Originally Posted by
tommy
Did I miss it over the last few years or is the Big East using a new tournament format this year? I just saw it, and wow -- with the possible exception of making a tiny bit more money -- is it dumb.
The top 4 teams don't get one bye, meaning one day of extra rest relative to the rest of the teams. The top 4 seeds get TWO byes -- TWO extra days of rest relative to the bottom 8 teams. Teams 5 through 8 get one extra day. So on the first day, which is Tuesday, teams seeded 9-16 play each other. The 4 winners play on Wednesday against teams seeded 5 through 8. The 4 winners of those games then play on Thursday against teams seeded 1 through 4. So teams seeded 9-16 have to win FIVE games in five days to win the thing, while the top 4 seeds only need to win three straight.
This strikes me as so unfair. I understand the byes for top seeds when your tournament has a number of teams not divisible by 8. Then you have to do the byes. But when you have a perfectly symmetrical number like the Big East does (16), to artificially create extra advantage for the top teams by concocting this kind of format, in the hopes of making some bank from the Tuesday gate for S. Florida v. Depaul and Cincinnati v. Rutgers, just stinks.
To me, the top seeds already have major advantages. First, they have the best teams of course. Next, they already have the easiest road. #1 would have matchups, barring upsets, with #16, then #8, then #4 before the finals. #2 would have the next easiest road, etc. Same as in the NCAA's. Fine. Those are two pretty big advantages. Now you have to serve up opponents that are not only inferior to begin with, but also tired? When it isn't necessary to do so? What would be so terrible about a 4 round tournament with the first round being 1 v 16, 2 v 15, 3 v 14, etc. like any normal person would design?
It's kind of the same problem I have with the geographic advantages that the NCAA gives the top teams in the Big Dance. I know, it helps with the gate. But I always have clung to the idea that we should be testing the mettle of the top teams. I'm not saying that, for instance, Kansas should have to play, say, Florida State in a 1 vs. 8 second round game in Jacksonville. Not saying that at all. Too close to their opponent's home floor. But I also don't think they should get to play them in St. Louis. If they're that good (and I mean all the top teams -- indeed all the teams period, not just Kansas of course), make them win 6 games against tournament-worthy teams on truly neutral floors. No obvious advantage to either squad. That's what the champion should have to do.
Just as in this silly Big East thing, the top teams in the NCAA already have the biggest advantages -- those again being the best teams and the easiest paths. Giving them the next best thing to home games in the NCAA tournament is contrary to the spirit of the tournament, or at least the tournament I thought I used to know.