Value of conference tournaments?

[18IsTheMan]

What is the value of post-season conference basketball tournaments? Aside from the instance where a team who wouldn't otherwise make the NCAAT wins the tournament and thereby gets an automatic berth, what value do they hold? One could actually argue that undeserving teams who sneak into the tournament by winning their conference tournament is a problem because it takes a spot away from other more deserving at-large teams.

They really just don't make a lot of sense. I think it's far more valuable to have been the best team in the conference over the course of the season.

I suppose it just boils down to money.

 

[midline]

These days the tournaments are as much a money grab as anything. It might help someone get off the bubble with a nice run, but as far as seeding for the teams already solidly in, I don't think it changes things much. Proof of this is Auburn. Won the SEC tourney, but still couldn't push them to a seed higher than a five.

 

[ShannonL]

Potential to reward a team that's hot at the end of the season. That team might be able to make some noise in the NCAA tournament if, say, they're on a roll and maybe healthy whereas that wasn't the case earlier in the season.

Of course for a lock team, it can be seen as either bragging rights if they win or they could intentionally lose early and get some extra rest before tournament time.

It's a mixed bag as to whether or not the conference tourneys are worthwhile. Everybody has their own opinion.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

I'm quite certain that opinions surrounding conference tournament importance change with regard to whether or not your team is in thanks to winning their conference tournament.

 

[king ward]

Eliminate them and add two conference games for everybody. That is also another chance to play your way into the Dance, is it not? These tournaments are a hollow remnant of what they used to be. A sham, actually.

 

[ReturnofAsimPenny]

Eliminate them and add two conference games for everybody. That is also another chance to play your way into the Dance, is it not? These tournaments are a hollow remnant of what they used to be. A sham, actually.

Not going to happen. TV loves them and pays good money for them .

 

[king ward]

Not going to happen. TV loves them and pays good money for them .

I'm aware of the commercial considerations. Those don't make them any better than they actually are, which is not very good.

 

[uscg1984]

Not going to happen. TV loves them and pays good money for them .

Then do away with the conference tournaments, do away with the NIT, expand the tournament field to 96 teams, give the top 32 teams byes, and let the other 64 teams play an extra round of tournament games over that last weekend of the season. 32 "play-in" games over that Saturday and Sunday ought to make enough money to replace the TV revenue from the conferences.

 

[king ward]

Then do away with the conference tournaments, do away with the NIT, expand the tournament field to 96 teams, give the top 32 teams byes, and let the other 64 teams play an extra round of tournament games over that last weekend of the season. 32 "play-in" games over that Saturday and Sunday ought to make enough money to replace the TV revenue from the conferences.

I'm not in favor of 96 teams, but expanding the Dance is preferable if it means discontinuing the outmoded conference tournaments - especially those that do not crown a conference champion but merely a tournament champion. They are ridiculous.

 

[uscg1984]

I'm not in favor of 96 teams, but expanding the Dance is preferable if it means discontinuing the outmoded conference tournaments - especially those that do not crown a conference champion but merely a tournament champion. They are ridiculous.

King, I'm not seriously advocating for another playoff expansion. I think my position on playoffs expansions are pretty well documented on here. Like you, I offer up the expansion only as a TV-revenue-inducement for quitting the conference tournaments.