22-23 NCAA Basketball Season

[twocoach]

I don't think Carolina is good enough to scrape together enough good wins to make the tourney so we'll see if any favoritism is needed to get them in.

[Deleted User 863]

All that aside, if I am the committee, I'd have trouble putting UNC in over one of the big 12 bubble teams. Or any team from any other weaker conference. We should get damn near all of our teams in. With good seeds too.

[ousdahl]

Heels play a top ten VA team this weekend. That might tell us a lot about who they are.

[ousdahl]

(win 1 of their last 3 regular season games and go 1-1 in the NCAA Tournament) do they make the NCAA Tournament? I say yes.

I say yes too.

If they go 1-1 in the NCAA tournament, then they definitely made the NCAA tournament.

[pdub]

Your brand dictates those heavy investments, long term.
Everything you do in a massive organization affects the value of said brand.
The NCAA will point to viewership and participation when negotiating future contracts.
( if they are still around - who knows what would happen legally with that contract if it's broken up before then )

Do I think if UNC has no analytical argument to make the tournament that they'll leap multiple teams that do? Nah.

Do I think if there's some way they could get in and now it's a tiebreaker between 2 or 3 other schools that they'll pick UNC? Yea.

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

Bingo pdub. Fan interest drives future revenue. People are also forgetting merchandise sales.
On a side note - If they make the tournament, I predict they will be favored in their game 1.

[Deleted User 863]

Do I think if there's some way they could get in and now it's a tiebreaker between 2 or 3 other schools that they'll pick UNC? Yea.

Depends who those teams are. I don't see any value over other big conference teams, but definitely do with smaller conference teams.

And is there every truly a tie in something subjective? The smaller conference teams probably deserve it less than the big conference teams due to resume. Even though it's not their fault.

Feels like there are a team or two every year who get snubbed or on the flip side raise eyebrows when they get in. I am sure this year will be no different, especially with how fucking wild the regular season has been so far.

[Deleted User 863]

On a side note - If they make the tournament, I predict they will be favored in their game 1.

Seems doubtful as a 10+ seed.

[TDub]

I dunno 10-7 games are usually a toss up

also possible they get in as a play in 11 seed vs 11 seed also a toss up

could be favored in either scenario

[Deleted User 863]

If we are counting play ins then sure.

Call me old school, but I don't count those play ins as real tournament games. I think the play ins are bullshit. Especially for the auto qualifying 16 seeds.

[TDub]

yea the play ins are dumb and unnecessary....but theoretically they count as tourney games


I think we should go back to 32 teams and certainly never expand beyond 64. Waters down the entire season and the entire sport.

[twocoach]

(win 1 of their last 3 regular season games and go 1-1 in the NCAA Tournament) do they make the NCAA Tournament? I say yes.

I say yes too.

If they go 1-1 in the NCAA tournament, then they definitely made the NCAA tournament.

Depends on who those wins and losses are against. They need to beat some good teams and avoid losing to non-tourney teams.

[pdub]

Do I think if there's some way they could get in and now it's a tiebreaker between 2 or 3 other schools that they'll pick UNC? Yea.

Depends who those teams are. I don't see any value over other big conference teams, but definitely do with smaller conference teams.

If you don't see the value between say Mississippi State and UNC in the NCAA tournament in terms of potential revenue then I cannot help you.

[twocoach]

If we are counting play ins then sure.

Call me old school, but I don't count those play ins as real tournament games. I think the play ins are bullshit. Especially for the auto qualifying 16 seeds.

Agreed. Play in games should be 100% at-large teams. No auto-qualifier should have to play in them. The power programs just won't agree to that.

[twocoach]

Do I think if there's some way they could get in and now it's a tiebreaker between 2 or 3 other schools that they'll pick UNC? Yea.

Depends who those teams are. I don't see any value over other big conference teams, but definitely do with smaller conference teams.

If you don't see the value between say Mississippi State and UNC in the NCAA tournament in terms of potential revenue then I cannot help you.

I honestly doubt the gain is large enough that the ncaa needs to make a coordinated effort to pressure the selection committee to do it. We'll see.

[pdub]

Coordinated? Certainly not.
Nudge nudge wink wink. I think yes.

But if UNC can't find one Quad 1 win, I don't see how they even have any sort of argument.

[PhDhawk]

I mean, it's humans picking the teams. If you had to choose between UNC and, say, North Texas with very similar resumes...who you gonna put in there....

Syracuse got in as a double digit seed a couple times where, prior to selection sunday NO ONE had them in...they were in the like next 4 out for all the bracketologists.

[Deleted User 863]

Do I think if there's some way they could get in and now it's a tiebreaker between 2 or 3 other schools that they'll pick UNC? Yea.

Depends who those teams are. I don't see any value over other big conference teams, but definitely do with smaller conference teams.

If you don't see the value between say Mississippi State and UNC in the NCAA tournament in terms of potential revenue then I cannot help you.

In a 1 or 2 game scenario does UNC really have significantly more fan support than Mississippi State? Enough to translate to relevant dollars? Maybe for basketball. UNC is a top 5 program of all time. I totally "get" your point. I just don't really see the translation to revenue dollars for the NCAA. But you may very well be correct. I agree in a tie situation UNC gets the nod.

Interesting to flip that scenario and think about it for football. Which program is more valuable then?

[pdub]

We are talking about basketball and the NCAA tournament.
Absolutely enough to translate to relevant dollars.
How much of that the NCAA itself sees is definitely minimal but would no doubt provide a boost for the opening weekend in all metrics.

[jfish26]

Depends who those teams are. I don't see any value over other big conference teams, but definitely do with smaller conference teams.

If you don't see the value between say Mississippi State and UNC in the NCAA tournament in terms of potential revenue then I cannot help you.

I honestly doubt the gain is large enough that the ncaa needs to make a coordinated effort to pressure the selection committee to do it. We'll see.

Not that I want to give oxygen to conspiracy theories anyway, but...I don't think there's even any financial incentive to grease the skids for UNC. Wouldn't the average non-blueblood at-large team stand to buy MORE tickets last-minute, than UNC fans? I cannot imagine any UNC fans who don't already have tickets are waiting around to see where UNC will play as an 11-seed? And, in the grand scheme of things, losing a few eyeballs will have no meaningful effect, ratings-wise.