Bradley AD to serve on Selection Committee Starting Next Yea

[AndShock]

http://www.mvc-sports.com/news/2018/3/9 ... ittee.aspx

Great for Bradley, the MVC and mid-majors in general. It’s been generally accepted that Wichita State doesn’t get into the tournament in 2016 had we not had a former AD on the committee.

[Mikovio]

Awesome! Love Chris, class all the way!

And you thought ISU Red was upset about getting left out before lol

[BEARZ77]

While it's nice that Bradley and the MVC has representation on the committee, nothing better illustrates the bias and unfair nature of the selection process than the committee makeup. There are 347 D-1 Teams, 32 conferences, and roughly 4,511 players. Yet traditionally the committee is dominated by P-5+1 members in a severely disproportionate ratio. The P5+1 conferences have only 21.6% of the total D-1 teams, and only 18.75% of the total number of conferences and similarly represent roughly 20% of D-1 basketball players, and yet in the current committee have 50% of the membership including the chair. I think it should be an established mandate that the committee has to reflect the makeup of the D-1 teams and conferences it represents in it's memberships. Secondly as we can see clearly in this years process, there needs to be some general OBJECTIVE criteria established on how teams are assessed and graded that does not automatically rule out 70 % of the members and sets up an unequal playing field. Simple criteria that would still allow for the fact the Bigs play in tougher conferences, but does not set it up where that alone accounts for the most influence. I don't know how you can justify a team being below .500 in their conference who doesn't win their Tourney being in the field. The Tournament should be about answering some questions as well as defining a champion. I don't need to see the 8th place team from the SEC; there's no mystery there, they've played against top teams and lost more times than they won. The question that the Tourney needs to answer is whether the 2nd place team or league champion who lost in their conference Tourney from the MVC/USA etc is better than the 5th or 6th place team from the SEC. That's the game we aren't getting except rarely and the questions that should be being answered in early round matchups, and we all know, when we get that game by chance, the Bigs often don't like the results in that game. Give the top seeds some early round byes and get rid of the games where we automatically set champions from smaller conferences to be beat by the top teams in the country, and set up some quality games that answer legitimate questions about parity among the quality midmajors and smaller schools and the middle level p-5+1 schools. That's the games we need to see with those winners then playing the teams we all know are a notch above not just the mids but their own conference members as well.

But when you start with a unfair committee representation, add in criteria that is ridiculously skewed from a scheduling standpoint, and keep those criteria a moving target when needed, you get a Tourney that is set up to make sure the money flows to those who already have the money.Which is another question as to why the dollars generated by the Tourney after paying each participants participation costs, aren't distributed equally among all 347 members since they all contribute to the process that culminates in the Tourney.

[Rambler63]

Really good points BEARZ. Some of the people on the committee seem to be quite willing to take their paydays now without regard to what makes the tournament so compelling to watch. They put many of the few mid-majors against each other in early rounds to protect the big boys. I hope every under-.500 P5 team goes down in round 1, but you get the impression that any proof or unmitigated disaster wouldn't change their fixation on pumping up already bloated P5s.

[All-MVC Fan]

Mark Adams has the right idea. All non-conference schedules should be assigned at random by the NCAA, or even better, a third party. Each school would have an even number of home and away games, and the P5 couldn’t lock out the rest of the world from playing them at home.

Of course, it would only be a matter of time before the P5 would bastardize that system, too. But it would make the non-con more compelling. You’d have as much chance of getting Duke at home as you would going on the road to play Texas Southern.

[Drakey]

Bears: you seem to believe that there is some desire to make the selection process fair or to let teams in because they are deserving. They have continually changed the selection process over time to get it to this point to make sure deserving teams do Not get in, but that virtually all teams from six conferences do get in. I have lost interest in watching conference tournaments as I know that whether I see a really good team or not, they will not be in the tournament unless they win the conference tournament, and then they will be seeded so low that it will be virtually impossible for them to win. The final four VCU team from a few years back would not even be in the tournament now.