Yes, I believe they are biased to the extent that they want to keep ESPN happy. ESPN puts a lot into their SEC Network and what better way to get advertising returns than having those teams be successful. I realize they own other networks but the SEC Network is obviously big to them. I don't think the committee would leave a deserving team out over this, but seeding, yes I believe ESPN has an influence.
"They."
It would be a question I would like to see ESPN put to the committee chairman. "Who sets the P & P's?
Oh brother.
Teams with winning conference records only?
Until this year any team that didn't have a winning conference record couldn't qualify unless they won the their Conference tournament. This year they are using COVID as an excuse to get some in like Mississippi State, Washington St, and North Carolina. All Power 5 Conference teams. I don't think that they should just change the rules to let some more P5 schools, there a some good Mid-Majors that will be left out that should be in it.
Let me rephrase. The concept of an S curve is not new, but the constant referencing to it in NCAA Tourneys (especially women's; men's may have preceded it) seems like a relatively new development to me.
I'm pretty sure this year they are considering teams w/ less than .500 records overall. There have been many, many teams with losing records in conference who did not win their conference tournament included in the field over the years.
Dunno about that. Men's tournament have been using it for years, and the women's tournament basically followed the men's rules, with a few exceptions for geography/attendance.
Where are you getting that from? Almost 100% sure that has never been the case.
I'm positive it's not correct. I'm sure you can find many SEC teams that had sub .500 conference records that got in. An example of a team I don't even need to look up to confirm, Ionescu's Fr. season the Ducks were 8-10 in the Pac 12, they did not win their conference tourney, but they managed to advance to the Elite 8 in the NCAA Tourney that year.
Many many many times. Grew up in central Texas, went to Texas A&M. Have family in Waco. Still at 5 out of 10. Sorry man.
Arkansas throws a wrench in this for me. I think they’re much better than their record shows. They just seem to be inconsistent at times.
290 miles through Fort Worth & the 135 merge in Denton. Ticket traps at the border [both sides] and in Norman. Never ending construction in Denton, Ardmore, Paul’s Valley, Norman & Moore. But you are the one person to do it in under 4 hours. LOL. Dream on. I drive it every week both ways. Not happening.
If Arkansas ends up with a losing Conference record they don't deserve to make it, they're 7-6 with 2 games left, @Auburn on Thursday and Alabama on Sunday at home. They should win both, but shouldn't lose both so they should be okay.
Thanks. I predicted to a friend that you would be the first to argue with me. Got a chicken fried steak dinner out of that.
UConn’s men have a similar counterpoint. They won the national championship after a 9-9 conference season. They won the BE Tournament anyway, but before they got an auto bid they won a tournament in Maui over Michigan State and Kentucky and won at Texas, all of which were in the top 10. The Big East was exceptionally strong that year, so 9-9 wasn’t so bad (although diappointing), but one more close loss making them 8-10 wouldn‘t make them less capable of a championship.
Oh yes, white gravy, with fries, black-eyed peas and cornbread. And sweet tea.
Fries? Ugh.
Having travelled down south frequently, I can attest that you'all have some good and tasty grub down there!.
Until recently, lived in McKinney, Tx, north of Dallas, and covered this geography for 10+ years. Have I made the trip from Waco to Ok City many times. Trip Advisor advises that it is a 4 1/2 trip. If I had an important appointment or social event (i.e. basketball game?) to go to, I would give myself 6 hours. Traffic in Dallas is often horrific.
How many top 10 teams has UConn beaten? One. And it was SC in OT. What’s your point?
Most years honestly there's probably 3-4 teams tops that are actually playing for the Title. Maybe 10 or so in an unusual year like this one. Doesn't mean teams should be excluded since they aren't Title worthy. There's a whole bunch of mid major conferences, should we exclude the winners of most of those?
A double elimination tournament, with far fewer teams would generate more exciting games and fewer champions who benefited from not having to play the strongest teams. One and done is an exciting format but can produce an unlikely winner.
So, what is your point?