Professor Chaos
March 27th, 2018, 11:56 AM
Interesting article from Yahoo's Pat Forde regarding Loyola-Chicago and how close they came to never even making the tournament: https://sports.yahoo.com/loyola-chicagos-final-four-run-reveals-flaws-ncaa-tournaments-selection-process-034007234.html
He basically uses this as the basis for his argument that more consideration needs to be given to mid-major at large candidates. However, I see some flaws to his argument. First, it's not like Loyola-Chicago has been blowing teams away proving that they should've been a no-brainer inclusion even had they lost in the MVC tournament. Had their buzzer beaters not went in that allowed them to beat both Miami and Tennessee on the first weekend of the tournament they would've been a tournament footnote at best. To me that just underscores the parity in the game today which is a good thing IMO.
Second, he talks about how 5-10 years ago there was an average of 8 mid-major teams that received at large bids and that's now down to an average of 3 over the last three years. But he fails to point out that this is because the best mid-major programs have gotten raided by the big conferences. 10 years ago the Pac 12 had 2 less teams, the Big Ten had 3 less teams, the ACC had 4 less teams, and the SEC had 2 less teams. Offset the two teams the Big 12 loss and that's 9 more schools in the P5. Beyond that the 14 team Big East has since morphed into the AAC and Big East which now includes 22 teams among them. So if you take away 17 of the best mid-major schools and put them in "major" conferences you're probably going to see mid-major at large bids decline.
Now to the point of how to fix it. He basically mentions more representation for the non-FBS schools on the committee (6 of the 10 selection committee members are from the 10 FBS conferences while only 4 of the 10 committee members are from the 21 non-FBS leagues). I think that's a part of it but I have a hard time seeing how adding a committee member from say the Big South is going to help the argument for St Mary's out of the WCC to get a bid over Oklahoma from the Big 12. To me there's really only two solutions (other than expanding the field) if you want ensure that the best mid-majors get a shot in the big dance:
Give the conference autobid to the regular season champ not the tournament champ.
Put in some provision that hurts the high major bubble teams like make it a requirement that a team must have a winning record (or maybe just a .500 record) in conference to be in consideration for an at-large bid.
I don't know if I'm a fan of either of them. I love championship week so, as a fan of a mid-major, I wouldn't want to see the first one implemented. The second one would be a better option IMO but because it hurts the high major team I don't see it ever passing. Honestly, I'm fine with the system the way it is now. To me Loyola-Chicago making the Final Four is just more proof of the parity in college basketball and doesn't mean the system needs to be overhauled. Just enjoy it as a fan because it's probably going to be a long time before another team outside of the "Big 7 conferences" makes it to a Final Four.
I'm done rambling. Thoughts? Is the selection system broken? If so, how would you fix it?
He basically uses this as the basis for his argument that more consideration needs to be given to mid-major at large candidates. However, I see some flaws to his argument. First, it's not like Loyola-Chicago has been blowing teams away proving that they should've been a no-brainer inclusion even had they lost in the MVC tournament. Had their buzzer beaters not went in that allowed them to beat both Miami and Tennessee on the first weekend of the tournament they would've been a tournament footnote at best. To me that just underscores the parity in the game today which is a good thing IMO.
Second, he talks about how 5-10 years ago there was an average of 8 mid-major teams that received at large bids and that's now down to an average of 3 over the last three years. But he fails to point out that this is because the best mid-major programs have gotten raided by the big conferences. 10 years ago the Pac 12 had 2 less teams, the Big Ten had 3 less teams, the ACC had 4 less teams, and the SEC had 2 less teams. Offset the two teams the Big 12 loss and that's 9 more schools in the P5. Beyond that the 14 team Big East has since morphed into the AAC and Big East which now includes 22 teams among them. So if you take away 17 of the best mid-major schools and put them in "major" conferences you're probably going to see mid-major at large bids decline.
Now to the point of how to fix it. He basically mentions more representation for the non-FBS schools on the committee (6 of the 10 selection committee members are from the 10 FBS conferences while only 4 of the 10 committee members are from the 21 non-FBS leagues). I think that's a part of it but I have a hard time seeing how adding a committee member from say the Big South is going to help the argument for St Mary's out of the WCC to get a bid over Oklahoma from the Big 12. To me there's really only two solutions (other than expanding the field) if you want ensure that the best mid-majors get a shot in the big dance:
Give the conference autobid to the regular season champ not the tournament champ.
Put in some provision that hurts the high major bubble teams like make it a requirement that a team must have a winning record (or maybe just a .500 record) in conference to be in consideration for an at-large bid.
I don't know if I'm a fan of either of them. I love championship week so, as a fan of a mid-major, I wouldn't want to see the first one implemented. The second one would be a better option IMO but because it hurts the high major team I don't see it ever passing. Honestly, I'm fine with the system the way it is now. To me Loyola-Chicago making the Final Four is just more proof of the parity in college basketball and doesn't mean the system needs to be overhauled. Just enjoy it as a fan because it's probably going to be a long time before another team outside of the "Big 7 conferences" makes it to a Final Four.
I'm done rambling. Thoughts? Is the selection system broken? If so, how would you fix it?