For all those who seem to think they produce better champions, I have a bet for you.

You take all teams who won their conference tournament. I take all regular season champions (1 seed in conference tourney). Even money bet, whichever category produces the NCAA Champion wins.

If the team that wins the tourney won both or neither, bets off.

Any takers?

wouldn't the #1 seeds in the conference tourney usually have higher seeding in the NCAA tourney? for example kentucky #1 seed and vandy 5 or 6 seed. who would take that bet?

For all those who think that unx fans don't whine about the significance of conference tournaments they can't win ( and Duke OWNS! ) I offer this thread as proof. Show me evidence to the contrary if ya disagree. Any takers?

haskell is incorrect, typically the highest seeds in the NCAA bracket win their conference tourney.

FSU absolutely deserves to be ACC Champion this year. However, conference tourneys are typically worse at producing quality teams. Feel free to take the bet outlined above.

you could argue that 1-and-done tournament formats in general are worse at producing quality teams

Exactly what I am trying to argue. They're good at differentiating teams that are already close (Duke and unc last year comes to mind). They're not very good at taking a huge group of teams and finding the best one.

so what about something like the NFL playoffs?

Well then let's just crown the #1 NCAA seed the champion.

They take the top teams and differentiate them via a tournament that follows the same structure as the regular season.

They don't throw all 32 teams into a group and have them play every day.

The NCAA tournament also takes the best teams in CBB and has a playoff that follows the same rest structure as the regular season.



Not to mention it doesn't make any sense at all to have a tournament that doesn't matter (a loss doesn't eliminate you from the NCAAs nor end your season) right before a tournament that DOES.

but surely they could narrow it down to the 4 teams with the best regular season record, right?

That would be like starting the Super Bowl right after the regular season. Too narrow, and it's too difficult to compare conferences without an extensive nonconference season.

However the conference season IS extensive. WE KNOW WHO SUCKS. Leave them out. 6 teams MAX. Top two get byes. That's a fair playoff, and rewards those who play well during the regular season.

Conference tournaments have jumped the shark

BULL SHIT There are many more teams that place value on them than those that do not. Sure, for unc and Duke recently it's been the difference between a 1 and 2 seed. Look at what the tourney meant for NCSU.

It mattered for Louisville, Vandy and St. Bon. Hell it mattered a lot for one of the perennial powers Michigan State.

When unc or Duke is 18-12 entering it in upcoming years, talk to me then. Meanwhile, it is your conference championship.

Well teams that play well during the regular season get rewarded with at-large bids. For the best teams in the ACC, it's only a 8 team tourney.

The conference tournament helps to separate the men from the boys so to speak. If a team like State goes down to a WF they don't make the tourney. It also gives a team like FSU a chance to prove their worth. Although FSU finished 3rd in the ACC regular season, I don't think anyone can argue that they haven't earned the right to be called the best team in the ACC RIGHT NOW.

I see two good things that come out of conference touraments:

1. It washes away records and lets us see how well teams are playing at the end of the season when they've had 30 games to mesh. A team could start conference play 1-4 and finish with a mediocre record but end the season playing as a top 3 team. It also allows teams to prove themselves in the event a star player is injured for a large part of the season.

2. I think some teams just play better under pressure and the conference tourney gives them a chance to make it or improve their seeding. It could possibly be the difference in a 6 seed and 3 seed.

It's one thing to hear non-ACC fans critique conference tournies but it's another when unx'ers do it and THAT'S exactly what this is all about. The ACC Tourney somehow became less than it once was for one simple reason....Duke started winning it all the damn time. The Devils have passed unx in conference crowns , have won 10 of the last 14 and are 34-4 over that span. That's flat-out amazing and Roy will say anything to belittle it and unx'ers will fall right in line. There's nuthin' high-minded about it when holes start whining over this. Duke owns it unx doesn't = "cocktail party."

I do wish that Roy cared more about it simply because it IS the championship.

I mean, does anyone honestly think henson misses the game today if it's the NCAA championship?

Let's just go by recruiting.

unc NUMEBRA 1 ! ! ! ! !

I think it should be based on NBA draft picks



unc numbera 1