SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4911
Reg: 02-04-06
|
05-12-17 02:03 PM - Post#229279
In response to mrjames
The pleasures of I Told You So are considerably reduced by the crappiness of the outcome. Remember:
1) The incentives of the NCAA basketball people are clear, and they are to favor major conferences and major-conference teams in assigning bids. Their plan is working; good mid-majors are fleeing their conferences to shore up the TV money for the big boys. It's like relegation without the fairness (let's see how Northern Iowa fares in the MVC without Wichita State, which learned its lesson and jumped to the AAC.)
2) The Ivy League is in an even worse position for a second bid, given the common knowledge that coaches and ADs will not be fired for failing to be invited.
3) There was ample evidence from other conferences that mid-major tourneys only draw fans and enthusiasm if games are played on the courts of the participants.
4) There was ample evidence that mid-major tourneys don't generate significant attention either inside or outside the conference fan base, especially net of the lost attention to regular-season games.
5) It was obvious that the Ivies' funky, contrarian old school way generated a lot of free publicity and branding for the league outside the fan base.
6) It was also obvious that the new format made the regular-season battle among the best teams irrelevant to most fans, diverting most attention away from the league's top teams.
7) Finally, there was never any question of the league displaying competence in siting, scheduling, or promoting a conference tournament. Instead we got a senseless idee fixe about using the more-popular men's games to promote the less-popular women's games, even at the cost of competitive fairness and quality.
The only good news is that Quaker fans will again have a chance to watch their team blow a golden opportunity to steal an undeserved bid.
Edited by SRP on 05-12-17 02:05 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
