Nah, it's fine the way it is. There was hockey and golf to watch this
Two more observations.For some of us, there are really only two
seasons: football, and waiting for football.And Mike, sorry dude,
but you ruined your Ute homerism credentials with your BYU comment. You had the
shot, and you didn't take it.
I agree with the article. Although I must say there were some awfully good
games this year. I don't feel the WCC deserved more than two teams this
year and neither did the Mountain West. So they were on par. Utah showed what
two conferences they didn't belong in, WCC and PAC 12. Had the shot and had
to take it.
Here is another idea for changes to the tournament.There are some
conferences with automatic bids that have really really bad teams. In fact,
their whole conference won/loss percentage is below 40% even though many of the
teams get most of their victories from non D-1 teams in non conference play.I suggest the NCAA only allow into the tournament team champions from
conferences that have a winning percentage of at least 42% and each team can
only count 2 wins from non D-1 Schools. An exception could be made if a
champion from a non qualifying conference has an RPI of 68 or higher.This would probably free up 4 more spots for the tournament.
The only tweak worth considering , is expanding the tournment from 68 to 96 and
doing away with the nit, or expanding to 128 teams and doing away with the nit
and the cit.It had been a 128 team tourney then all of utahs teams
except suu would have been in the tournament. How great would that have been?All conference winners,all conference tournament winners,and
basically all teams with atleast decent winning record.and no silly
play-in games.Just one big march madness tournament.The
tournament of all tournaments.That would truly be big.
"This year, BYU was the only team outside one of the major conferences to
get into the tournament as an at-large team."What exactly are
you constituting as a "major conference", and what are you considering
"at-large"? San Diego State lost their tournament final, so they were an
at-large team. Are we considering the gutted Big East and the Atlantic 10 major
conferences? When I hear "major conference," I don't consider the
ones that just happen to be currently proficient in a particular sport in that
category, I consider the ones generating major revenue (i.e. football, big tv
money). These ones aren't.