[cjg11582]

There seems to be a lot of discrepancy this year between the conferences. Is there a chance we have a replay of '85 and see three Big East teams make the final four? Possibly even four? Is it really that inconceivable that Georgetown, Nova, UConn, and WVU win their first four games in the NCAA tourney? Maybe only two conferences will be represented? Don't get me wrong, there is talent across the country and definitely some potential darkhorses (LSU, for instance). Personally, I think it would be validating for The Big East as a conference to reach that kind of success, considering how much flack they caught for their shortcomings in football this year.

Anyone seeing things differently? Maybe over-representation from a different conference? Would this be good or bad for March Madness?

[desertrat]

Doesn't the Big East have 16 teams? If so, it only figures that they might have a few more top teams than the Big 10 or Pac-10 on the basis of sheer numbers alone. I guess there is always a possibility they could get 2 or 3 teams into the final 4 since just last year the Big 10 had 2 in the final 4.

[wvuauthor]

It is definitely a possibility that three Big East teams could make the Final Four, but things would have to set up right on selection Sunday. I might have to start a thread over on the college football forum about the Big East Football Conference!

[pete_b]

I think that if you set aside the fact that the champ from each conference gets an automatic bid, the conference issue is a moot point. The big dance is a battle of teams and not conferences. The conference tournaments before the big dance determines which teams are best the in the conference. When it comes to the big dance its every team for themself. I really think that it doesn't matter if there is a conference dominated bracket whether it be one side of it or the Final Four. At that point in the season each team is an individual entity. Lets try not to control things too much by putting teams in the dance just because of a conferences under or over representation. Lets just make the NCAA tournament the best field possible regardless of conference.

[cjg11582]

That is understandable Pete, but considering The Big East does have sixteen teams and twelve of them were in the tourney last year, and by all accounts it is without question the best conference this year, shouldn't they receive 9-10 bids. This seems perfectly legitimate to me. The Pac-10 should not receive more than four (and even this seems generous). And conference USA? Only Memphis and UAB are locks; UTEP would definitely be questionable considering they play in a weak conference and have no real credentials. My assertion is if they played in The Big Ten or Big East they would have a losing record. So who compensates for all these shortages of quality teams from lesser conferences?
I would rather see The Big 10 get seven bids, and The Big East get 10-12 bids then mediocre teams from lesser conferences get 4-6 because we want some semblance of geographical balance. In all honesty, is anyone supremely confident that any team from The Pac-10 can beat Lousiville or Michigan (two bubble teams in strong conferences)? Surely Washington or UCLA could prove competitive, but they are locks for the tournament while UM and Lousiville are going to need an infinite amount of luck.
So in an essence I am agreeing with you, I want to see the best teams make the Tournament regardless of the conference they reside in.

[desertrat]

Originally Posted by cjg11582

That is understandable Pete, but considering The Big East does have sixteen teams and twelve of them were in the tourney last year, and by all accounts it is without question the best conference this year, shouldn't they receive 9-10 bids. This seems perfectly legitimate to me. The Pac-10 should not receive more than four (and even this seems generous). And conference USA? Only Memphis and UAB are locks; UTEP would definitely be questionable considering they play in a weak conference and have no real credentials. My assertion is if they played in The Big Ten or Big East they would have a losing record. So who compensates for all these shortages of quality teams from lesser conferences?
I would rather see The Big 10 get seven bids, and The Big East get 10-12 bids then mediocre teams from lesser conferences get 4-6 because we want some semblance of geographical balance. In all honesty, is anyone supremely confident that any team from The Pac-10 can beat Lousiville or Michigan (two bubble teams in strong conferences)? Surely Washington or UCLA could prove competitive, but they are locks for the tournament while UM and Lousiville are going to need an infinite amount of luck.
So in an essence I am agreeing with you, I want to see the best teams make the Tournament regardless of the conference they reside in.

UCLA won at Michigan earlier this season 68-61. I looked through Louisville's schedule and see they lost to every good team they played. No conference should get more than 7 bids when there are only 65 bids available in the tourney. There are 31 conferences with an automatic bid for each leaving only 34 at large bids.

[cjg11582]

Alright, so the Pac-10 regular season champ beat the sixth rated team in The Big Ten by seven points, they can hang their hat on that, I guess. But like I said it is a competitve match up, based on that result you think The Pac-10 should get the same number of bids as The Big Ten? And Lousiville? They beat two stellar teams in conference in Cinncy and Marquette. Everyone they lost to they were supposed to lose to. Does that imply they couldn't defeat Arizona this year? Call me crazy, but I interpret a four point loss in Storrs as a four point win against any Pac-10 team. With maybe the exception of UCLA.

[desertrat]

Arizona lost to UConn by 7, a double OT loss to Michigan State, and beat Kansas by 12, Western Kentucky by 5, and ended Washington's 2 year unbeaten streak at home in an 86-85 OT game. None of those games were at home. I think Arizona would beat Louisville.
As to your implying that I think the Pac-10 deserves as many bids as the Big 10 this year, I never said that nor do I believe that. What I did say was that no conference should get more than 7 bids, and actually 5 to 6 is more than enough bids for the top conferences. The Big 10 and Big East are this years top 2 conferences and deserve the most bids, but none deserve 7 IMO. When I mentioned UCLA did beat Michigan, I think the fact that it was on Michigan's home floor makes a 7 point win more impressive. The score was more lopsided until Michigan hit a couple of late 3s to make it appear closer than it was.
I would argue that Cincy and Marquette are less than stellar teams, they are good teams but I guess it would depend on your definition of what stellar is. I think the Pac-10 will get 3 or 4 bids, 4 most likely. Big 10 should get 5, maybe 6 but that is pushing it.

[cjg11582]

Then I will assume you think smaller conferences should be receiving multiple bids as well. The MVC (who should get four total bids), the MWC (should get two bids) and the CAA (should get two) are the only mid-major conferences that deserve multiple invites to the tournament.
Pac-10: 3 (at large bids, four total)
Big 12: 3 (four total)
ACC: 4 (five total)
SEC: 5 (six total)
CUSA: 1 (two total)

These are rough estimations but this leaves 13 open at-large spots for two conferences. Which means at a minimium we are looking at 7-8 total from The Big Ten and The Big East. And they should be rewarded as such for being the two best conferences all year. And Cinncy is definitely a bubble team, but with wins against WVU, LSU and Marquette and a 19-12 overall record, I was impressed with how they were able to maintain a winning record. Marquette is 10-6 in conference play, 20-9 overall and is a lock for The tourney. With wins over UConn, Georgetown and Pitt, I don't know what more one can expect from school like Marquette. Do you simply think the Big East is overrated?

[desertrat]

The Big East, like i said before, is probably the best conference this year. I just don't think any conference deserves 7 teams. That deludes the tournament in my opinion when you have teams from the bottom half of their conference in a national championship tourney.

[wvuauthor]

Desertrat,

The Big East is going to get at least 7 teams. I think that the whole selection process makes the tournament a lot of fun before it even starts. But we still have a couple of days before selection Sunday!

[Lefty Noob]

I heard someone yesterday making the case on ESPN that the Big East would get 7 teams because it was basically, and I'm paraphrasing here, two conferences in one. He likened it to five being from the Big East and two from Conference USA. Can't say I quite follow the line of thinking there. Seems to me like a flimsy premise. What do you guys think?

[BigBadBuc]

Lefty,

How much larger is the Big East than other conferences? Do you know without doing a ton of research?

BBB

[Lefty Noob]

Big East has 16 teams. Big 12 and ACC have 12 each. A-10 has 14 teams.

So clearly some other conferences are at least in the same ballpark in terms of number of teams.