And I suppose sitting with our arms crossed doing nothing differently but expecting better results is?
Agree or disagree?
- Thread starter PURPLEFIRE
- Start date
Schedule tough teams out of conference and win most of those games and don't lose to bad teams and you have a good chance at an at large bid.
Pretty much this. JC is right, CUSA needs to do a better job of scheduling though. Remember this is the same conference that did not give UTEP home and home with Memphis. When both teams were legit, once per year.
CUSA sucks
UTEP was ranked 5th in the preseason poll. It would have been silly to have UTEP play the other 5 teams twice because it would have killed their RPI.
I did and this is why I think your solution is silly. Middle Tennessee had no business losing to Southern Miss. This is why they didn't get an at large bid.
MTSU had no business playing USM three times. Switch one of those regular conference games with ODU (78) and their chances for an at large increase.
Ivy has a 4 team tourney now, 2nd year they've done it. I think 4-6 top teams should be the only ones to play in the conf tourney but leaving out the rest costs the league "some" money I guess.
So you were saying...
http://www.herald-dispatch.com/spor...cle_dad0483a-c987-5b60-9041-bfc87418accd.html
As mentioned by @UTEPfan1966 on the Pre season thread. No accountability with the various screen names.
Wasn't post season tourney's a "carrot in front of the horse" for conferences to make more money from TV? This is why FBS has their format. It capitalism in its purest form at the FBS level.
Now to have this discussion the whole debate of "the student-athelete" gets left behind. They do bring in the revenue. The coach doesn't have to run the 3 spot, block out, run the floor for almost 40 minutes, d up, etc. They just teach it. That 20 year old from NJ who had offers from Duke, Ohio State, Gonzaga, UNC, Wisconsin, is why we watch. Not the 43 year old with a bad hair line. They're facilitators.
A college schedule can be brutal. You're up before donuts are made and in bed not until you finished your paper on criminal elements in urban america 101 at 11:00 PM. Those nice facilities every college wants to attract top recruits? They're not for show. Your butt better be in there for a few hours almost every day. D1 college sports is almost 24/7.
Now under the debate "the college playoff format is not balanced and needs more inclusive", why is player not interviewed and taken seriously? Allstate Insurance has more say than thousands of D1 students athletes combined because of the money.
My point is, it's a matter of "exposure" for the school and fair market price for a 20 something's talent and dedication. They do get a scholarship, but a formula based on TV revenue+radio+entertainment (EA sports games for example)+residuals from (season) ticket sales need to be part of the debate because of that appraised value.
Hence, expand NCAA "play in" games. Give auto bids to mid majors based on thresh holds of RPI, SOS and so on but add a caveat. Throw in 3-5 year student performance. Fairfield won the conference but is a bubble team because they lost to Seton Hall and South Carolina in OOC play at some holiday classic? Wait, their grad rate is almost 100% the last three years! Bingo! They're in. Reward is based on positive behavior, and should move away from "what have you done for me lately?" that is consuming D1 athletics.
Expand, let student athlete unionize better and give the D1 programs more exposure by rewarding academic performance AND having a good conference season. Look what happened at UT-Arlington?! That shouldn't be becoming a norm.
Last edited:
Similar threads
