Quote:
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar
Of course there's no perfect system, but March Madness/NFL playoffs/etc give all high-level teams a chance. You can't say that there are only 4 high level teams in CFB each year. Therefore, terrible format. Especially given all the inherent biases.
In CBB, you don't lose your chance at a nat'l championship because your star player misses a game in the regular season, or because of a tough early season loss when you weren't playing your best ball. Or because some idiots just don't perceive you to be on the level of a few other teams.
UCLA is actually a better example of my point than yours. Here was a team that finished with a few more losses than the top teams (a couple of which were very fluky losses under wild circumstances) and they were perceived to play in a weak conference, so they were given an 11 seed by a subjective committee. Turned out the Pac-12 was far better than people realized and they dominated the tourney, with a lot of convincing wins over much higher-seeded teams. They were a way underrated conference and they proved it. And the best of them was UCLA. If not for a half-court prayer at the buzzer (vs one of the best teams in recent years), they'd have played for a national title. Anyone who says that UCLA didn't deserve to be there is foolish.
Now let's imagine if CBB used the same system as CFB. Last year's playoff selection would have been Gonzaga, Baylor, Arizona and KU. Only one of them even reached their regional final. Are you telling me that Baylor would have deserved it more than UNC? Baylor was a shell of what they were early on. And by any metric, UNC was playing as well as any team in the nation for the last month of the season. That SHOULD matter a lot more than what happened early in the year. You shouldn't be penalized for peaking at the right time. They mowed through the tourney field and had KU down 15 at halftime of the nat'l title game. Yet, in a 4-team playoff, they would have been about the 30th team considered.
And Duke was probably the most talented team in the country, yet they wouldn't have made the cut either. Gonzaga was an overrated team that was there more due to reputation than achievements. And Arizona was another slightly overrated team that feasted on a fairly weak schedule.
A four team system is a joke. Period. For a thousand reasons.
|
Wasn’t advocating for college basketball to use the same system. Just pointing out that no system is perfect and each has their own inherent flaws. I think they should have kept CBB at 64 and quit watering it down by adding teams. Just makes it more likely that the best teams won’t be there in the end.
And I think college football is perfect with a 4 team playoff, but of course the NCAA has to go and **** that up too (expanding to 12 by 2026) so I guess you’re getting your wish there.