Banter Message Board

EC GrapeApe

Joined: 1/1/16 Posts: 1626
Likes: 1109

Not that it makes me hate it, but the downside is a significantly increased

Likelihood of long-distance 2nd weekend travel. Look no further than our recent D1 projection..... with a SR paired against Oregon St.

Whether or not it makes the path easier will be up for debate based on each team’s circumstances..... but it is a nice gesture towards being “fair”, granted when you’re dealing in an inexact science, “fair” is relative term.

Look at us for an example...... 51 games in and now the next 6/7 games can realistically result in us ending up anywhere between #7/8 overall and #20 overall. The margin is that thin. With that being the case...... is seeding 9-16 really accomplishing that much???..... especially when (if we finish in 12-14 range) the difference for us is something like drawing uNC-ch/Clemson/UGA(in the regional model) vs potentially ending up with Oregon St or Stanford(in the seeded model). When the margin is that thin, I’m not completely sold that it’s benefiical to all involved (especially the fans) for the likelihood of long-distance travel on very short notice to be increased in the name of being “fair”.

The obvious rebuttal is that someone always has to go West....... to which I would reply that is correct, but that “someone” was almost always one of weaker of the 9-16 group anyway and there were usually only a few teams required to make looooong distance travel every year(without upsets).

I would submit that if the most “fair” was the intent, the best option would be to completely re-drawn the bracket after the first weekend to pair the best left vs the worst left(and so on). Right now it just feels like the NCAA is trying to ride two horses at the same time.......

(In response to this post by ECPirate89)

Posted: 05/16/2018 at 09:32AM


Insert a Link

Enter the title of the link here:

Enter the full web address of the link here -- include the "http://" part:

Current Thread:

Support BYB: Shop at Amazon!