One Recommended NCAA Tournament Change
The Confidential thinks that one particular NCAA Tournament change is in order. This one is going to be controversial, but the Confidential believes that the reigning national champion should get an automatic invite to the Big Dance, so long as they meet the minimum criteria of, say, 18 wins.
This year, Kentucky went 21-11 overall and 12-6 in conference, albeit in the admittedly weak SEC. For that, they were rewarded with a trip to the NIT. Really? Would it have been THAT awful to slap an 11 seed on the Wildcats? Give someone a chance to upset the reigning champion? This is a no-brainer to the Confidential. With 68 teams, many of whom are mediocre and/or only there based on “automatic” bids, there is plenty of room for one more automatic bid. The Earth will stay on its axis–just be a bit more fun. Let’s see someone dethrone the prior champ, regardless of how easy or hard it is to do.
The cons are obvious, but not without flaws.
Con #1. Only the best 68 teams should be in the tournament.
Bull. Crap. Bullcrap. Liberty is 15-20 and validly in the tournament. And that rule should not change either. If nobody from Liberty’s conference (probably should have looked that up) can beat Liberty in its tournament, nobody else deserves the spot. Might as well be Liberty. It’s what makes March madness an event. But if Liberty is OK, then why not Kentucky? Who is more likely to make a run? Let’s not pretend that this is exclusively about only the top teams participating.
Con #2. OK, if you don’t win your tournament, then you must be one of the best at-large teams.
Now we are really splitting hairs here aren’t we? To include Kentucky would be to exclude Boise State. Is everyone 100% sure that Kentucky is worse than Boise State. This is like deciding between two 6-6 football teams. Let’s give the nod to the team that will juice up the tournament the most. Moreover, while we all love the underdog story (at least until it reached the point where you feel weird picking Butler to lose and/or a 5 seed to win), we love watching the elite teams lose even more. Admit it… which interests you more… Lehigh winning or Duke losing? Most people would take the latter. It’s as much about schadenfreude as it is rooting for the underdog. C’mon, let’s see a Kentucky cheerleader cry!
Con #3. Why are we screwing over the midmajors?
Who is screwing over a midmajor? Virginia and Maryland were among the teams left out of the Big Dance. The NIT is full of major conference schools. More likely than not, allowing a national champion to enter the bracket would exclude a team that was around .500 in a major conference. This is essentially trading a .500 team that is interesting for a .500 team that is not. Let someone enjoy beating Kentucky rather than sigh after beating some other middle of the pack big conference mediocrity.
Con #4. You just like Kentucky, don’t you?
Heck no. The opposite. You cannot let hate cloud your judgment. This is about seeing Kentucky be both part of the Big Dance and losing. Let’s see who gets to take down the former Goliath. That is a lot more exciting than some other 12 seed. And it gives the tournament just that much more excitement.
Con #5. This Kentucky team looks nothing like last year’s team, so why bother?
Well, we are all just rooting for jerseys anyway. Does it matter than 5 guys left and were replaced with 5 new guys? In theory. But it is still Kentucky’s championship to lose until someone beats them. At least it could be. That would be neat.
Con #6. Who cares, how often could this possibly happen?
According to this article, only 5 times in the past 25 or so years. But three of those have been since 2008. This is a new trend. It will likely happen more and more as the NBA continues to draft kids with potential instead of men with a flaw here or there. And if it truly is are, what is the problem? If anything, rarity is a benefit to the change. After all, it would not be that much of a burden to make the switch.
Con #7. Did you see that Kentucky just lost to Robert Morris? There goes that theory.
Hardly. The fun is (a) having Kentucky rally around its championship and play better than they have all season; and (b) giving some other team the thrill of eliminating them. Every year, we see good teams “give up” at NIT time. It is perplexing, but the disappointment of not being in the Big Dance can lead to some surprises. So it does not matter than Kentucky lost. Except that those kids lost out on a chance to play more and develop character. Of course, it also shows how hard it is to play a true road game. For those who defend neutral site games, there is nothing like playing in a small, packed gym. Teams better than Kentucky might have wilted under that pressure.
Finally, this is NOT about this Kentucky team, but about the principle. Let the champion have an automatic bid.
What say you? Is there a better reason to include the prior year’s champ? Disagree vehemently? Let us know…
The Confidential 
interesting take on this. I have no problem with your proposal – like you stated, it’s a matter of trading a boring mediocre team for an exciting one…
I don’t like this idea. First of all, the team that wins the Championship (or places in the Final Four) gets much more exposure, media attention, etc..and unless the coaching staff leaves, typically gets a big bump in recruiting and college applications. That alone is a huge advantage for a school to have over the other 60+ teams that were in the tournament that year.
Even though the best talent on that team will likely graduate or go pro, if a college cannot translate a National Championship into better recruiting to replenishing its stars from the previous year, then they don’t deserve a free pass to the tournament. Frankly, I’m not sure they even deserve a free pass to the NIT.
As it relates to Kentucky, they had a big injury to Nerlens Noel. Does that mean that every team who loses a key player mid-season to injury gets special consideration by the selection committee?
Not advocating for special consideration by the committee.
Only advocating that the team that wins the National Championship one year is automatically invited to defend its Championship the subsequent year, provided that they meet some benchmark to ensure that they are one of the best 68 teams in the country, such as 18 wins. Only difference is that they don’t need to be one of the best 34 at-large teams.
If we allow any conference champion in, we cannot really pretend that we currently have the best 68 teams? Of course not. So what is the harm in allowing the title holder to defend its title?
As for exposure, it is deserved. The best team does not always win the tournament. Some years, yes. Other years, no. See Villanova, NC State. For the non-elite teams, its a nice plug,
I understand your premise; I just disagree. The defending Nat’l Champ has advantages going into the next season, and some disadvantages.No need giving them a free pass to the tourney.
Frankly, if I had to choose between two bubble teams: the defending Champ that re-loaded with Freshmen one-and-dones, or a team that had a bunch of seniors/upper classmen, I’d go with the latter.
This isn’t football, it shouldn’t matter what you accomplished last season. This a new, different season. If you want to make room for them then change the midmajors conference tourney rule to where only their top 4 teams gets compete. This would help prevent teams like Liberty with their 20 losses from getting into the tourney and put more of emphasis on the regular season where it belongs and no longer reward bad teams who get lucky in a conference tourney.
Can’t get on board with that at all. Last year is over. You get this year what you earn this year.
It’s not about getting it… it’s about getting the right to defend it.
Again, a 21-win Kentucky team was excluded. If Syracuse won 21 games in 2004, would we have accepted being excluded so that some .500 team from the Big XII could be in the Big Dance? Heck no.
I think people just want to hate on Kentucky, North Carolina, and Florida–the last three teams to run into this. But that just drives my point—hatred of those teams is interesting.
Not on board. This is the 2013 NCAA Championship tournament, and should only reflect 2013 results.
Years ago I thought this would be a good idea. Not sure why, but I don’t feel that way anymore.