The Ballad of Illinois State, by Ken Pomeroy

[glm38]

Just to troll the whole world, I'd like to point out that if we selected at-large teams solely by kenpom, the Big 12 would have 8 teams in.

I'd be totally okay with the selection committee using KP or other similar metric to select the at-larges. A really good system would be to give each conference (32) the auto-qualifier, grant the next 28 highest ranked schools a bid, and then allow the committee to grant 8 teams the play-in game. The committee then seeds the schools either by analytics or some other method.

I wish they would use the play in game properly. It in no way shape or form should EVER be 4 power conference teams like this year. Use it for a mid major that is right outside the cut line, that didn't have 20 built in opportunities for good wins. Pair them with a middling P5 team that "won more good games" with 5 times the chances and let the mid major play its way into the tourney.

+1. If you did it this way it would also generate more interest than matching 2 middling P5 teams IMO.

[Wufan]

I'd be totally okay with the selection committee using KP or other similar metric to select the at-larges. A really good system would be to give each conference (32) the auto-qualifier, grant the next 28 highest ranked schools a bid, and then allow the committee to grant 8 teams the play-in game. The committee then seeds the schools either by analytics or some other method.

I wish they would use the play in game properly. It in no way shape or form should EVER be 4 power conference teams like this year. Use it for a mid major that is right outside the cut line, that didn't have 20 built in opportunities for good wins. Pair them with a middling P5 team that "won more good games" with 5 times the chances and let the mid major play its way into the tourney.

+1. If you did it this way it would also generate more interest than matching 2 middling P5 teams IMO.

Great idea! 4 or 8 best teams from a one bid conference, or four or eight best teams that won a regular season title, but didn't make the 56 team field.

[Stickboy46]

I'd be totally okay with the selection committee using KP or other similar metric to select the at-larges. A really good system would be to give each conference (32) the auto-qualifier, grant the next 28 highest ranked schools a bid, and then allow the committee to grant 8 teams the play-in game. The committee then seeds the schools either by analytics or some other method.

I wish they would use the play in game properly. It in no way shape or form should EVER be 4 power conference teams like this year. Use it for a mid major that is right outside the cut line, that didn't have 20 built in opportunities for good wins. Pair them with a middling P5 team that "won more good games" with 5 times the chances and let the mid major play its way into the tourney.

+1. If you did it this way it would also generate more interest than matching 2 middling P5 teams IMO.

Most K State fans I know are pissed off they are in the play in game. Not because they felt like they should be in, but because it makes it harder to fire their coach because they "got in". I'm sure the ratings are going to be horrible.

[BirdsEyeView]

I'd be totally okay with the selection committee using KP or other similar metric to select the at-larges. A really good system would be to give each conference (32) the auto-qualifier, grant the next 28 highest ranked schools a bid, and then allow the committee to grant 8 teams the play-in game. The committee then seeds the schools either by analytics or some other method.

I wish they would use the play in game properly. It in no way shape or form should EVER be 4 power conference teams like this year. Use it for a mid major that is right outside the cut line, that didn't have 20 built in opportunities for good wins. Pair them with a middling P5 team that "won more good games" with 5 times the chances and let the mid major play its way into the tourney.

+1. If you did it this way it would also generate more interest than matching 2 middling P5 teams IMO.

Now we are cooking with oil. Way better than tonight. I doubt I'll tune in.

[Majik45]

I always thought the "play in" games should be the last 8 at large teams, not 4 of the 16 seeds. If you are barely making the tourney, you deserve to play in.

For those that did not know, Former Bradley coach Jim Les is stuck playing with his UC Davis squad in the first play in game tomorrow night.

[bleach]

If they would just apply one standard it would be fine. You must be over .500 in your conference if you don't get the automatic bid!

[CaliRdBrd]

If they would just apply one standard it would be fine. You must be over .500 in your conference if you don't get the automatic bid!

If you did this, Wake, K-Sate, Xavier and Ok State would be sitting at home and I'd be absolutely OK with that.

Another caveat...if you win the regular season, that's the auto-bid

[SubGod22]

Another caveat...if you win the regular season, that's the auto-bid

That will never happen. Conference tournaments aren't going to go away and there has to be something to play for. And there's no way you risk giving two bids to most conferences because of it.

But the having to finish at least .500 in conference should absolutely be a standard, and I don't think too many people would take issue with it.

[bleach]

Another caveat...if you win the regular season, that's the auto-bid

That will never happen. Conference tournaments aren't going to go away and there has to be something to play for. And there's no way you risk giving two bids to most conferences because of it.

But the having to finish at least .500 in conference should absolutely be a standard, and I don't think too many people would take issue with it.

No one except the P5s which might as well be everyone.

[TheAsianSensation]

You'll never see the over .500 rule ever implemented for this simple reason: bubble talk would vanish. Every team over .500 in a major conference would get a bid, period. The narrative would become that every single power conference team makes the field at 10-8 or better...no matter how good their resume is.

Bubble talk is a big part of the industry. If you eliminate bubble discussion, you hurt the revenue stream. And if you implement that rule, you kill bubble talk (no one wants to listen to ISU bubble talk nationally, let's be honest).