I think that they should maybe mandate that a team needs to be at least .500 in their own Conference in order to qualify for an at large bid.
Sorry if this has already been discussed, I haven't read the entire thread. Just sorta jumping in here.
but, that's not fair
some programs unfairly belong to very strong basketball conferences
Yes I follow such a program, and they don't belong on any bubble.
I strongly disagree with you
@Brutus Buckeye for the reason stated by
@FearlessF but I want to expand on it a bit.
First, the NCAA Tournament already favors teams from crappy conferences because all they have to do is to win their crappy conference tournament. In many cases that is substantially easier than compiling a decent record in a conference like ours.
I'll use Gonzaga's West Coast Conference as an example. Per the net rankings, the WCC members are ranked:
- #2 Gonzaga
- #34 St. Mary's
- #72 San Francisco
- #85 BYU
- #99 San Diego
- #142 Loyola Marymount
- #167 Peperdine
- #183 Santa Clara
- #213 Pacific
- #326 Portland
Going .500 in that conference would be easy even for a bad B1G team.
Here are the NET rankings for the B1G:
- #8 MSU
- #10 M
- #12 PU
- #15 UW
- #26 UMD
- #42 IA
- #49 PSU
- #51 IU
- #52 UNL
- #55 tOSU
- #56 MN
- #88 NU
- #100 RU
- #105 IL
It would be ridiculously unfair to major conference teams to require them to achieve a .500 ranking in a gauntlet like the B1G. Note that half of the WCC's teams would be the worst team in the B1G by far. Five of the B1G's 14 teams would be at least the second best team in the WCC.
One can criticize MSU's two losses to #51 IU, but realize that in their entire conference slate Gonzaga only played three games against teams as good as Indiana, their three games against Saint Mary's. Gonzaga went 2-1. In games against teams at least that good the Spartans went:
- 2-0 against #10 M
- 1-1 against #12 PU
- 1-0 against #15 UW
- 1-0 against #26 UMD
- 2-0 against #42 IA
- 1-0 against #49 PSU
- 0-2 against #42 IU
Another reason is unbalanced schedules. In the B1G, of course, we play 20 games against 13 teams meaning that we play:
- Three on the road only
- Three at home only, and
- Seven both home and road.
This can be a humongous difference. Consider two hypothetical league schedules that Ohio State could have been assigned:
Hypothetical Schedule #1:
- MSU, M, and PU at home only
- UW, UMD, and IA on the road only
- The rest (PSU, IU, UNL, MN, NU, RU, and IL) twice each
Hypothetical Schedule #2:
- NU, RU, and IL on the road only
- MN, UNL, and IU at home only
- The rest (MSU, M, PU, UW, UMD, IA, PSU) twice each
A team that goes .500 on hypothetical schedule #2 should absolutely be in the tournament. A team that goes .500 against hypothetical schedule #1 is a different thing entirely.
A team should absolutely not be excluded from the tournament based on having a tougher league schedule. The teams in the tournament should be the auto-qualifiers (I only reluctantly accept that) and the best remaining teams in the country as at-large representatives.
Finally, for anyone who thinks the NCAA does not favor crappy conference teams, please note that major conference teams have won six of the last seven tournaments played to determine the best team left out of the NCAA. That includes two B1G teams (PSU in 2018 and MN in 2014). Prior to that minor conferences won a couple and then we are right back to major conference teams again.
NIT winners:
- PSU in 2018
- TCU in 2017
- George Washington in 2016
- Stanford in 2015
- Minnesota in 2014
- Baylor in 2013
- Stanford in 2012
- Wichita State in 2011
- Dayton in 2010
- PSU in 2009
- tOSU in 2008
- WVU in 2007
- USCe in 2006
- USCe in 2005
- Michigan in 2004
Note that the best team left out of the NCAA tournament has been from our league five times in the last 15 years. There is no reason whatsoever to make this disparity even worse such that it favors teams from crappy conferences more than it already does.