How do people feel about the BE banning UConn from the BET next year?

[DogMania]

What do people think about the BE banning UConn from the BET? I haven't heard a lot of people bat this one around. I realize they added a new rule that if you're not eligible for the NCAA-T you won't be eligible for the BET, but isn't there room for UConn to ask for and be granted a waiver? Or has that already been done and rejected as well?

I can understand if a team is banned due to recruiting violations and such, but if we are bad-ass mad at the NCAA for what they're doing when the current players seem to be all excelling in the classroom, why aren't we pissed at the BE? I realize this opens the door to the conference having to give up their automatic bid if UConn wins the BET, but is that good enough reason for penalizing the players and fans even further?

If taking ships and post season away isn't close to a death sentence (a term used in the past with programs that were penalized in a similar fashion), I don't know what is.

I don't know about you, but I feel like the NCAA and BE has violated my fandom. I can accept the program a fan roots for being penalized appropriately for proven violations, but this just seems like excessive piling on laced with hidden and not so hidden agendas.

I guess at some point we all have to accept what we perceive as an injustice. It's simply a part in many aspects of life. I must admit, I'm usually a forgiving man and realize that holding back forgiveness can cause more pain than it's worth. But in this case, I'm not about to accept our fate and on some level will continue to go down swinging, which is what I hope UConn does till it exhausts all it's avenues.

 

[nomar]

I think it's great

 

[caw]

What do people think about the BE banning UConn from the BET? I haven't heard a lot of people bat this one around. I realize they added a new rule that if you're not eligible for the NCAA-T you won't be eligible for the BET, but isn't there room for UConn to ask for and be granted a waiver? Or has that already been done and rejected as well?

I can understand if a team is banned due to recruiting violations and such, but if we are bad-ass mad at the NCAA for what they're doing when the current players seem to be all excelling in the classroom, why aren't we pissed at the BE? I realize this opens the door to the conference having to give up their automatic bid if UConn wins the BET, but is that good enough reason for penalizing the players and fans even further?

If taking ships and post season away isn't close to a death sentence (a term used in the past with programs that were penalized in a similar fashion), I don't know what is.

I don't know about you, but I feel like the NCAA and BE has violated my fandom. I can accept the program a fan roots for being penalized appropriately for proven violations, but this just seems like excessive piling on laced with hidden and not so hidden agendas.

I guess at some point we all have to accept what we perceive as an injustice. It's simply a part in many aspects of life. I must admit, I'm usually a forgiving man and realize that holding back forgiveness can cause more pain than it's worth. But in this case, I'm not about to accept our fate and on some level will continue to go down swinging, which is what I hope UConn does till it exhausts all it's avenues.

If it were solely about UConn I would agree, they could have instituted a rule saying the second place team could get the automatic bid if the winner was not eligible.

However, going forward there could be multiple teams that are ineligible and then the BE could forfeit the automatic bid if the finals (or even final 4) were all ineligible. Really it had to be done.

 

[DogMania]

If it were solely about UConn I would agree, they could have instituted a rule saying the second place team could get the automatic bid if the winner was not eligible.

However, going forward there could be multiple teams that are ineligible and then the BE could forfeit the automatic bid if the finals (or even final 4) were all ineligible. Really it had to be done.

Really?!?! Good thing our legal system doesn't work that way. That's not to say our legal system doesn't have it's problems. They make room for extenuating circumstances and reduced sentences. So the BE has to exact the highest penalty no matter what because they are concerned about precedence. I've always hated rulings that are predominantly based on precedence. I was part of a board back in the day that had members that simply ruled with that in mind all the time. Who cares if the players don't deserve that fate. Screw 'em!

I think our conference which represents not only the institutional members but also the students should take a close look at who would be impacted the most and consider if those people really deserve that fate.

I doubt that any one of you can convince me to see it otherwise. If one of the other programs was in our situation, I would want them to be able to play in the BET even if it meant that they could end up knocking UConn out of getting a NCAA bid. If my program wasn't good enough to beat them or at least be good enough to be one of the 68 teams, then so be it. I just don't get it. If one of the eligible teams can't beat one of the NCAA tournament ineligible teams for the championship so be it. Is that more harmful than preventing an entire team that has excelled at what was expected from even participating in their conference tournament? I don't think so!!!!

 

[caw]

Really?!?! Good thing our legal system doesn't work that way. That's not to say our legal system doesn't have it's problems. They make room for extenuating circumstances and reduced sentences. So the BE has to exact the highest penalty no matter what because they are concerned about precedence. I've always hated rulings that are predominantly based on precedence. I was part of a board back in the day that had members that simply ruled with that in mind all the time. Who cares if the players don't deserve that fate. Screw 'em!

I think our conference which represents not only the institutional members but also the students should take a close look at who would be impacted the most and consider if those people really deserve that fate.

I doubt that any one of you can convince me to see it otherwise. If one of the other programs was in our situation, I would want them to be able to play in the BET even if it meant that they could end up knocking UConn out of getting a NCAA bid. If my program wasn't good enough to beat them or at least be good enough to be one of the 68 teams, then so be it. I just don't get it. If one of the eligible teams can't beat one of the NCAA tournament ineligible teams for the championship so be it. Is that more harmful than preventing an entire team that has excelled at what was expected from even participating in their conference tournament? I don't think so!!!!

It is what it is. If they change the years used across the board there could be multiple teams ineligible for the NCAAT next year in the BE. Even if they don't change them that is still possible. Have to wait and see what the 2010-2011 official scores are.

Don't get me wrong, I would prefer the BE didn't have to do this, but I understand why they did (assuming it wasn't petty jealousy).

 

[Husky Dad]

Its bullshit. The BE blows for this one.

 

[Gurleyman]

I've always thought conferences should keep teams ineligible for the postseason out of their tournaments, so that the automatic bid doesn't get wasted on a team that can't use it. Would be hypocritical of me to criticize the decision.

 

[Ts5034]

I think this was the decision the Big East had to make. If UConn ever won the BET next year then that would be one hell of a circus. The conference gets an automatic bid no matter what and if we won the BET then there really is no fair way to figure out who the team is tht would get the bid.

 

[prankster]

I believe that the issue of fairness in terms of the BET and its automatic bid needs to be considered. And it goes beyond simply letting the mantle fall to the team that comes in second....

For every team that a post-season-inelegible team beats, that is a team that has lost its chance.....at the hands of a team that has no chance....

There is a fairness argment to be made there.

 

[DogMania]

I've always thought conferences should keep teams ineligible for the postseason out of their tournaments, so that the automatic bid doesn't get wasted on a team that can't use it. Would be hypocritical of me to criticize the decision.

It's not hypocrisy to change your mind if you see it differently as long as it's based on something other than, it's now affecting "my team".

Now everyone has a right to their opinion. If you still feel this way, so be it. As I said before, if this same scenario happened to any other program in the BE, I'd hope that the NCAA would not ban them from the BET. Even as much as I hate certain programs, I don't see this as fair to the players. They're the ones the BE is not allowing to participate like their fellow BE basketball players are permitted to do so. In fact, you're going to likely see next spring an entire team that has achieved higher in the classroom over the past 3 years than to some other teams that will be in the BET. Really! How is that fair!

This might not be a good comparison, but imagine if someone tells you, although you've received all A's the past 3 years, we're not going to let you get your diploma because the classes 3 and 4 years ago did poorly. Too bad! Suck it up!

A player earns his opportunity to play in the BET because he took care of business in the classroom and on the court. IMO, the NCAA and the Conferences need to find a way to penalize the guilty and not the innocent. One way they can do this is with money, especially since we are seeing program and conference decisions being made for money reasons. If they feel that the coaching staff, the athletic department and/or the entire institution is at fault then hit 'em where it hurts most. Take away some significant NCAA and Conference earnings, which a lot is TV money. You do that a few times, and you can bet some institutions are going to kick their ADs, Coaches, and others to the curb if they don't change their ways of doing things. Money has a way of doing that. To punish the players, and in this instant, an entire team that is actually excelling in the area that they are being penalized for over 2 years now and will be close to 3 by the time the tournaments come around, seems grossly unjust.

 

[DogMania]

I believe that the issue of fairness in terms of the BET and its automatic bid needs to be considered. And it goes beyond simply letting the mantle fall to the team that comes in second....

For every team that a post-season-inelegible team beats, that is a team that has lost its chance.....at the hands of a team that has no chance....

There is a fairness argment to be made there.

I don't agree. If a team didn't do enough during the regular season to make the NCAA and happens to lose to a team, in this case that is made up entirely of players who didn't do anything wrong, it's their own fault. Win more f'ng games! It's called the Big East Tournament, not the NCAA Entrance Tournament. It's to battle for the winner of their conference tournament. Why should a rule and decision that bans a program from an NCAA event, one that many feel is unjust in the first place, have precedence over the conference's tournament. I don't know how far back the BET goes, but in a lot of sports these tournaments weren't designed to determine who gets an automatic bid to some national tournament. It was to determine which team can win the end of the season conference tournament.

It's like the US government saying since this senator from your state got impeached, we're not going to let any candidates from his district run for that state senator's spot. He must come from some other district. I don't care if those candidates (replace with current UConn student athletes) didn't do anything wrong or are even proving to be worthy candidates. Because the idiot we just impeached comes from that district, all those candidates are not allowed to run for that state election.

Yeah, the above isn't an exact equivalent, since the senator spot would still get filled by someone from that state while in the case with UConn, if they were to win the BET, it could prevent a program who's only chance to get in would have been by winning the BET, but what are the chances that scenario would take place.

For whatever reason, I'm okay to some degree if the team was being held out because of some major recruiting and illegal benefits violations, even if no such violations are tied back to the current players. That s*cks, but to some degree, I can live with that. But in this case where none of the members of the team were culpable for these academic shortcomings and most of the team will have 2 to 3 years of solid APR, it just reeks of injustice and the conference should grant UConn a waver and just live with the possibility that UConn could take away a chance for some program who's regular season results were lacking. I can understand if that happened to my team, I'd be upset.

In fact, I was a little ticked at SU for beating us with what they clearly knew at the time was an ineligible player in Melo. Without him, UConn probably beats SU and who knows how deep they would have gone in the BET and the NCAA to that matter with a likely better seed. In that case they beat us with a player that clearly should not have been on the floor. SU was rewarded a #1 seed thanks to what an ineligible player had done for them just about all season long.

I'd like to think that I would be able to sit back and see the big picture and not want that entire team that deserved to play in the BET to be forced to miss it even it it meant my team not getting into the NCAA by losing to them.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I've always thought conferences should keep teams ineligible for the postseason out of their tournaments, so that the automatic bid doesn't get wasted on a team that can't use it. Would be hypocritical of me to criticize the decision.

Do you honestly believe that the BE needs the auto bid?

 

[DogMania]

Do you honestly believe that the BE needs the auto bid?

Wow! Great Point and concisely said, too.

 

[Gurleyman]

Do you honestly believe that the BE needs the auto bid?

The majority of the time, no. But it is still there as a carrot for the teams that don't have at-large resumes. It's just something that I've always said should be cut and dry - the tournament is played for the automatic bid, so if you can't accept the bid, then you shouldn't be there. Sucks that we're the team in that position, but my only rationale for reversing my opinion would be that it's different if it affects my team.

 

[prankster]

In fact, I was a little ticked at SU for beating us with what they clearly knew at the time was an ineligible player in Melo. Without him, UConn probably beats SU and who knows how deep they would have gone in the BET and the NCAA to that matter with a likely better seed. In that case they beat us with a player that clearly should not have been on the floor. SU was rewarded a #1 seed thanks to what an ineligible player had done for them just about all season long.
That was kind of my point, but written differently....

If a particular team if seeded to play a tournament ineligible team....things happen...things that affect tournament seeding, as well as a potential automatic bid (presuming the lightning in a bottle, win it all scenario)...

Look, I am as torqued off about this whole stupid mess as anyone....but at a given level, I can understand the logic behind excluding a tournament ineligible team from the BET.

 

[Drumguy]

In fact, I was a little ticked at SU for beating us with what they clearly knew at the time was an ineligible player in Melo. Without him, UConn probably beats SU and who knows how deep they would have gone in the BET and the NCAA to that matter with a likely better seed. In that case they beat us with a player that clearly should not have been on the floor. SU was rewarded a #1 seed thanks to what an ineligible player had done for them just about all season long.
That was kind of my point, but written differently....

If a particular team if seeded to play a tournament ineligible team....things happen...things that affect tournament seeding, as well as a potential automatic bid (presuming the lightning in a bottle, win it all scenario)...

Look, I am as torqued off about this whole stupid mess as anyone....but at a given level, I can understand the logic behind excluding a tournament ineligible team from the BET.

This is not that same thing at all. The Big East should take a stand that represents fairness. Melo was ineligble but none of our players are - BIG difference.

Honestly if this is how the BE treats us I'd rather go to CUSA and just beat up on everyone and get the auto bid every year. Worked for Memphis. Screw the BE,.

 

[caw]

This is not that same thing at all. The Big East should take a stand that represents fairness. Melo was ineligble but none of our players are - BIG difference.

Honestly if this is how the BE treats us I'd rather go to CUSA and just beat up on everyone and get the auto bid every year. Worked for Memphis. Screw the BE,.

But the team is ineligible. They are being punished because the program messed up (whether the coaches/ex-coaches/ex-players/etc.) It sucks, but that's how it is. I don't blame the BE for this rule.

What will get my goat is if this rule is changed after this year, by either the NCAA or the BE, or in the NCAA's case - they update the dates used after this year (giving some teams a free pass).

 

[Drumguy]

But the team is ineligible. They are being punished because the program messed up (whether the coaches/ex-coaches/ex-players/etc.) It sucks, but that's how it is. I don't blame the BE for this rule.

What will get my goat is if this rule is changed after this year, by either the NCAA or the BE, or in the NCAA's case - they update the dates used after this year (giving some teams a free pass).

It doesn't make sense to re-punish a team under new rules when it was punished - significantly - under the old rules. Other teams have received an exception from the NCAA, we are the only team being punished under both sets of rules.

We don't all have to kowtow to the Emmert and his inane logic.

 

[caw]

It doesn't make sense to re-punish a team under new rules when it was punished - significantly - under the old rules. Other teams have received an exception from the NCAA, we are the only team being punished under both sets of rules.

We don't all have to kowtow to the Emmert and his inane logic.

Right, of course not. However, this is discussing the BE ban which is understandable based on logistics and fairness to other teams in the conference.

 

[Taco]

Banning from the BET has nothing to do with the NCAA Tourney auto bid. When was the last time a runner up didn't get an At Large? By the logic that losing to UCONN could prevent a other team from making the tourney, they should ban UCONN from the regular season as well - don't all games count the same?

 

[kobebeanbryant]

why the hell would the big east let us play in the BET? the only thing we can do is hurt the other teams in the league. fairly obvious decision by the BE if you ask me.​

 

[Drumguy]

Right, of course not. However, this is discussing the BE ban which is understandable based on logistics and fairness to other teams in the conference.

I don't agree with your logic. It's not our current players who caused the apr ban nor are any ineligible. The Big East should take a stand to protect it's members. If I was in charge of the BE I would refuse to let any of the Big East teams into the NCAA tournament next year unless the NCAA acts reasonably and takes into account the new apr for the new rules.

There's no reason the NCAA is being unfair so it has to be a direct retaliation for whatever slight Emmert feels against us. It's just not logical to single out and punish UConn.

 

[Kevin Caliendo]

I can understand why the BE decided to do it. if they create a precedent with Uconn, they would have to do in in any sport and thus risk at at-large bid

Here is why it sucks. The BET is reall the only thing that the BE does right. ITs a great event, it captures the city and remains meaningful when every other conference tourney is garbage. 2013 was basically going to be the last relevent Big East tourney ever. Syracuse and Pitt gone after that, Louisville too...no one will care about the remaining teams/matchups. It's over.Memphis v GTown? whoo hoo. Now no Uconn in 2013?

I'm happy I went this past year. Last vestige of a great event

 

[Huskies4ever]

Right, of course not. However, this is discussing the BE ban which is understandable based on logistics and fairness to other teams in the conference.

Syracuse was banned from the NCAA tourney in 1993 and not the Big East tourney, where they lost in the finals. It was a different era then: less parity, mid majors rarely got to the sweet sixteen, Big East was smaller and only 3 teams made it to the dance.

 

[Gregory Koch]

The Pac-12 banned USC from its championship game since they were ineligible. UCLA went instead and got walloped by Oregon. So you can't really use your UConn persecution theory on this one. Sorry.
And I think it's perfectly logical. UConn has a postseason ban, so this should include the whole postseason. If you disagree on the postseason ban, that is reasonable, but that really isn't the Big East's fault. It's a good policy. As long as they don't selectively enforce it and allow 'Cuse in if/when they get a postseason ban. Also, suppose we did let it fall to the team that came in second if an ineligible team won. Suppose we were to then face Syracuse (for the sake of argument) in the title game next year. Would that game mean anything at all? Why even bother playing it? One way or the other, Syracuse is going to get the auto bid, so who really cares? Do they have anything to play for? Do we? Plus, suppose semifinal #1 is us vs. Louisville and semifinal two is 'Cuse vs. Georgetown. Also suppose the UConn-Louisville game is first (i.e. the 7:00 PM game and SU-GU is the 9:30 game). We beat Louisville in the first game, let's say. Isn't 'Cuse - Georgetown now effectively acting as the championship game? Whoever wins that game is getting the auto-bid regardless of whether they beat us. In fact, the Orange or Hoyas could very well wind up with the auto-bid in spite of only winning two games (if they then lose to us). On the other hand, Louisville (or whoever's on our side) would have to win at least 3. Ridiculously, that means that if we get the 3-seed, the 4 seed could potentially only win two games, but the #2 seed would need to win three. That is not fair at all. It really creates a lot of issues.