Greg writes:
>As for the latter idea, I'd like to pose a heretical question - why
>insist on choosing the best twelve teams to go to the tournament,
>anyway? (Gasp!)
 
?!  Because that is the idea!  It is the national tournament, for the 12
best teams in the country.  It's not like the NHL.
 
>                The mindless selection of three teams from each
>conference (seeded 1, 2, 3 in a conference-specific bracket) would
>eliminate everybody's claims of regional or conference bias and ensure
>a field with equal regional interest, and a little creative scheduling
>could guarantee that conference rivalries would not be replayed until
>the NCAA semi-final.
 
No, it would not eliminate those claims.  It would be inherently biased
against those conferences which year in, year out produce more than three
teams worthy of selection; and it would be biased in favor of conferences
which produce fewer than three.
 
Not only this, but I think there should be no relationship whatsoever
between the conferences and the national tourney.  I don't even like the rule
forcing the committee to award bids to the tourney champs, and I despise
the new rule requiring at least two teams from each conference to be chosen,
just as I didn't think the Independent bid was right.  The committee should
be free to choose the *12 best teams in the country* regardless of conference
affiliation, which would include the Independents. Independents which earn a
spot among the top 12 should go.
 
The NCAA states clearly that even conference tourney games count for no more
than regular season games when they are selecting teams for the NCAAs.  Then
they say, "BUT, teams that win the conference *championship* game get an
automatic bid."  Sure, it makes it interesting because then teams like 1991
Northeastern get a chance to get in.  But if that's going to be the case,
the NCAA should not claim the tourney is for the 12 best teams.
 
>Yeah, I know, there would still be some controversy over picking (and
>ranking) the three teams from a conference (look at Cornell-SLU last
>year). But there would be a *much* better chance of doing the right
>thing when comparing teams, with at least two (and probably more)
>head-to-head games and many games vs. common opponents.
 
Last year, your method would have allowed SLU to go to the dance while
leaving Providence home.  That's a clear example of how it is even more flawed
than the current system.  If a 4th team in conference A is better than a 3rd
team in conference B, there is no way that the 3rd team should go and the
4th be left home.  Maybe in the past this has been done and it shouldn't have,
but to write it into the system?  There's no way I can support that.
 
 
- mike