn't want to play. Furthermore, BYU's athletic director was on the committee, so if this was about money he would have wanted Saint Mary's in because his conference, and hence his school, would have gotten more of it.

    I completely agree that when it comes to scheduling, the teams outside of the multi-bid leagues are at a huge circumstantial disadvantage. It's a lot harder for them to get good teams to play them, and even when they do get those games they are early in the season, so if they want to land inside the bubble then they essentially have to make their case in November and December and then hope they don't blow it in January and February. I wish the Bracket Buster would come back, but it was ESPN that ended it. Not the NCAA. There is nothing from stopping all of those schools from setting aside a week late in the season where they all have unscheduled games, and then pair up the best teams against one another in a round robin, or eight team tournament like the exempt tournaments early in the year, or whatever. Hell, they could even try to set it up so it meets the specifications of an exempt tournament, and they'd essentially get to play four games for the price of one. Quite frankly I don't know why they haven't tried to do that.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  3. #3
    Supporting Member waggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Gold Country
    Posts
    10,744
    The TV networks paying the big dollars for the product are influencing the selections. How great that influence is, is up for debate, but it does exist.

  4. #4
    Supporting Member bourbonman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Distillery
    Posts
    1,646
    No. One of the beauties in sports is KY high school basketball. No class system. Everyone has a chance. Leave this alone too.
    It's time for a bourbon on the rocks!

  5. #5
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7,528
    Quote Originally Posted by waggy View Post
    The TV networks paying the big dollars for the product are influencing the selections. How great that influence is, is up for debate, but it does exist.
    The networks sell the commercial time close to a year in advance, and in a lot of cases it's probably even longer than that since many of the NCAA corporate sponsors agree to long term deals. The networks are making the same amount of money no matter which teams are in it, and it's made long before the tournament, or for that matter the season, even begins. I think the figure last year was $1.24 billion. That might not seem like much more than $1.1 billion, but it is $230 million.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  6. #6
    Supporting Member GoMuskies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    25,177
    Quote Originally Posted by xubrew View Post
    I think the figure last year was $1.24 billion. That might not seem like much more than $1.1 billion, but it is $230 million.
    $1.24 billion minus $1.1 billion = $140 million.

  7. #7
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7,528
    Quote Originally Posted by GoMuskies View Post
    $1.24 billion minus $1.1 billion = $140 million.
    ehh, so it is..
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  8. #8
    Supporting Member xu82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    7,926
    Quote Originally Posted by xubrew View Post
    ehh, so it is..

    Eh....math is overrated.

  9. #9
    I can understand the money is already accounted for, but if ratings drop then money drops down the road when it comes time to renew contracts. Really I have no beef with St. Mary's being out.

    My issue is MTSU. With a SOS of 10 nonconference a 20's rpi there is no way the committee can say they were not an at large. This means a 4 loss team at the time lost it in the last week while ASU and Oklahoma got in on two month droughts. I can't think the reason why is anything other than fan base size and star power because it is the only thing that makes sense

  10. #10
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7,528
    When it comes time to renew the contracts almost everyone who has anything to do with this year's tournament will be retired. I get not liking that Middle Tennessee didn't get in. I get thinking that the committee gets things wrong. What seems utterly nonsensical to me is how a group of people who all have other jobs and are primarily concerned with other things would make a selection that does not personally benefit them at all because they're worried about what the next TV contract will look like in fifteen years.
    Last edited by xubrew; 03-12-2018 at 10:04 PM.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •