This, to me, is a good example of bad journalism, but maybe I'm reading it wrong.
The headline says the NCAA Tournament lacks mid-major teams in the sweet 16 "by design," and several times throughout the article the writer says things like:
But, is any of that true? Were any mid-major teams underseeded? And, more importantly, if you're operating under the assumption that the tournament is gamed toward the high-major teams, how would you fix it?
MAYBE Wichita was underseeded, but they're hardly a cinderella team and we talked on another thread about how they were a tough team to seed because they had hardly beaten anyone any good.
Also, if a team is seeded higher, then doesn't that disqualify them from cinderella status?
This did get me thinking though, what if the selection committee had a guideline, maybe not a hard and fast rule, but a "when possible" type thing to prioritize matchups between power conference teams and mid-major teams in the opening rounds? This year, for example, they could have broken up the Northwestern/Vandy, Wisconsin/Va Tech, Miami/Michigan State, Michigan/Oklahoma State games. On the flip side they could have moved a couple of teams around to avoid St. Mary's/VCU, Dayton/Wichita, Butler/Winthrop and Rhode Island/Creighton.
The headline says the NCAA Tournament lacks mid-major teams in the sweet 16 "by design," and several times throughout the article the writer says things like:
Quote:
But really, the fact that Middle Tennessee State was the only 12-seed or lower to win its first-round matchupand the fact that all mid-majors are seeded so lowis a product of the NCAA's design.
Quote:
So it's quite important that the NCAA design a system that benefits its fellow money-makers.
Quote:
All this has been thoroughly reported on before; it's not some giant reveal that the tournament itself is set up to help the established top-tier programs advance and gobble up revenue.
But, is any of that true? Were any mid-major teams underseeded? And, more importantly, if you're operating under the assumption that the tournament is gamed toward the high-major teams, how would you fix it?
MAYBE Wichita was underseeded, but they're hardly a cinderella team and we talked on another thread about how they were a tough team to seed because they had hardly beaten anyone any good.
Also, if a team is seeded higher, then doesn't that disqualify them from cinderella status?
This did get me thinking though, what if the selection committee had a guideline, maybe not a hard and fast rule, but a "when possible" type thing to prioritize matchups between power conference teams and mid-major teams in the opening rounds? This year, for example, they could have broken up the Northwestern/Vandy, Wisconsin/Va Tech, Miami/Michigan State, Michigan/Oklahoma State games. On the flip side they could have moved a couple of teams around to avoid St. Mary's/VCU, Dayton/Wichita, Butler/Winthrop and Rhode Island/Creighton.