If you build it, they will come

[hapapp]

I count at least 10 conferences where the regular season champs will possibly all have at least 10 losses. You know that a few of those conferences will have some middle of the pack 13 loss (or worse) team make a run and win their tournament and get a bid. While that's "the beauty" of the Big Dance every year it is also a bit ridiculous. Another reason to expand by one day/round. Let these teams with terrible records who magically won their tournament just play a preliminary round and if they beat a similar team from another similar conference then they deserve the bid. A solid 25-6ish App team should not lose a bid if we have a bad game in the conference tournament.

Too many examples in the past where teams with similar resumes were left out. Though they were early, those losses to NIU and UNCA will be really bad losses to overcome.

[Bigdaddyg1]

I just have a hard time every year with some 20-14 terrible team from a terrible conference getting in after 3-4 good days in their tournament. You get that miracle win on the first day and everyone goes crazy then invariably they lose on the weekend and it's back to the usual teams- not always but usually. Out of 68 teams typically about 20 are legit, 20-30 are power conference teams with lousy records, half of the rest are mid majors who are good and get seeded too low and pull off the 12-5 win. The rest are the garbage who can't even win in the NIT. Every mid major regular season champion should get a shot.

[APPdiesel]

That’s why I believe each conference should get 2 bids. 1 for the regular season champ (full body of work) and 1 for the conference tournament champ (team that’s playing hot). If the same team wins both it opens an at large. Incentivize the regular season champ to try to win the tournament with more tournament unit$.

[AppSt94]

That’s why I believe each conference should get 2 bids. 1 for the regular season champ (full body of work) and 1 for the conference tournament champ (team that’s playing hot). If the same team wins both it opens an at large. Incentivize the regular season champ to try to win the tournament with more tournament unit$.

I don’t disagree with this format. Dean Smith, like him or not, always felt like the regular season conference championship should mean something.

[Bigdaddyg1]

It's a shame that the NET rankings are relied upon for bids. I've never really looked at them until this year- what has been the point with us typically around 200? At any rate Xavier and Villanova are about 20 spots ahead of us and are both 11-10 and are 5-5 and 4-6 respectively in their conference. Yeah yeah tougher schedule and conference but if you are that good don't be a game over .500 2/3's of the way through a season. After teams reach this point there should be committee members assigned to watch mid major games (like ours) so that the eyeball test can be used. At this point our schedule we have played is meaningless. The eyeballs tell you that this team is flat out good.

[agentpaul001]

It's a shame that the NET rankings are relied upon for bids. I've never really looked at them until this year- what has been the point with us typically around 200? At any rate Xavier and Villanova are about 20 spots ahead of us and are both 11-10 and are 5-5 and 4-6 respectively in their conference. Yeah yeah tougher schedule and conference but if you are that good don't be a game over .500 2/3's of the way through a season. After teams reach this point there should be committee members assigned to watch mid major games (like ours) so that the eyeball test can be used. At this point our schedule we have played is meaningless. The eyeballs tell you that this team is flat out good.

Even more so when they seem mostly to exist to discount mid-major teams from at-large selections. Its easy to find examples of weak P5 teams with so so net rankings getting in over deserving mid-majors because of lack of Quad 1 wins/etc.

I think the most fair and best way to address this is to require all at-large selections to be over .500 in conference play. In most years that would open up a couple more bids to more deserving teams and those P5 teams would still have opportunities to win their conference tournaments.

[Saint3333]

It's a shame that the NET rankings are relied upon for bids. I've never really looked at them until this year- what has been the point with us typically around 200? At any rate Xavier and Villanova are about 20 spots ahead of us and are both 11-10 and are 5-5 and 4-6 respectively in their conference. Yeah yeah tougher schedule and conference but if you are that good don't be a game over .500 2/3's of the way through a season. After teams reach this point there should be committee members assigned to watch mid major games (like ours) so that the eyeball test can be used. At this point our schedule we have played is meaningless. The eyeballs tell you that this team is flat out good.

Even more so when they seem mostly to exist to discount mid-major teams from at-large selections. Its easy to find examples of weak P5 teams with so so net rankings getting in over deserving mid-majors because of lack of Quad 1 wins/etc.

I think the most fair and best way to address this is to require all at-large selections to be over .500 in conference play. In most years that would open up a couple more bids to more deserving teams and those P5 teams would still have opportunities to win their conference tournaments.

This is a great idea, with conferences being 14-18 teams now going .500 in conference would be a good bar.

[appdaze]

Is it bad that I wish they weren't predicting us on here yet? They have us as the AQ 12 seed in the Midwest.

https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story ... redictions

[huskie3]

Is it bad that I wish they weren't predicting us on here yet? They have us as the AQ 12 seed in the Midwest.

https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story ... redictions

Rematch with Auburn in 2 round not bad.

[APPdiesel]

That’s why I believe each conference should get 2 bids. 1 for the regular season champ (full body of work) and 1 for the conference tournament champ (team that’s playing hot). If the same team wins both it opens an at large. Incentivize the regular season champ to try to win the tournament with more tournament unit$.

I don’t disagree with this format. Dean Smith, like him or not, always felt like the regular season conference championship should mean something.

At that point if you want more teams in, make them play-in to get in. It was bogus a few years ago when we got in via winning the SB tournament and were stuck as a play in. We got smoked in that game, so an argument can be made we were right where we deserved to be, but still. A tournament champ shouldn’t be a play in.

[hapapp]

That’s why I believe each conference should get 2 bids. 1 for the regular season champ (full body of work) and 1 for the conference tournament champ (team that’s playing hot). If the same team wins both it opens an at large. Incentivize the regular season champ to try to win the tournament with more tournament unit$.

I don’t disagree with this format. Dean Smith, like him or not, always felt like the regular season conference championship should mean something.

At that point if you want more teams in, make them play-in to get in. It was bogus a few years ago when we got in via winning the SB tournament and were stuck as a play in. We got smoked in that game, so an argument can be made we were right where we deserved to be, but still. A tournament champ shouldn’t be a play in.

We lost by one point, 54-53.

[Bigdaddyg1]

In my opinion that App team that year was a perfect example of a team who would be in my preliminary playin (expanded) model. If I recall we were close to .500 the regular season and caught fire for 4 days. While that was awesome for us a great 4 days after a mediocre 30 games doesn't really equate to an automatic 64 team bid, again just my opinion.

[APPdiesel]

That’s why I believe each conference should get 2 bids. 1 for the regular season champ (full body of work) and 1 for the conference tournament champ (team that’s playing hot). If the same team wins both it opens an at large. Incentivize the regular season champ to try to win the tournament with more tournament unit$.

I don’t disagree with this format. Dean Smith, like him or not, always felt like the regular season conference championship should mean something.

At that point if you want more teams in, make them play-in to get in. It was bogus a few years ago when we got in via winning the SB tournament and were stuck as a play in. We got smoked in that game, so an argument can be made we were right where we deserved to be, but still. A tournament champ shouldn’t be a play in.

We lost by one point, 54-53.

I stand corrected. I was remembering with my heart, not with my head.

[Stonewall]

It was an awful night. Anyway , beat Southern!

[AppSt94]

That’s why I believe each conference should get 2 bids. 1 for the regular season champ (full body of work) and 1 for the conference tournament champ (team that’s playing hot). If the same team wins both it opens an at large. Incentivize the regular season champ to try to win the tournament with more tournament unit$.

I don’t disagree with this format. Dean Smith, like him or not, always felt like the regular season conference championship should mean something.

At that point if you want more teams in, make them play-in to get in. It was bogus a few years ago when we got in via winning the SB tournament and were stuck as a play in. We got smoked in that game, so an argument can be made we were right where we deserved to be, but still. A tournament champ shouldn’t be a play in.

We lost by one point, 54-53.

I stand corrected. I was remembering with my heart, not with my head.

To be fair, you weren’t completely wrong. We were getting our ass handed to us in the first half but came back.

[BambooRdApp]

That’s why I believe each conference should get 2 bids. 1 for the regular season champ (full body of work) and 1 for the conference tournament champ (team that’s playing hot). If the same team wins both it opens an at large. Incentivize the regular season champ to try to win the tournament with more tournament unit$.

I don’t disagree with this format. Dean Smith, like him or not, always felt like the regular season conference championship should mean something.

At that point if you want more teams in, make them play-in to get in. It was bogus a few years ago when we got in via winning the SB tournament and were stuck as a play in. We got smoked in that game, so an argument can be made we were right where we deserved to be, but still. A tournament champ shouldn’t be a play in.

We lost by one point, 54-53.

I stand corrected. I was remembering with my heart, not with my head.

It was a typical game for that team if I am remembering teams and year correctly. The team had a tendency to get down by 18 to 20..and then have a massive comeback...that comeback was a point short.
At the time as season progressed, I advocated for that team to scrimmage each other at a local high school gym for a 20 minute half...so by game time..they would be in 2nd half mode

[appfanjj]

That’s why I believe each conference should get 2 bids. 1 for the regular season champ (full body of work) and 1 for the conference tournament champ (team that’s playing hot). If the same team wins both it opens an at large. Incentivize the regular season champ to try to win the tournament with more tournament unit$.

I don’t disagree with this format. Dean Smith, like him or not, always felt like the regular season conference championship should mean something.

At that point if you want more teams in, make them play-in to get in. It was bogus a few years ago when we got in via winning the SB tournament and were stuck as a play in. We got smoked in that game, so an argument can be made we were right where we deserved to be, but still. A tournament champ shouldn’t be a play in.

We lost by one point, 54-53.

And had two shots to win on the last possession of the game.

[hapapp]

That’s why I believe each conference should get 2 bids. 1 for the regular season champ (full body of work) and 1 for the conference tournament champ (team that’s playing hot). If the same team wins both it opens an at large. Incentivize the regular season champ to try to win the tournament with more tournament unit$.

I don’t disagree with this format. Dean Smith, like him or not, always felt like the regular season conference championship should mean something.

At that point if you want more teams in, make them play-in to get in. It was bogus a few years ago when we got in via winning the SB tournament and were stuck as a play in. We got smoked in that game, so an argument can be made we were right where we deserved to be, but still. A tournament champ shouldn’t be a play in.

We lost by one point, 54-53.

I stand corrected. I was remembering with my heart, not with my head.

In fairness, at one point we were getting smoked but came on late and had a chance to win.

[APPdiesel]

I don’t disagree with this format. Dean Smith, like him or not, always felt like the regular season conference championship should mean something.

At that point if you want more teams in, make them play-in to get in. It was bogus a few years ago when we got in via winning the SB tournament and were stuck as a play in. We got smoked in that game, so an argument can be made we were right where we deserved to be, but still. A tournament champ shouldn’t be a play in.

We lost by one point, 54-53.

I stand corrected. I was remembering with my heart, not with my head.

In fairness, at one point we were getting smoked but came on late and had a chance to win.

On our show every week we bring on a Panthers podcaster named JJ Hardy. He said to us once “nobody remembers context a year later”. I was guilty of that. I forgot the context, but remembered how disappointed I was in App’s showing that night.

[Bigdaddyg1]

At that point if you want more teams in, make them play-in to get in. It was bogus a few years ago when we got in via winning the SB tournament and were stuck as a play in. We got smoked in that game, so an argument can be made we were right where we deserved to be, but still. A tournament champ shouldn’t be a play in.

We lost by one point, 54-53.

I stand corrected. I was remembering with my heart, not with my head.

In fairness, at one point we were getting smoked but came on late and had a chance to win.

On our show every week we bring on a Panthers podcaster named JJ Hardy. He said to us once “nobody remembers context a year later”. I was guilty of that. I forgot the context, but remembered how disappointed I was in App’s showing that night.

All of that incredible play for 4 days and we didn't even make the main event. Maybe we erase that this year.