WWRD? Eliminate the Super Conference

TSBE is a not so-flattering acronym for The Super Big East.  It's not so-flattering in that it is meant to convey a picture that the powers that be who created TSBE were only in it for the size and money.  After all, any conference that has to employ a "double-bye" in their conference tournament to appease the larger, more talented members so that all conference members can be included in the conference tournament, despite the fact that the size of the conference (16) is a perfect "tournament number," is not exactly an organization steeped in logic.

What are the advantages of a super conference like TSBE other than money and acronyms?  Let's take a look at TSBE as an example.  Starting with talent, the conference champion made the Final Four this year so that's a good start, right?  But so did the conference champions of the ACC (12 teams) and the Horizon League (10 teams).  A lesser team in the Big Ten (11 teams, which begs the question...) rounded out the four.

The supporting cast of six other teams from TSBE that made the tournament finished as follows:
Louisville (9) blown out in first round by Cal (who at one point was not supposed to make the tourney)
Georgetown (3), Notre Dame (6), Marquette (6)--"Upset" in the first round
Pittsburgh (3) beats Oakland before losing to Xavier in second round
Villanova (2)--struggled to beat 15th seed by 3 in first round before losing to #10 St. Mary's
Syracuse (1)--"Upset" by Butler in Sweet Sixteen

To sum up, that's four first round exits, two second round exits by teams that should have been shoo-ins for the Sweet Sixteen and an underachieving #1 that got way too much credit during the year and lost to a mid-major in around earlier than expected (although the loss to Butler, in hindsight, is not as problematic as originally thought--just ask Kansas State, Michigan State, and those who were holding their breath on that last shot against Duke).

One or two of the above results I could see happening "in the regular course of business" that is the NCAA tournament.  But the sum total of all of them, coupled with W. Virginia's no-show against Duke is more indicative, I think, of an overrated conference.  Don't misunderstand.  I'm not saying that any of these teams are not good teams.  My point is that for them to be rated as the top conference all year long and to have so many teams in the top 10 during the year, they better be able to show up in the postseason.  And those results are not what I would call showing up.

The whole point of this is that the Super Conference becomes a vehicle for keeping deserving mid-major teams out of the postseason mix because average members of TSBE get a boost from the Strength of Schedule fallacy if they happen to upset one of the top teams in the league.  And how do the top teams get a boost?  By beating good teams in early season holiday tournaments at neutral sites when teams are still finding their rhythm.  The SOS fallacy results in a high RPI for anyone in the conference as the teams take turns beating each other during conference play.  The problem is, not only do they not play enough games against teams from other conferences in the middle of the season, they don't even play half the teams in their own conference twice (when you play 18 games in a 16-team conference, you only play three teams twice during the year which is not fair if one team is playing Syracuse, Villanova, and W. Virginia and the other team is playing St. John's, DePaul and Rutgers.  Thus, if an upset happens on the road, chances are, there is no return date with which to compare results and determine whether or not an upset was a fluke (or at least made possible by a hostile home crowd).

And if  you think the move to 96 teams will help with adding more midmajors, remember this--five TSBE schools made the NIT meaning 13 of the 16 schools in the conference were in the postseason.  If there is an expansion to 96 teams, the additional 31 will be those teams that would have been in the NIT.  And the records of those five schools were 20-13, 19-13, 19-16, 18-16, and 17-16.  No wonder the coaches are in favor of it.  Would you not like to coach in a conference where you can barely win half your games and still make the Big Dance?

In a case like TSBE, you almost have to have a conference tournament because there is not enough of a sample size that is fair and equitable to everyone during the season to allow for a regular season champion being legitimate enough to represent the conference as an auto bid.  But since my first take in this three-part series was to eliminate the conference tournament, you need to come with a fair way for the regular season to mean something to the conference champ and the auto bid.  By having teams play everyone in the conference twice in a home and home series during the season, you get your fair measuring stick for determining the conference champion.  And it takes a regular season, not four days and a double bye to do so. 10 teams, 12 if you eliminate the conference tournaments, could pull it off.

Are there any good reasons to be TSBE?

I think I'm back to the cool acronym...

Peace,
Reg