Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="FfldCntyFan, post: 4915303, member: 71"] This is the stuff that pisses me off beyond end. When they first moved beyond 64 (when the 16 member WAC split into the WAC & Mountain West) the reasoning was that they couldn't take away any automatic bids from a lesser conference. Obviously the idea of taking away an at large, that almost assuredly would go to a member of a power conference was never a possibility. The play-in games that they've refused to call play-in games deprive some schools of the actual experience, which is entirely bullspit. The champion of the Big Sky, the MEAC, etc should be part of the 64 team field that begins play on the Thursday after selections Sunday. That school did everything it was required to do (win it's confreence's autobid) while being afforded one opportunity. The last school from one of the power conferences to receive an at large bid had countless opportunities to earn its way into the field and failed nearly all of them. If one of those schools still needs the opportunity to be part of the NCAA tournament, they should be playing in Dayton against a school with a similar claim. Yes, they did a (surprinsingly) good thing when they went to four of these games by having the final at large teams participate in two of them but they really should have the final eight at large do this. They also should have only at large bids play these games once they expand. I know an eleven seed from the SEC or B-12 will more likley make it through a few rounds than the one representative of any of the bottome five or six conferences. That isn't the point. Abelene Christian, Coppin St, Mercer, Valparaiso, Oral Roberts, Richmond, Hampton, Norfolk St, St Peters, Cleveland St, Middle Tennessee, Fairleigh Dickenson and UMBC are as much of the fabric of this tournament as shots by Laetner or Suggs. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach