Suggestion for Improving Invitations to March Madness

[Shocker1976]

IMO the invitation criteria for March Madness needs to be amended, as too many invitations are extended to teams from the BCS Conferences and the "recognized" basketball conferences who have little chance of winning the Big Dance. NCAA basketball fans and the tournament itself would be better served by granting only 32 invitations to the "recognized" major conferences (American; Atlantic 10; ACC; Big 12; Big East; Big Ten; Pac 12; and, SEC); while extending 32 invitations to the remaining conferences. Such a format could provide teams like Stephen F. Austin (24-2), Southern Mississippi (21-5) and New Mexico State (20-8) an opportunity to play and advance in the Big Dance; rather than condemning fans to watch second tier BCS teams lose in first round play.

The following table reflects my thoughts on how the 32 invitations to the BCS and "recognized" conferences could be distributed using records as of February 18, 2014.

Conference	Invited to Tourney	On the Bubble
American	Cincinnati
	Louisville
	SMU
	U Conn
	Memphis
Atlantic 10	Saint Louis	St Joseph (17-7)
	VCU	Richmond (17-9)
	George Washington	Dayton (17-9)
	University Mass.
ACC	Syracuse	UNC (18-7)
	Virginia
	Duke
	Pitt
Big 12	Kansas	Kansas State (17-8)
	Texas	Baylor (17-9)
	Iowa State
	Oklahoma
Big East	Creighton	Providence (17-10)
	Villanova
	Xavier
	St John’s
Big Ten	Michigan State	Minnesota (17-9)
	Michigan
	Iowa
	Wisconsin
	Ohio State
Pac 12	Arizona	Colorado (19-7)
	UCLA	California (17-8)
	Arizona State	Utah (17-8)
SEC	Florida	Ole Miss (16-10)
	Kentucky	Tennessee (16-10)
	Missouri

[Cdizzle]

Teams should not receive, or be denied a bid, based on their conference affiliation. Whether that is a BCS conference or not.

[Steeleshocker]

I think a simpler solution would be to require a team to have a at least a .500 record in conference (unless you win the conference tourney, of course). That would keep conferences from being able to send 80% of their members, as has been proposed about the big 12 at times.

[ShockerMas]

I don't see why there would be a need to limit any conference's amount of teams in the NCAA tournament. Sometimes there are just a ton of good teams in a particular conference in certain years. For example I bet most people thought that the MVC had "more than their fair share" in 2006 with 4 teams, but they were given a chance to prove themselves after receiving the bids

[Shocker1976]

Teams should not receive, or be denied a bid, based on their conference affiliation. Whether that is a BCS conference or not.

I agree with your sentiment but explain to this board how non-BCS and "non-recognized basketball conference" teams are not currently being denied a bid based on conference affiliation.

[tropicalshox]

I challenge 1976 to give us the 32 non power conference teams that are deserving to dance.

[capnkirk]

I think it would interesting to play all your conference games the first part of the season. Then the non-con games. Then play the conference tourney.

[Dan]

The conference tournament champion getting the auto bid is the joke of the tourney. That's what gobbles up bids from deserving teams. Can you imagine if someone like Missouri State or SIU wins our tourney? These are the types of teams that are taking away the bid from their fellow conference members that are more deserving and would probably put forth a better effort in the NCAA.

[rrshock]

I agree with the .500 in conference thing. OkSt is 4-9 on conference and they are considered a bubble team right now. That is a joke.

I know this would limit some good teams from getting on, but do those teams that can't even break even in their own conference need to be dancing?

[Flip1381]

So...Stephen F. Austin is already in the tournament. The other 2 teams are not winning their league (3rd and 2nd) and have had some bad losses. Southern Miss got blown out by Louisville and UAB, New Mexico St has 8 losses which include Colorado St (12-13, 9th in the MWC), Chicago St (4th in the WAC, 8-14 overall record), UMKC (7-17, 7th in the WAC), and Idaho (11-16, 8th in the WAC).

Can you explain a bit more, I must not be following the logic.

[WuDrWu]

I would make it that you have to have a BETTER than .500 record in your conference to advance. Yes, I understand the argument that you want the best teams, and I won't argue that sometimes the best 34 might be left out, BUT it might be the other way as well, and I would argue that given 2 fairly close entities, I'll take the one that didn't have the chance vs the one that had multiple opportunities and failed as often as they succeeded. Since the scheduling is tipped HEAVILY in favor of these larger conferences, I have no problem LIGHTLY putting my finger on the other end of the scales.

[Shocker1976]

I challenge 1976 to give us the 32 non power conference teams that are deserving to dance.

The 32 number of invitations is an arbitrary number; choose your own limit, all I am suggesting is a more equitable allotment of invitations to ensure that quality teams who are not affiliated with a BCS conference or "recognized basketball conference" have a chance to play in the NCAA tournament.

[Cdizzle]

Setting a number that needs filled is a terrible idea. Putting heavier restrictions on entrance criteria, such as .500+ conference record, 4+ road wins, etc., would give more of the teams you want a chance, without punishing another deserving team just because a cap was reached.

[Play Angry]

Honestly, it's pretty miraculous that the NCAA Tournament has existed in its current format as long as it has. Eventually a line is going to get drawn between the haves and the have nots, just like in football.

The concern won't be getting more bids for the have nots at that point, it will be whether they can get any at all. This is one of the very, very strongest motivators for why I want to get out of the MVC ASAP. When the axe falls, that league will not get any favors.

[Shock Top]

BATTLE ROYALE!!!