Calipari goes to bat for Bellarmine

[tfk53]

Kentucky beat Bellarmine last night, 60-41 with score being tied at halftime. Not a surprise that it took another Top 20 team quite awhile to figure out Bellarmine.
Afterwards, Calipari said he wanted the NCAA to allow Bellarmine to be allowed to win an NCAA bid, instead of waiting the 4 years as required for teams transitioning to D1. It makes no sense for the NCAA to impose a 4 year window before a team who has transitioned to D1 can earn a bid to March Madness. Bellarmine should have been able to go last year after winning the ASUN tournament.

https://clutchpoints.com/kentucky-ba...oach-emotional

[kako]

Well, all coaches are always going to talk up a team that they played, no matter what. Beating or losing to a team that is viewed as good/great always helps your own reputation.

That being said, I believe the rule is there to avoid some team coming in for one year, making a splash for cash, then reverting back to its former self, which probably wasn't good, and then leaving. I believe teams can leave D-I at any time, or stop their hoops programs at any time with no NCAA penalties (there could be conference or other agreements to address). When there were a lot more independents, it was potentially easier to game this system. But with the advent of almost every team being in a conference, then one would think the conferences would not let in a one-hit wonder, either. And now an independent probably couldn't get enough meaningful games anyway. So bottom line, I agree that it's time for the NCAA to revisit this rule.

9F

[JasonEvans]

Well, all coaches are always going to talk up a team that they played, no matter what. Beating or losing to a team that is viewed as good/great always helps your own reputation.

That being said, I believe the rule is there to avoid some team coming in for one year, making a splash for cash, then reverting back to its former self, which probably wasn't good, and then leaving. I believe teams can leave D-I at any time, or stop their hoops programs at any time with no NCAA penalties (there could be conference or other agreements to address). When there were a lot more independents, it was potentially easier to game this system. But with the advent of almost every team being in a conference, then one would think the conferences would not let in a one-hit wonder, either. And now an independent probably couldn't get enough meaningful games anyway. So bottom line, I agree that it's time for the NCAA to revisit this rule.

9F

How exactly was a school supposed to be able to be good enough to earn a bid in their first year and then disappear in year two? Feels like some underpants gnome kinda logic. Don't make no sense to me.

If Bellarmine earns a bid by winning a conference, I see zero harm in allowing them to play in the tourney. But, this is not the first time the NCAA rule book feels like it was written by a five year old.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

But, this is not the first time the NCAA rule book feels like it was written by a five year old.

Are you suggesting that the NCAA is reluctant to change rules that don't make sense? How inflammatory!

I also see literally zero reasoning to this odd rule.

[azzefkram]

Well, all coaches are always going to talk up a team that they played, no matter what. Beating or losing to a team that is viewed as good/great always helps your own reputation.

That being said, I believe the rule is there to avoid some team coming in for one year, making a splash for cash, then reverting back to its former self, which probably wasn't good, and then leaving. I believe teams can leave D-I at any time, or stop their hoops programs at any time with no NCAA penalties (there could be conference or other agreements to address). When there were a lot more independents, it was potentially easier to game this system. But with the advent of almost every team being in a conference, then one would think the conferences would not let in a one-hit wonder, either. And now an independent probably couldn't get enough meaningful games anyway. So bottom line, I agree that it's time for the NCAA to revisit this rule.

9F

Given that we are dealing with the NCAA, that makes sense. How crazypants is it to punish teams/players for something they might do? If the big worry is that a team will join D-I, make some dough, then leave, wouldn't a vesting penalty for leaving D-I handle that better?