>
> I'd rather separate the reporting and the commentary
>
> > Date: Fri, 1 Jul 94 14:42:21 MDT
> > Subject: ncaa news (6/22/94)
> >
> ah, the "fix the CC travesty" syndrome, part 1.  I'd certainly hope
> they used a STATISTICIAN instead of a mathematician.
>
> > recommend to exec that there be 2 automatic bids to each of the four
> > conferences
>
> the CC rule, part 2.  Betcha both the regular season champion and the
> tourney champion make it if this passes.
>
 
Since right now, at least 2 teams from every conference must be taken (the
only stipulation being that one of those two be chosen by the conference and
the other by the NCAA (the conferences all have chosen to take the tourney
champ)), I wonder if they would either decide on an NCAA level or a conference
level how the second "automatic" bid would be decided.  If it were done on the
conference level, would at least some conferences chose to take the two teams
in the championship game and not the regular season champ.
   To play devil's advocate... from the conference standpoint (looking at the
future, not the CC vs. MSU thing last year), in *GENERAL* (9 out of 10 years),
your regular season conf. champ is going to have a strong enough RPIch rating
to get them in with an at-large bid.  If they don't make it to the conf finals,
then your conference would have the two automatics with the two finalists, and
your best chance at a #3 bid with the reg season conf champ.  It increases the
chances of your conference getting the three bids.  Now if the reg season conf
champ makes it to the finals, so be it.  They make it and the NCAA can decide
whether to take a third or fourth based on the RPIch rating.
   The problem with making it the reg season champ and the playoff champ that
get the bids is that, in many years, the reg season champ wins the conference
playoffs.  Now you are back to only 1 automatic bid with the NCAA deciding who
they'll take after that.
   I'm not saying that the conferences should take the two playoff finalists,
but allowing two automatic bids from each conference does not guarantee that
the conference will choose to take its reg season champ.
   Heck, the ECAC wound up in a strange situation in 1978 when BU was the conf
champ (only 1 loss in the regular season), but got upset by Providence in the
playoffs, who went on to lose to BC in the ECAC finals.  Usually, the NCAA's
(only a 4-team tourney then) just took the two finalists from the two big
conferences (ECAC and WCHA) and there was your Final Four.  In this case,
however, due to BU's dominance during the season, they had a one-game play-off
between Providence and BU to see who would get the bid.  BU won that game
before defeating Wisconsin and BC in the NCAA's/Final 4 to win the national
championship.  That seems like a strange situation to me sitting here now.
   What I would say is that I don't think the NCAA is trying to take the reg
season champ, but just trying to cover the collective butts of those in charge
by allowing the conf to decide on a second "automatic."  You realize, if the
NCAA offers each conf a second "automatic" bid, there is NO way anyone could
complain (I'm NOT picking on Charlie, I'm talking about the future) about not
making it "when they were the reg season conf champ" or "when we made it to the
finals!!!"
   I agree that this looks like it was fall-out from the MSU over CC decision
this past year, but it may also only be cosmetic and not really solve anything.
 
(All of this is with a big "IMHO")
 
> > ask for proposal and cost estimates for the use of instant replay
> > during the championship
>
> I wonder what prompted that?  I certainly did not see anything even
> remotely resembling controversial in the championship game this year.
> Maybe they mean for ALL the playoff games.
>
 
I would think that this is just thinking about how any audience at home might
react to a national championship game on ESPN being decided by a bad call.
 
What if Northeastern vs. LSSU was on ESPN for all to see.  Here on the list
we all know NU was hosed, but we'll get over it.  I'm still going to watch
games next year.  The casual fan (the one the higher-ups are trying to get)
would be very turned off by being able to watch in slow-motion that the wrong
team won.  If the game is being seen nationally on ESPN, I think the NCAA would
want it to look good.  (It has to at least appear that the deserving team won.)
 
Who knows, perhaps I look for image in every move the NCAA makes, but I'm sure
it is at least a factor in much.
 
 
Tony  BU'92'93
Former Ogre