moose/squirrel wrote: stubbins wrote:
mondayamqb wrote:Okay, I know I"m in trouble when it takes three posts to explain a concept. Promise, last one. Instead of the traditional seeding, think of doing it with a blind draw lottery. Under the system we have, a power team is always pitted a smaller school or weaker team in the first round...seeding. Montana will never get above a 12 seed. With a lottery system two smalls or two bigs could occasionally play each other. In some years we could play another mid-major in first round; win and possibly play the winner of another small vs.small (the luck of the draw)and have a realistic chance at being in the sweet 16. The drawback is that the power teams (follow the money) wouldn't want play another power and risk being out in the first round. Likewise, two multiple team conferences wouldn't want two of their members to play each other in the first round (follow the money). This system gives smaller schools a give chance to win a game or two and gain some momentum. Which would you prefer for Montana? One team would still have to win six games in a row to become champion.
this will never happen....the big conferences want as many wins as possible. If the big east wins 8 of its first round games...that is something like 64 million dollars over the next 7 years for the conference. You can see how teams in a good conference can have a higher athletic budget. The MWC didn't have a very good showing this year, but they usually win at least two games a year in the tourney. You can see how that money adds up. After three years in a row with even just two wins a year for your conference...the money just becomes staggering.
Now imagine the acc or big east....$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
They would never give up some of that money by having to play another "power" in the first round.
I'd be curious where you got the numbers that you are submitting. Let's not forget that many involved in your conspiracy theory are heading home...please fill us in brochacho.
Don't know what a brochacho is....and I am not sure what conspiracy theory you speak of...and I don't know who else is involved in this conspiracy theory....but
I do know that the ncaa payed 180.5 million last year ALONE to teams. Some of this is travel money, so not all of that is just for winning, but a large chunk is...O'Day has said before that those winnings are payed out over 7 years(could be 6). That number varies for teams depending on how many are in each conference.
I would think you could see how year after year of multiple teams winning from a conference adds significantly to a school's budget.
As to the post I was addressing, why would a Kentucky take a chance of playing a Kansas in a year like this. The large conferences would lose out on a for sure win every year by doing this...and losing a large chunk of money when compounded over 7 (or 6) years. Is that the conspiracy theory you are addressing?
Not sure what you don't understand about this, so if I didn't answer the question, I apologize....
Don't take me too seriously, I am a little crazy about Griz football....and I am right.
"holz is a turtle lookin old fart with oldteimers disease " ~ JAKEweezy93. Greatest Quote on a Post in the history of message boards