Should all 256 Div I schools be invited to the Tournament?


I mentioned this same thing in another thread. But I say invite all of the school that play Division I ball (app. 325). Conference tournaments do nothing but eliminate deserving schools who manage to lose out when the don't gain an automatic bid. That's non-sense.

Most of the schools will make more money playing in a national tournament than they would playing in a conference tournament. This would also give the regular season more meaning since the champion would be determined from play in it

And who knows, we might even get a Milan High school one year (the little school that won the Indiana State Tournament back when all of the schools in the state competed against each other for the crown regardless of size).

The NIT is now an afterthought in the post season. Play it in the pre-season only.

Regards.
 

Click here to visit HBCUSportsShop
Originally posted by Dr. Mac


And who knows, we might even get a Milan High school one year (the little school that won the Indiana State Tournament back when all of the schools in the state competed against each other for the crown regardless of size).
Click to expand...

Just for clarification, this was the Indiana Tourney format all the way up until the 1997 season.
After that, they started suing that STUPID class system in basketball. :mad: :(

There is no way to define a TRUE champion other than with the
"come-one-come-all" [/}format. I know that most (if not all) have that format, but I don't know why Indiana followed suit.
Hell, you only need 5 players to take you there...enrollment size should have no bearing.

I think it would be good to give all the schools a chance to compete regardless of record. Aye, if you're fortunate to get hot during the tourney....you deserve the title. ;)
 
Originally posted by Ntelekt


Just for clarification, this was the Indiana Tourney format all the way up until the 1997 season.
After that, they started suing that STUPID class system in basketball. :mad: :(

There is no way to define a TRUE champion other than with the
"come-one-come-all" [/}format. I know that most (if not all) have that format, but I don't know why Indiana followed suit.
Hell, you only need 5 players to take you there...enrollment size should have no bearing.

I think it would be good to give all the schools a chance to compete regardless of record. Aye, if you're fortunate to get hot during the tourney....you deserve the title. ;)
Click to expand...


I dont agree with you that there shouldnt be a class system... Yes all teams put 5 players on the court, but when you have a school with 3000 people you have WAYYY more (good players) to choose from than a school with 300. I know in Alabama, a 1a team would NEVER beat a 6A team in basketball or football. This year my high school JOJ was average. In a tournament JOJ had to play SKYLINE... some 1a school that made it to the Final 3. JOJ beat Skyline by over 50 points. Same thing happenned when Gerald Wallace came to Huntsville and played in the Butler Tournament. They were number 2 in 4a and he was THE BEST PLAYER IN THE NATION. He scored his 50 points but they still got killed by a sub par 6a team.
 
Orginally posted by Ntelekt

Just for clarification, this was the Indiana Tourney format all the way up until the 1997 season.
After that, they started suing that STUPID class system in basketball.
Click to expand...

I don't know if the clarification was for my benefit, Ntelekt, but I'm aware of the changes in the classification. I noted that the system had changed by use of the word "when".

the little school that won the Indiana State Tournament back when all of the schools in the state competed against each other for the crown regardless of size.
Click to expand...

We live a stone's throw from the Indiana line and have many connections in the Indiana cities along the Ohio/Indiana border, so we are very aware of the controversy with the change to classifications in the b-ball tourney.

I, too, wished Indiana had stayed like they were. It made for a very interesting tournament and was unique. I understand the arguement that the bigger schools could have an advantage because they had more players to choose from; but in the end, basketball is five on five and, potential depth aside, one five has to beat the other five to win. It's as simple as that. If I got the best five, I'm going to win regardless of the size of the school.

Regards.
 
Well, I can understand you feeling that way, but keep in mind...I grew up seeing EVERYBODY being able to compete in the tournament. The only class system that was used was for football.
I've seen itty bitty schools no more than 400 students make it to the semi-state championship. I've seen big azz schools from Indianapolis win the title.
True enough, the odds lay in the favor of the larger schools, but that's why the games are played. The class system may even the odds somewhat, but you STILL don't get a TRUE champion. If those class champions played a tourney amongst themselves, then we might have something...but I don't see that happen.

This way there is NO debate about who is top dog...because there is onlY ONE team left standing. Just like when my school was in the state championship game my senior year. It was the long awaited matchup pitting Glen Robinson and Gary Roosevelt against Alan Henderson and Indianapolis Brebeuf. If the class system was in place then, this heralded matchup would not have ever taken place. We won of course :D...and there was no questioning who the state champion truly was.

I feel that's how it should be. If they started a DIA basketball tournament and a separate (but supposedly equal) DIAA basketball tourney, do you think people will go for that? Probably not.
But aye...it gives the SMALLER schools a better chance to compete, right? ;)
The situations are quite similar...
 
Dr. Mac:

Naw...it wasn't necessarily for your benefit. There are OTHER people who read these threads, also...and some may assume this particular system was discontinued WAAAY BACK when Milan won the championship. ;)
It's easy for some to associate the sheer mentioning of Milan (and the fact that this happened decades ago)and the end to the all-team tournament format; I just didn't want anyone to get the wrong impression that the change existed a long time. :)


I too was pissed off when I was made aware of the change. You don't need to fix what ain't broke! :D
 
It may work in Indiana, but it would NEVER work in Alabama... the 5a or 6a team would win the state title every year.

Ntelect could you imagine Butler girls playing a 1a team in BAMA... SMH. They won the 6a state championship game by 65 points. They would have beat a 1A team by way over 100.
 
I don't see this happening. Wouldn't this downgrade the status of the tournament if every team was invited?

Are we saying a 0-25 team would also make it? I just don't see the NCAA giving a payout to a 0-25 325th seed. If not, then what teams actually receive the money which seems to be the important issue. I'm willing to bet the smaller conferencs still would not get a fair share of the pie
 
Originally posted by DAHILL
It may work in Indiana, but it would NEVER work in Alabama... the 5a or 6a team would win the state title every year.

Ntelect could you imagine Butler girls playing a 1a team in BAMA... SMH. They won the 6a state championship game by 65 points. They would have beat a 1A team by way over 100.
Click to expand...

Exactly! That's partially my point.

If you pit a Butler girl's squad against a 1A team...you would naturally think that they would beat the ISH outta them.:D

But if this 1A, WHILE competing with bigger schools in the tourney AND beating those teams....then it might not be as much of a cake calk as expected. Aye...they had to get to that championship game for a reason. ;)

In Butler's case, the bigger school ends up being the best, but isn't always the case. Think about it...have you seen some 3A champs who were better than the 5A champs?
School size doesn't automatically give you a better team...it just gives you a larger crop to choose from, which sometimes don't mean a dayum thing. :lol:

If a team can't compete against larger schools, then they don't deserve to be champion!

In Indiana, the format was like this:

Sectionals:
(a whoooole lot of sites...64 of them)

Regionals
(16 sites)

Semi-State
(4 sites:
Evansville, Fort Wayne, West Lafayette, and Indianapolis)

State Finals
(in the Hoosier/RCA Dome or Market Square Arena):

If Alabama used that format, all of the Huntsville schools (plus maybe one more) would have their own sectional.
If they make it out...cool. If they don't...oh well.

It's called survival of the fittest! :D
 
Originally posted by Jag Voice
I don't see this happening. Wouldn't this downgrade the status of the tournament if every team was invited?

Are we saying a 0-25 team would also make it? I just don't see the NCAA giving a payout to a 0-25 325th seed. If not, then what teams actually receive the money which seems to be the important issue. I'm willing to bet the smaller conferencs still would not get a fair share of the pie
Click to expand...

You're right. I'm almost certain that it won't happen. But if you think about it...the format isn't that foreign to us.

Think about it: You DO have conference tournaments, right? That means even the scrubs get a chance for post season play (except for SU and UAPB :D). If that is looked at as ONE big tourney (conference plus the 64) then you almost have it. :)


The chances of it actually taking place are almost slim to none, but it does provide something to think about.
The NCAA ain't thinking about teams who aren't making money for them, so we KNOW that the smaller schools would get screwed in the payoffs if this was ever to come to fruition.
I have no idea how you would bracket this big azz tournament, but I'd love to see somebody try it. :lol:
 
I dont think it makes much sense. The bigboys would have to split thie piece of the pie with 200 other loser schools. Why would CBS pay money to see Duke or Maryland play a 64 seed, then play a 32 seed, then a 16 seed?

I just dont see it.
 
I don't agree with letting all teams in. At the start of the conference tournament, everyone has a chance, Keep winning you are in, lose you are out. The first regional for us (not Southern) was the the SWAC tourny. <br><Br> Just think, a first round matchup between Pine Bluff (324 seed) and Maryland (1 seed ). What would be the point, just a waste of travel and time. 1 vs 16 now is a mismatch most of the time. <br><br>As far as the Indiana tourn goes, I rather the split divisions. Some of you have a "dream world" view of reality. Your 5 and my 5. Well, basketball is played with more than 5 you need a bench. And when 1 school draws from 3,000 students, they very much more likely (bad english, I know) to have a few more 6-5 + on the bench and other players that can really play where a small school (300-400) will not. Depth makes a big difference. For what, so a bunch of speculators in the stands can say, "We got one champion". In La. we got 7 classes, and you can't tell any one of the 7 that they are not state champions. 7 Teams that ended the season on top. Now some of the teams in different classification play each other during the season or in tournaments, so you can still get bigtime matchups. I say let 7 teams full of kids be champions and let the old folks in the stands talk. Also, most large schools have more resources.
 
Although technically speaking every team does get a shot at the NCAA tourney when they began play in their conference tourney, fairness with respect to the number of chances teams have to win the NCAA tourney becomes the point with the current selection process. What I mean by this is that due to the current at-large selection process, upwards of 4 to 5 teams from some conferences which did not win their tourney's championship get a second shot at winning the NCAA touney. We only get one chance; that being if we win our tourney.

I advocate letting everybody in, in part, because doing this will give all of the the schools an equal number of chances, one, to win the whole thing.

As far as the financial impact, teams make increasing amounts of money for their schools as the team advances. That wouldn't change. And since most conferences have a form of revenue sharing for the schools in their conference that make the tourney anyway, they are already effectively (with some exceptions) splitting the proceeds from their tourney appearance with their member schools. So splitting the NCAA tourney pot with all of the schools in D-I might not result in a school receiving that much more or less than it does currently.

I think opening the tourney up to all of the teams has more of a chance of becoming reality than we might think it does.

Regards.
 
Originally posted by Lewis
As far as the Indiana tourn goes, I rather the split divisions. Some of you have a "dream world" view of reality. Your 5 and my 5. Well, basketball is played with more than 5 you need a bench. And when 1 school draws from 3,000 students, they very much more likely (bad english, I know) to have a few more 6-5 + on the bench and other players that can really play where a small school (300-400) will not. Depth makes a big difference. For what, so a bunch of speculators in the stands can say, "We got one champion". In La. we got 7 classes, and you can't tell any one of the 7 that they are not state champions. 7 Teams that ended the season on top. Now some of the teams in different classification play each other during the season or in tournaments, so you can still get bigtime matchups. I say let 7 teams full of kids be champions and let the old folks in the stands talk. Also, most large schools have more resources.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that one.

I mean, the "supposed" 1A Champ may not even be included in the top 10 teams in the state...they're just top "for their size". Bump that! A true champion is the way to go. Yeah...you need more than 5...okay. Hell, you can say NINE then! :p Basketball is not like football in terms of having more of a crop to choose from. Dream world or not, I've seen itty bitty schools kick azz on the court. It's all about quality not quantity, right? ;) Larger crop to choose from doesn't instantaneously give you automatic success, but yes...it can help.

The fact remains, it's all about a TRUE champion....not necessarily "one" champ. SEVEN champions in ONE state??? If that's the way you like it....oh well. :lol:
Different strokes for different folks. :)
 

Click here to visit HBCUSportsShop
I know basketball is big in Indiana, but that process just wouldnt work in Alabama. The 1a-4a would never win state against the 6a and 5a schools. Most of the times they play in lil holiday tournaments and the score is lopsided. Next year ALL Huntsville schools besides Grissom, move down to 5a. I PROMISE you the state champion will be from Huntsville from now on. I just look at my high school. JOJ was average in 6a and dominated 5a with the same damn team only a year after moving down. JOJ came in 3rd place in the Huntsville City(filled with 6a teams) but advanced to Elight 8 in 5a coming ONE missed free throw away from the Final Four.... You may not agree but there is a big difference in class, IF you are dealing with public schools. Now schools like St Jude in the gump, Parkway Christian (rod grizzard) are small schools that are allowed to recruit and those are a different story.
 
I PROMISE you the state champion will be from Huntsville from now on.
Click to expand...
:smh:

Huntsville bball must be light years ahead of the whole state for you to make a PROMISE like that.


My .02

I don't think class differences make that big a difference in bball, as opposed to football. It's not inconceivable that a small school can have 5 good players that could beat a large school. I can think of several here in GA. Heck, even back when I was in high school (many, many years ago), my AA school used to regularly beat AAAA (the largest class) schools.
 
I can understand that.

I haven't followed Indiana football like I used to, so I'm not sure how it would be if they didn't have the class system (probably the same as in Bama).

But as far as Indiana hoops goes, like in the Gary Holiday tournaments, the lesser teams would step up and it was always down to the wire (at least it was back in da day).

But I guess it all depends on the area. To be honest, I don't think Indiana basketball is nearly as strong as it used to be. :(
 
I mean, the "supposed" 1A Champ may not even be included in the top 10 teams in the state...they're just top "for their size". Bump that! A true champion is the way to go. Yeah...you need more than 5...
Click to expand...
Just my point, just so some old fart like you can say what you said you will send 6 teams home losers after playing with the deck stacked against them. No one on this board is so stupid that they can't see the difference between drawing a team from 3,000 students and 300 students. Yeah sure, every blue moon the 300 would come up with a better team, but most of the time we know would happen. Let the kids win.
 
Originally posted by Lewis
Just my point, just so some old fart like you can say what you said you will send 6 teams home losers after playing with the deck stacked against them. No one on this board is so stupid that they can't see the difference between drawing a team from 3,000 students and 300 students. Yeah sure, every blue moon the 300 would come up with a better team, but most of the time we know would happen. Let the kids win.
Click to expand...

Shut up, dude...you can't change my mind! :D

Big school or not, having all those different classes in basketball is silly TO ME. ;) Yeah, every blue moon you have the itty bitties winnin' thangs, but aye...that counts. That's why they play the game, right?

The only sport where multi-class system seems necessary to ME is football.
Basketball doesn't need it...
Track doesn't need it...
Table hockey doesn't need it...

You have your opinion and I have mine...and think the class system should have it's limits...case closed.
I wouldn't expect you to feel me...you're used to SEVEN classes, anyway. :lol:

It's all good...but dang. :p
 
Cant agree with you in track either... Grissom High in Huntsville is a prime example.... They have about 100 people on their track team. They put 4 people in every event. Wont win NOTHING, but still win state every year.
 
Originally posted by DAHILL
Cant agree with you in track either... Grissom High in Huntsville is a prime example.... They have about 100 people on their track team. They put 4 people in every event. Wont win NOTHING, but still win state every year.
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm more adamant about it in track.
A small school can have one stellar athlete who wins his event at state...but that's the only points his team gets, and it's all good. Hell...that's kinda like in the Olympics! :D

Well...my school was a track POWERHOUSE in the MIDWEST (not just in Indiana). Gary Roosevelt High School won state from 1980 to 1989...and one year, they won state with only FOUR people!!!
No it wasn't a low scoring meet...it's just they kicked azz in the sprints, hurdles and relays. With There were times when our boys AND girls won state....against those HUGE schools in Indianapolis. :eek:
When our boys streak faded, another Gary school picked up where they left off...for a minute. ;)
But with track being more of an individual sport, more of the focus is placed on excelling in your specific events.

Illinois was kickin' butt too, but I noticed that they had 2 classes: Class A and Class AA. It was kinda weird to see the Class A champ in the 100M run a 10.97, but seeing the 5TH place sprinter in AA run a 10.8. :lol:
It's almost not fair for someone to not be nearly as fast as you be declared "champion", but you better that person and STILL not placing. That aspect is what bothers me about classes

But I do feel you on the Grissom thing. Valparaiso High School was KNOWN for having a million people on their team and placing high at state. It's all about the points, so I can't fault them for that. But aye...you don't say nothing when the US squads have a lot of people in every event, do you? ;)

High school track is a perfect example of my point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top