Should teams with a conference record below .500 be considered for an at large bid?

[Shockm]

Perhaps a losing record in conference isn't the end all, but when you are taking the 7th and 8th place teams in a conference and their record is 4 games below .500 against the 'real' teams, why are they worthy for a shot at the title?

As we know, playing 20 games against teams who give you their best shot every game and winning means something.

Knowing you can jerk off on half your games and know you don't have to give your best every game and still get a bid is not what the tourney is about.

Rewarding mediocrity is what this is.

We can all agree with teams deserving chances and opportunities. When we were in the Valley and we won the conference several years by 4-6 games (between 1st and 2nd place), and then we were upset by still competitive teams who put it together in a 3 game tourney, that is one thing. But if a conference is just won by 1-2 games and their conference compadres aren't competitive, that is another. UNI and a couple of other teams were quite competitive from 2nd place but during our last year, we were upset in the MVC Tournament and almost didn't earn an opportunity. Then we defeated Arizona, another Power 5 team in the play in game.

[ShockerPrez]

Basically, I don't think a conference, any conference deserves 80% of their teams in the dance. I've seen enough big 12 games to know garbage when I see it.

OSU and WV are a loose stool. TCU, OU and Texas are a more firm dump.

But its all crap.

[SB Shock]

You judge a team on their whole body of work.

[WstateU]

Their entire 'stool'...

[AndShock]

I have no problem with banning schools with under .500 conference records but it will never happen. If going .500 in your conference is too hard then the MVC would love to have you. P5 schools already have every advantage in the world but they act like it’s still too tough.

[TheShocktocles]

I just don't believe the strength of a conference entitles teams with records under .500. They're losers. I believe I heard one of the braketologists speak to how poorly these teams do in the tournament.

Think of the late season games that could happen between teams trying to get to the .500 mark.

Unfortunately it is never going to change.

You are absolutely right. It's never going to change. The new net rating is just another scam to give more preferential treatment to the so -called 5 power conference schools. Here are some facts to consider. You guys remember the 2011 season? I sure do. What a sweet year.

VCU was told by the same effing television experts today and former committee members that they should not be in the NCAA tournament. They had to play in the first NCAA play in game. They went on to beat USC, Georgetown, Purdue, Florida State and Kansas. All teams from the so-called power conferences.

And our boys went to the NIT as an at large team. I will never forget these same television clowns saying how unfair it was that Nebraska, Washington State, Virginia Tech, and Alabama that they had to play in the NIT. They said these teams should be in the NCAA. They cried like little babies. Not one effing word was said about our boys. Of course the shocks went on to win the NIT and beat all those teams that should have been playing in the NCAA.

In the end, the Final Four consisted of two teams that the shocks lost to by a grand total of 5 points. It's clear WSU should have been in the NCAA tournament. One guy from Alabama wrote an article saying so. The rest of the blueblood crowd and television establishment were quiet. The radio clowns in KC laughed and said we were 66 best team in the country. Here we are today and nothing has changed. The fact that we have to debate whether we get in the NIT with the strength of schedule the shocks have played is ridiculous. But teams like TCU and OU with losing records in their conference deserve bids in the NCAA. Total bullsht.

[BOBB]

Preach it. Like Malcolm Farrakhan!

[pinstripers]

of course not, but they will be

[Kung Wu]

You are absolutely right. It's never going to change. The new net rating is just another scam to give more preferential treatment to the so -called 5 power conference schools. Here are some facts to consider. You guys remember the 2011 season? I sure do. What a sweet year.

When you brought up 2011, I thought you were going to point out that the national champs, UConn, were only 0.500 in conference that season.

[ShockTalk]

BUT, they won their conference tournament.

[ShockTalk]

By the way, the Big East was a MONSTER conference that year. UConn was 5-6 against Top 20 teams before marching through the BE tourney.

[ShockBand]

Knowing you can jerk off on half your games and know you don't have to give your best every game and still get a bid is not what the tourney is about.

[WstateU]

https://media.giphy.com/media/wWue0rCDOphOE/giphy.gif

[1979Shocker]

What if there was a basketball division with 6 teams consisting of 3 leagues of 2 teams each. Below is how the season went for the teams.

League	Team	Non-Conf	Conf	Overall	Results
A	1	2-0	2-0	4-0	W-B2, W-C1, W-A2, W-A2
A	2	2-0	0-2	2-2	W-B1, W-C2, L-A1, L-A1
B	1	1-1	1-1	2-2	L-A2, W-C1, W-B2, L-B2
B	2	1-1	1-1	2-2	L-A1, W-C2, L-B1, W-B1
C	1	0-2	2-0	2-2	L-A1, L-B1, W-C2, W-C2
C	2	0-2	0-2	0-4	L-A2, L-B2, L-C1, L-C1

Should team 2 of the A league make the tournament, even though they didn't win any league games, since they are clearly the second best team in the division?

Edit: In this scenario, there is no league tournament and only 4 teams make the division tournament. There is also no automatic bid for winning your league. Team 1 of the A league makes it. and team 2 of the C league doesn't. Of the remaining 4 teams (all with 2-2 records), who should make it?

[TheShocktocles]

When you brought up 2011, I thought you were going to point out that the national champs, UConn, were only 0.500 in conference that season.

Your right, Uconn was terrible in their conference. But I thought they won their conference tournament. Still I think the shocks should have been in the NCAA. Also is this the year that Barry at Missouri State got screwed ?

I think they won the MVC regular season but lost the MVC tournament and got the automatic bid to the NIT. The blueblood powers on the committee wanted to teach him a lesson fior being outspoken about how unfair the system was. I could have my facts wrong but I think that is what happened.

[UCONN_Husky]

I'm ok with an 8-10 conference record as long as they have the resume (NET, quality wins, & OOC performance). But 6-12 Indiana? No f'ing way. I don't care how good their NET or wins are.

[ShockTalk]

Yeah, I said earlier I'm good with 8-10 (1 game short of .500) assuming some other factors play in to it. My rub right now is teams like OU as a 10 seed with a 6-10 conference record. They don't win their last 2 games or the conference tourney, they should be out, not in.

[kcshocker11]

No, No ,No!

[TheShocktocles]

Bill Self just said OU should be in the tornament. That settles it. Self is a God. Hallelujah.

[WuShock16]

Exact quote: "God, I hope they are...or $#!+"

[shoxlax]

The NCAA Tournament should be full of winners, not losers.

If your conference is too tough for you, then leave and go to an “easier” conference. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

Exactly, where is the “Hell No” option in the poll?

[calfan]

No. If they can’t win at least half their conference games let them join a new conference. That is what they tell he mid-majors.