More Cinderallas and a Better Tourney with No Auto-Bids

Ryan Teeples by Contributor Written on March 24, 2009
DETROIT - MARCH 30:  Stephen Curry #30 of the Davidson Wildcats brings the ball up court against the Kansas Jayhawks during the Midwest Regional Final of the 2008 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament at Ford Field on March 30, 2008 in Detroit, Michigan. Kansas won 59-57.  (Photo by Gregory Shamus/Getty Images) (Photo by Gregory Shamus/Getty Images)

Every year we debate, dissect, and denounce the NCAA's tournament selections and seedings.

Much of the debate centers around the so-called "bubble teams," whose place in the tournament is tenuous and undecided. But over the years, we've come to accept the auto-bid process without so much as a raised eyebrow.

Purists (and likely the NCAA itself) will argue the automatic bids for the smallest of conferences are vital to the integrity of the sport. But come on, that's just ridiculous.

There's an argument to be made that the product itself would be of much higher quality if it featured better teams that are left out, in order to include little-guys like Robert Morris or Radford (no offense Colonials and Highlanders).

And don't buy the rubbish that such a system would eliminate the Cinderellas. In reality, dropping the automatic qualifiers would allow the selection committee to pick more deserving teams with a solid chance at actually becoming a Cinderella story.

This year it means the teams featured in a great NIT matchup last night, Davidson and Saint Mary's, would have been in. We all know Davidson proved it has Cinderella chops last year.

Sure, it may mean more Big Conference teams get in, but we'd also see so many deserving mid-majors get a shot when they'd otherwise be left out for the fourth place tourney winner from the Ohio Valley Conference (Morehead State).

San Diego State, Creighton, Kentucky, UNLV, New Mexico, Tulsa, Florida, Penn State, and the aforementioned Davidson and Saint Mary's, are all teams that could have filled the 12-16 seeds under such a system. And all of them have wins on their resume that prove they have what it takes to pull off an upset of a higher seed.

Opponents of such a plan will also argue that it eliminates access to the tourney for teams from the smallest conferences. I argue that programs like Siena, Gonzaga, and Memphis prove that's not the case. But even if it is, why are smaller conferences entitled to an auto-bid over a deserving team who has a great season, but is left out for not winning its conference tourney (Creighton)?

Maybe it makes the conference tournaments less meaningful, but in the end it would ensure the 64 most deserving teams are in, and would drive even more high drama in the early rounds of the tourney.

(0)
...
Share This  
Crop_45x45
or to post this comment

1 Comments

There are no comments yet. Get the conversation started by leaving the first comment

Loading more comments...
posted just now
  • Loading...
  • Nobody has liked this comment yet
Cancel

This comment and all replies have been deleted This comment has been deleted Undo delete

47
reads

1
comments

written on March 24, 2009 Opinion

The best newsletter on the web

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address


CBS Sports Official Partner
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Getty Images.
Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Getty Images is strictly prohibited.