In Today’s Game, Should there Be Automatic Qualifiers?

[Puppy Love]

I’ve been thinking about this a bit… In today’s game, does it still make sense to have automatic qualifiers? On the upside, it gives every team at least some hope that they could make the tournament just by winning their league tournament. On the downside, it makes most games in the early rounds terribly lopsided and non-competitive. One possibility would be to split the tournament in half and let the small leagues compete against each other. I know that’s not really practical because sometimes a small league can produce is a really great team. Would it be better to say that a team has to have a minimum standing in the NET in order to qualify? I’m interested in hearing your opinions.

 

[undersized]

The autobids are what make this tournament special.

 

[Geew1992]

Keep the autobids. Look at the men's tournament. They've had 16 seeds win. Makes it fun. Anything is possible especially the way the game is growing

 

[geordi]

Not only should there be automatic qualifiers, the field should be reduced to 64. Having an automatic qualification effectively makes the conference tournaments part of the overall NCAA tournament - the first weekend so to speak. That being said, there are effectively 362 (?) teams entered in the tournament, each one with a chance to win the national championship. They just have to win 6 or 7 games overall. Some teams, by virtue of their scope of work throughout the season, simply get 2 chances.

 

[Rb335]

I see both sides. The auto qualifiers make the conference tournaments carry more weight, especially for smaller conferences or teams that go on a Cinderella run.

But I can see the intrigue of the NCAA tournament being the 64 best teams in the nation. First round matchups would be less lopsided, but only for the top seeded teams. And those teams should be winning anyways.

Maybe someday, the depth on the women’s side will match the men’s, and you’ll see more frequent upsets of the top 3 seeds in round one. But for now, those type of upsets are more like once a decade.

 

[BRS24]

What if you had both? Teams that win conference regular season, and if different, teams that win conf tourneys? A team could fly thru the regular season and then have one bad game and poof, there goes your bid, unless you are from a conference deemed high ranking.

 

[Vowelguy]

In this era with the P2 attempting to gobble everything up, No One should be suggesting that limiting access of lesser schools is a good idea.

Otherwise we are just headed towards a Division 1A with the BiG and SEC only, and everyone else in 1AA.

 

[maple]

AQ are sometimes the only thing these smaller conferences have to play for. Just making the tournament (even if they know they'll be blown out of the water) is a special memory these kids will cherish forever. At the end of the day it's about giving young women and men a chance to experience something once in a lifetime.

And besides, NO ONE knows what will happen once the tournament starts. It's not like the world of WBB has never had major tourney upsets. You have to play the game.

Taking that away would be beyond stupid.

 

[nwhoopfan]

While AQ allow a few really weak teams into the Tourney, we don't need another dozen or more mediocre to worse than mediocre P5 teams getting in. In softball and baseball it's not uncommon for all but 1 or 2 SEC teams to get included. Does anyone want that in basketball?

 

[Alydar]

Each conference decides whether their automatic qualifier is the regular season champ or the tournament champ.
There should always be path for a cinderella team that caught fire late in the season. .

 

[Bigboote]

I think the autobids should stay. Not only that, I think conference winners shouldn't be in play-in games. They get bids to the tournament, not bids to try to get into the tournament.

 

[FridaFriend]

I like the autobids, especially, as suggested, that we don't need a bunch more of mediocre P5 teams.

 

[dabears17]

The autobids are what make this tournament special.

My wife grew up in Poughkeepsie, so seeing Marist in person at Maples beat Ohio State and then Middle Tennessee to make the Sweet 16 as the 3rd 13 seed to do in 2007 was pretty special.

 

[From France]

As i think, a conference shouldn't have more than 5 representing, It would give mid majors a better chance to have ot the regular season and tournament champions in.

I'm sorry but when I see 9 teams from the same conference in, I feel it's just for money and disrespect for the outside P5 (soon to be P4) conferences.

If it continues that way, the WNIT should be played before NCAAA T and the top 4 being auto qualified as # 16

I am not sure there is a way to be equal but there should not be more than 5 teams from the same conference.

 

[From France]

And since NCAA created the NET, it should at least serve to name te top 16, at least. Otherwise it doesn't mean anything.

 

[GamecockFam]

I like having the autobids. Up to this point, not higher than a 3-seed has won the women's tournament, so there could be an argument made that the tournament should only consist of the top 16 teams. With that said, the tournament is greater than competing to become a national champion, it is an experience for these college students and a reward for winning their conference tournaments. I say let's keep it the way it is.

 

[From France]

I agree with the auto-qualifiers, but putting a rule that no more than 5 from the same conference would serve mid-majors. How the thell can the # 9 in P4 conference prevail on a mid major regular champion that lost in its conference tournament ?
It is JUST money not sports !

 

[From France]

And for me Massey, BPI, NET, HerHoopsStats rankings are way more right than the AP/USA Today polls

 

[From France]

Yes, ALL the conferences tournament champions should be in

 

[From France]

As should be all the conferences regular champions

 

[JellyBean]

Yes. There should be automatic qualifiers in today's game.

 

[From France]

I you wanna play a separate Power 4 championship, then take the decision, but I think it would be ridiculous

 

[From France]

if "March Madness" is the nickname of the tournament is beacuse everything can happen, I wouldn't change this for anything

 

[Gate81]

Other angle to it, is then who decides what is a lesser conference? Adding an arbitrary/subjective factor to this equation could have unintended consequences especially if you think you're not in one but others think you are. Big East?

 

[Forego]

I’ve been thinking about this a bit… In today’s game, does it still make sense to have automatic qualifiers? On the upside, it gives every team at least some hope that they could make the tournament just by winning their league tournament. On the downside, it makes most games in the early rounds terribly lopsided and non-competitive. One possibility would be to split the tournament in half and let the small leagues compete against each other. I know that’s not really practical because sometimes a small league can produce is a really great team. Would it be better to say that a team has to have a minimum standing in the NET in order to qualify? I’m interested in hearing your

Essentially, the split you are recommending will be implemented when the NCAA expands the tournament to 96 (and ultimately128) teams. This will permit the regular season conference champions (from the nonpower conferences) and the conference tournament champions to be selected to the field. This should also permit the selection of more power conference teams as “at large” seeds to accommodate the super-sized power conferences. Personally, I do not like the idea to expand the tournament but it will happen because of the money it will make.