Conference Tournaments Present the Home Court Advantage

Is it any wonder that the San Diego Toreros punched their ticket to the Big Dance? Will college basketball fans be shocked if the UNLV Rebels win the Mountain West tournament again? If the New Mexico State Aggies run the table this week, will anyone be surprised?

No.

Was it a shocker that South Alabama flopped against Middle Tennessee?

Yes.

Why?

Because all these teams had or will have the opportunity to play on their home court for the most important games of the season.

It's all a set up that just doesn't make sense. If a trip to the best thing March has ever seen rides on these games, why give an advantage to a certain team?

A lot of conferences run a tournament with home games being played at the higher seed's house. Makes sense.

A lot of conferences run a tournament on a neutral floor. Makes sense.

A couple conferences use a combination of the two. That's fine.

The Big South had one round in Asheville with the other two rounds determined by the higher seed. That's fine, too.

But a whole tournament on the home floor of a second or third place team is a recipe for tournament disaster. Do you really want to risk giving an automatic bid to somebody with a mediocre resume that strings a couple wins together on their home court?

What might teams like Syracuse or Baylor, who play in two brutal conferences, say if they get bumped out of the field?

Yes, I am bitter that my BYU Cougars will have to play at the Thomas and Mack Center, no matter how many screaming fans will show up in blue and white. Yes, I am bitter that San Diego will occupy a spot in the field of 65 that would be better occupied by a team that could actually get out of the first round. I'm a fan, I'm allowed to be bitter. 

There are three options. Make it a fair fight by setting up shop at a neutral site. Make it a fair fight by shifting locations. Or make it fair and play the games at the higher seed.

Until then, just let me be bitter.