This plan to fix one-bid conference tourneys might be radical, but it's also logical

[CaribouJim]

http://www.cbssports.com/college-bas...-also-logical/

Zany Gary Parrish idea. Nonetheless, would be interesting to see how it would play out as a test some year.

[MayorBeluga]

http://www.cbssports.com/college-bas...-also-logical/

Zany Gary Parrish idea. Nonetheless, would be interesting to see how it would play out as a test some year.

The conferences are free to implement the first idea (granting the regular season champ a bye to the final). The level of stupidity on the second part (giving the regular season champs a 10 point lead to start the game) is epic.

[Nukem2]

I wonder how much money these mid-to-low major conferences and their members actually make from these tourneys when you add in all the attendant costs?

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

My thought was this. First, I love the bye to the final. Great idea that gives the champ an easier path without diminishing the importance of the conference tournament. I'd have the tournament at a neutral site (or however it's currently done) and instead of the 10 point spot, let the regular season champ host the title game. That way they get the bye and home court advantage.

One problem, what about ties? What if you have two 15-3 teams that split the season series? Is a tiebreaker enough to justify one team hosting the final and the other needing to play 2-3 games just to get there?

I do think a rework is needed, especially in one bid leagues that give a bad team like Milwaukee the same chance as a quality team like Oakland or Valparaiso.

[TheSultan]

Conferences have used some sort of "laddering" system in the past. Didn't the Horizon League used to bye their top two seeds to the semifinals?

But again, it really is up to the conference and they can do whatever is in their best interests as far as I am concerned. (Although I personally like the idea of giving the #1 seed a bye to the championship game.) And yes I do think they make money on the conference tournament, otherwise they wouldn't bother.

[Goose85]

If the conference doesn't care if the conference champ goes to the tourney or not, I'm not sure why Gary Parrish cares. Most of the perennial one bid leagues are one and done anyway.

Was the Horizon league game last night more interesting because the top seed wasn't playing, or would it have been more interesting if it turned out to be Oakland v. Valpo? I really don't know.

In smaller conferences the conference champ has built in advantages like seeding, sitting out a round, or playing games at home. I know Horizon did this in the past.
Basically, conference tournaments mean almost every team in NCAA D1 has a shot at the big dance. Sure you can complain about a team getting left out, but most had a chance to win their conference tourney.

[MU/Panther]

If the conference doesn't care if the conference champ goes to the tourney or not, I'm not sure why Gary Parrish cares. Most of the perennial one bid leagues are one and done anyway.

.

#1 seed of one bid leagues improves the odds to get to the 2nd round and maybe Sweet 16.

[Mucrisco]

I don't like that at all. The regular season champion is an accomplishment in itself and is something to be proud in its own worth. But, you have certain goals. One goal is to win the regular season. The next goal is to win the conference tournament. The next might be to win the national championship. Let the teams compete for those goals on the court instead of trying to set what is fair in the rule book. Sports is about competition and overcoming obstacles.

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

If the conference doesn't care if the conference champ goes to the tourney or not, I'm not sure why Gary Parrish cares. Most of the perennial one bid leagues are one and done anyway.

Having your best team in increases your league's exposure, the chance to earn tournament shares that provide revenue for the entire league, and give the entire country the chance to see the best possible teams compete in the tournament. Milwaukee wasn't going to be that Cinderella Sweet 16 story from a Dayton 16 seed game, but Oakland or Valparaiso from a 13 or 14 might have been. Better for the Horizon, better for the quality of competition in the NCAA Tournament as a whole.

[Goose85]

Having your best team in increases your league's exposure, the chance to earn tournament shares that provide revenue for the entire league, and give the entire country the chance to see the best possible teams compete in the tournament. Milwaukee wasn't going to be that Cinderella Sweet 16 story from a Dayton 16 seed game, but Oakland or Valparaiso from a 13 or 14 might have been. Better for the Horizon, better for the quality of competition in the NCAA Tournament as a whole.

I understand that, but the conferences can choose who goes and how they set up their tourney. My guess is that many do give the top team an advantage, like playing at home.

I can just see the argument the first time the #1 seed gets a pass to the tournament final and losses. It wasn't fair, we haven't played in over a week, and then we had to play a team that is used to the tournament and is hot, having won two or three straight.