Are Conference Championships fair?

[mountainman]

No conference has to play an championship game. These games are staged by the choice of the conference.

As I understand it, the NCAA does require that a conference have a minimum of 12 teams in order to have the option of a championship game, but the decision whether to stage the game or not is up to the conference members.

The appeal is, in my view, simply revenues to the conference members for staging the game. There is little other incentive otherwise as far as I can see, especially since now there are twelve regular season games that affords each conference member the opportunity to play every other conference member.

I believe these games put a potential national title game appearance at risk as well as a BCS game bid. Also, they create an unequal circumstance for the teams whose conference requires a member to play an additional game in order to be crowned conference champion.

It appears the bean-counters are in reality running the conferences as opposed to the athletic departments. I sense a perspective that it's who makes the most money as opposed to who wins on the field is becoming the measure of success. I'm not sure that's a good thing for college athletics.

It would not surprise me if the NCAA intervenes is some fashion to regulate the potential negative influence of dollars on the game. If such influences do indeed exist, I hope they do because I would hate to think that the national title would simply go to the highest bidder.

[colorado_loves_football]

I wasn't talking about TCU or Va Tech. Just making a point about the future. We will see in the next couple of years if the changes are good. I think they will cause more problem then they solve, but I'm willing to see how it goes before making a final judgment.

Liar, Liar! It's ok, Spence, you have a right to your opinion, you don't have to 'shroud' it in secrecy. But I know what you are saying, should say a team from the Big Ten get 'overlooked' in favor of a team from say, the MAC, through that provision, that might not go over too well.
But, you have to weigh into the consideration, that more typically than not, the Big Ten has been over-represented in the BCS, at least proportionally-speaking, but that could be a reflection of the quality of play there.
I'm not against the idea of awarding 'multiple' BCS bids when necessary.
OSU and Notre Dame, obviously 'earned' the right to play in the Fiesta Bowl, and I wouldn't want to refuse either team their just reward. But, I think you might admit, TCU and Oregon were overlooked. They likely would have been paired together in the '5th' bowl, had it been in place, but tha'ts really no excuse for not arranging a Holiday Bowl 'pairing'.
Nobody will convince me Oklahoma was 'better' than TCU. That's the 'crux' of my argument. Everything came out in the wash, I guess.
TCU had their hands full with Iowa St, and i'ts possible they lose to Oregon, but if you do'nt schedule the game, nobody knows for sure.
Oklahoma was a better team at the end of the year, beating Oregon demonstrated that, but I believe TCU improved, as did Iowa St.
I was impressed generally, with how the BCS did, in their pairings, but some of that was probably just 'blind' luck. The Cotton Bowl turned out to be a pretty good game, Alabama and Texas Tech. That's why I will be interested in seeing how well TCU will do againt the Red Raiders.

[colorado_loves_football]

I would be happy to see a TCU/ Alabama ooc game in the future. TCU is a quality opponent, and I think that they may have a good game. I think last year that would have been a really good matchup.

Thanks Rolltide, for the compliment, believe it or not TCU has an 'edge' over Alabama, all-time 3-2. Last two times, they've played, Alabama 'owned' TCU winning by a combined 86-3! Last time TCU won was in 1957, their 'heyday', beating Alabama 28-0, and they also won the two previous games, played in Tuscaloosa (21-0, 23-6).
What I might 'prefer' rather than having to schedule them, would be a BCS 'pairing' such as in the Cotton Bowl, last year. That's why I'll be interested to see how well TCU does against Texas Tech, it will be yet another indication of where they 'stack-up' competitively against the SEC.

[Spence]

Liar, Liar! It's ok, Spence, you have a right to your opinion, you don't have to 'shroud' it in secrecy. But I know what you are saying, should say a team from the Big Ten get 'overlooked' in favor of a team from say, the MAC, through that provision, that might not go over too well.
But, you have to weigh into the consideration, that more typically than not, the Big Ten has been over-represented in the BCS, at least proportionally-speaking, but that could be a reflection of the quality of play there.

I really wasn't trying to do that. You should know me well enough by now that I would have came out and said it if that is what I meant.

TCU beat Oklahoma last year, so if a fifth bowl were added, they would have had a legit claim to one of the spots. What I am talking about is a team that plays no ranked opponents and finishes 1st. in a weak conference getting in over a highly ranked team that finishes second that plays in a really tough conference.

Kind of like Cincy in B-Ball this year. They played a top 10 schedule and won 18 games and the NCAA selection committee, in all their wisdom, leaves them out of the tournament. Letting in teams from conferences that Cincy would have dominated if they were in that conference. That is wrong in my book.

[colorado_loves_football]

Spence, I agree with you that in general a team from the Big East is likely more qualified than say a team from the WAC, in basketball, but I still think the NCAA did a pretty good job, overall, in its selections.
Cincinnati, will likely do well in the NIT, and if I were they, I might even prefer being in a bracket I could win, rather than one I will likely lose.

Air Force was an 'at large' selection to the NCAA's. They lost 6 games the entire year, including a disappointing preliminary round game to Wyoming, they likely thought they were headed to the NIT. But, lo and behold they will be playing Illinois, in a 'preliminary' game, and I for one think that's a better arrangement. You have to consider that Air Force never has been to the NCAA's. Taking Cincinnati would likely give the NCAA's 'better' competition, but Air Force will likely never have another chance, barring a miracle. They aren't known for their basketball.

Now, apply my argument to C-USA, a conference traditionally not known for outstanding football, by-and-large (at least not this year). Tulsa wins it after spending much of its 'life' as an 'also-ran' in the WAC. Winning a C-USA title likely was something they never imagined possible, yet they did it, and in convincing fashion, I might add. They 'earned' what amounts to a 'non-BCS' bid to the Liberty Bowl. The officials likely would have scheduled TCU but for the fact they assumed Fresno St was better.
As it worked out, Tulsa beat their 'jewel' of a pick, and did it without much fanfare. I, for one would have liked to have seen how Tulsa might have done in the BCS as an 'at large' pick.

If I go 'purely' on record, Virginia Tech, LSU, Alabama, Wisconsin, and maybe any other number of teams are selected ahead of Tulsa. I believe Tulsa 'earns' the opportunity by winning C-USA. Similarly, I think TCU 'earns' the opportunity if they beat Tulsa. Neither team necessarily 'wins' a major conference, but they are confernece champions. Memphis, in basketball, is maybe a better example. They are a #1 seed, but likely won't be in the Final Four, but you can't take away their 'regular' season record, for sake of competition. All those other teams already had a chance, and lost. TCU and Tulsa deserve a 'fair' opportunity to be represented as 'at large' candidates to the BCS.
I want the BCS to be fair, but I also want it to represent the entire NCAA.

[Spence]

Spence, I agree with you that in general a team from the Big East is likely more qualified than say a team from the WAC, in basketball, but I still think the NCAA did a pretty good job, overall, in its selections.
Cincinnati, will likely do well in the NIT, and if I were they, I might even prefer being in a bracket I could win, rather than one I will likely lose.

Air Force was an 'at large' selection to the NCAA's. They lost 6 games the entire year, including a disappointing preliminary round game to Wyoming, they likely thought they were headed to the NIT. But, lo and behold they will be playing Illinois, in a 'preliminary' game, and I for one think that's a better arrangement. You have to consider that Air Force never has been to the NCAA's. Taking Cincinnati would likely give the NCAA's 'better' competition, but Air Force will likely never have another chance, barring a miracle. They aren't known for their basketball.

Why should Air Force go before Cincy? This isn't a charity tournament it is a tournament to find out who the best teams is this year. Just because they may never be able to make it again is no reason to include them. I will never be a pro ball player, should they let me in because I am almost at the retirement age of most pro ballplayers? No, because I don't belong. I am not good enough. If it doesn't matter who the best are, why worry about playing a tournament or conducting polls or even having leagues? You compete to be the best at what you are doing. The best should be the ones who get rewarded. There is no reason to even have a championship if it is any other way. At least the BCS tries to get the best teams. They may not always succeed, but the NCAA selection committee is a joke. It is a made for TV event. They try to put teams in position to be Cinderella because it is good for ratings. People like to root for the underdog, but it has nothing to do with finding the best teams and playing them off. I only hope CFB has better sense then to do something like that.

[colorado_loves_football]

Why should Air Force go before Cincy?

Air Force 'earned' their NCAA invitation through competitive play, something I had assumed you were a proponent of. 27-6, is a lot better than 18-? Cincinnati's overall record.
Eight Big East teams were selected to the NCAA tournament, breaking an all-time record of 7 which I believe was jointly held by the Big East and the Big Ten. You would have sent 9, and denied the Mountain West Conference a representative, most likely (I know the tournament champions are assured a spot). Air Force was likely the best team in the west, from a competitive standpoint, but the Illinois game will either substantiate that or refute it, so ti will be an interesting pairing of 'comparable' teams, record-wise.
Just because the Big East are strong, doesn't mean every team 'deserves' to play in the tournament. If Cincinnati wins the NIT then maybe you have a point, but barring that happening, I think the 'best' team was selected. And we'll both find out if they deserved it, tonight.

[Spence]

Air Force 'earned' their NCAA invitation through competitive play, something I had assumed you were a proponent of. 27-6, is a lot better than 18-? Cincinnati's overall record.
Eight Big East teams were selected to the NCAA tournament, breaking an all-time record of 7 which I believe was jointly held by the Big East and the Big Ten. You would have sent 9, and denied the Mountain West Conference a representative, most likely (I know the tournament champions are assured a spot).

If Air Force played Cincinnati 5 times who would win the series. I don't care how many teams a conference sends if those teams are better then the others. Cincinatti play one of the toughest schedules in the nation. If they would have played Air Force's record they would have had a better record then Air Force did. This year the B-East is the best conference in basketball. They are in the top 2 every year. That is why the NCAA tournament is a joke.

[colorado_loves_football]

If Air Force played Cincinnati 5 times who would win the series. I don't care how many teams a conference sends if those teams are better then the others. Cincinatti play one of the toughest schedules in the nation. If they would have played Air Force's record they would have had a better record then Air Force did. This year the B-East is the best conference in basketball. They are in the top 2 every year. That is why the NCAA tournament is a joke.

Your argument, applied to Cincinnati, might be valid, but the fact remains Cincinnati was 19-16, Air Force, I think was 24-7. Air Force might not ever go back to the NCAA tourney, but you are right that's probably not sufficient reason to invite them. That being said, I thought Air Force played decent, albeit in a losing effort to Illinois.

[Spence]

I guess as long as they call it the NCAA Tournament instead of the NCAA playoffs it is alright no matter who they take. Playoff's imply these are the best 64 teams in the nation and are seeded as such. That in't how the NCAA B-Ball tourney works.

By they way, Cincy would have had a lot better record and might have won the B-10 also. The B-East is a very, very good conference in B-Ball.

[colorado_loves_football]

I guess as long as they call it the NCAA Tournament instead of the NCAA playoffs it is alright no matter who they take. Playoff's imply these are the best 64 teams in the nation and are seeded as such. That in't how the NCAA B-Ball tourney works.

By they way, Cincy would have had a lot better record and might have won the B-10 also. The B-East is a very, very good conference in B-Ball.

Honestly, Spence, I think you need to be a little less critical of the selections made. Which team would you have eliminated? The team that played Villanova (Monmouth) was temporarily within 4 points, before losing, a #16 seed.
There were a few other games had similar results. Air Force was a #13 seed, lost to Illinois, but not badly. Utah St. lost to Washington, a #1 seed from the previous year (Utah St wasn't selected). Northwestern St. (not to be confused with Northwestern U.) beat the Big Ten Champions.
Sure, there are teams that probably aren't 'worthy' of a NCAA bid. Nevada losing to Montana of all teams was a major upset, isn't Montana I-AA? Nevada was the WAC champions.
You could make an argument against the WAC, but Air Force played their heart out, in a losing effort. I, for one, think they deserved to be there, over Cincinnati. Sure, the Big East is strong, but 8 teams is enough. 9 is too many. Adam Rich would be proud. So, for that matter, would Dick Van Patten. They are probably Big East fans.

[Spence]

I don't care who they take, it doesn't matter to me. They just shouldn't bill it as the best 64 teams in CBB. It isn't and it isn't a play-off it is a tournament. Play-offs would take only the best teams.

[Spence]

the beauty of the ncca basketball tourney is it gives the little guys a chance to shine . think of it this way . northwestern state takes down iowa. a team that won the big 10 tournament . does that mean northwestern state could compete night in and night out with ohio state, indiana, mich, mich state, etc - probably not . but it's that 1 chance, once in a lifetime chance to knock off the big bad iowa hawkeyes . they did it. that to me captures the spirit of this tourney . i do agree w/you spence - it's not a playoff . it's a tournament . a darn good tournament . americal loves it because we want see the little guys slay the big guys .

that being said - i think the cinn omission comes down to who would america rather see in the tourney ? i still believe the committee chose air force because they would rather reward a small school than another major school who had a mediocre record . jusy my 2 cents.

I agree and actually I would rather see Air Force then I would Cincinnati. My point is that a lot of the national media want this to be the model for CFB and this tournament has nothing to do with trying to pick the best teams(although the top 25 will be in there and seeded). I would hate for college football to turn into a total show. The NCAA selection committee set the brackets up to provide the most stories. Not necessarily to provide the fairest format. Also football is a very different sport. You can do pretty good in the NCAA with 6 or 7 good players. In football you must have 28-35 good players to succeed.

David vs. Goliath plays very well on tv to middle america. The NCAA knows that and exploits that fact to make the tournament popular.

I honestly believe the BCS does everything in it's power to try and get the best teams paired up during the bowl season. The rest of the bowls give us a pretty good mix of pairings as to create cross conference rivalries. I love the bowl season. From the first game to the last game. I hope nothing ever happens to change it.

[colorado_loves_football]

I agree and actually I would rather see Air Force then I would Cincinnati. My point is that a lot of the national media want this to be the model for CFB and this tournament has nothing to do with trying to pick the best teams(although the top 25 will be in there and seeded). I would hate for college football to turn into a total show. The NCAA selection committee set the brackets up to provide the most stories. Not necessarily to provide the fairest format. Also football is a very different sport. You can do pretty good in the NCAA with 6 or 7 good players. In football you must have 28-35 good players to succeed.

David vs. Goliath plays very well on tv to middle america. The NCAA knows that and exploits that fact to make the tournament popular.

I honestly believe the BCS does everything in it's power to try and get the best teams paired up during the bowl season. The rest of the bowls give us a pretty good mix of pairings as to create cross conference rivalries. I love the bowl season. From the first game to the last game. I hope nothing ever happens to change it.

First of all, I don't buy into the argument that somehow Air Force wasn't a 'deserving' NCAA representative. They were the best team in the Mountain West Conference, regular season. Unless I'm mistaken, traditionally that team is given an 'automatic' bid to the NCAA tournament, irrespective of how they do in their post-season tournament, but their losing to Wyoming maybe cast a shadow of 'doubt' upon their regular season record. But, I think regular season major conference champions are given priority, and that likely explains why they were selected over Cincinnati.
For the record, Cincinnati wasn't the only team left out, Maryland was another one, and they lost to Manhattan, in their NIT opener. And given how well Wichita St, has played, if anything the team being overlooked, was Manhattan. But, the 'lesser' conferences typically aren't given multiple NCAA bids. The Big East had 8 representatives, 5 remaining.
It would appear to me, that if anything they were over-represented. I don't really care how good Cincinnati as a basketball program is. Maybe if they win the NIT (a strong possiblity) then you have a legitimate gripe.
But, barring that happening, I think they were placed exactly where they belong. Another team that might have been selected, Colorado, wasn't partly because they were terrible at the end of the year. Kevin Weiberg said something about it being 'unfortunate' that Colorado wasn't selected, but they obviously weren't good enough, if a 30 point loss to Texas A&M, is a true reflection of how good they aren't. And I was once a Colorado student, so I'm simply being 'true to the facts' as I recognize them.
Texas A&M lost a heart-breaker to LSU. Those are the kind of games, that make the NCAA tournament interesting. Take those out of the equation, or in other words, keep the other major conference representatives from playing, and you lose a lot more than you gain.
A point could be made, I suppose for a team not winning the entire tournament, from say the Mid American Confernece. But that's not a sufficient reason to not allow them to play. Similar argument can be made toward the BCS. Bottom line: if a team isn't sufficiently qualified to win their conference, they probably aren't good enough to be selected.
I don't necessarily like the idea of 'multiple' representatives, but they do a pretty good job, as far as keeping it 'fair'.

[Spence]

For the record, Cincinnati wasn't the only team left out, Maryland was another one, and they lost to Manhattan, in their NIT opener. And given how well Wichita St, has played, if anything the team being overlooked, was Manhattan. But, the 'lesser' conferences typically aren't given multiple NCAA bids. The Big East had 8 representatives, 5 remaining.
It would appear to me, that if anything they were over-represented. I don't really care how good Cincinnati as a basketball program is. Maybe if they win the NIT (a strong possiblity) then you have a legitimate gripe.

I was just using Cincy as an example. I'm sure their were more teams that were better then a lot of teams in the tourney. I'm not necessarily talking about mid majors. I am talking about teams that shouldn't have been selected. The Big 10 is a prime example of teams not deseving to make it in. Cincinnati or probably Maryland would have probably won the B-10.

Why wouldn't anyone want the best teams in no matter what conference they play in. This whole representative thing makes no sense to me at all. If you are good enough, you should make it, if your not good enough you should stay home.