Probably about the time we lose the outdated and not-needed divisions for b-ball. That is, never.

This tournament format is supposed to reward teams for their regular season records, but the only real beneficiaries are the 3 and 4 seeds, who are guaranteed a game against a team that's already played two games in three days. The top 2 seeds don't have that guarantee, because they could play 3 and 4. Plus, the 5 seed (and maybe the 6) may have to play two extra games even though they have the same regular season MAC record as the 4 seed but lost a tie-breaker. Two extra games shouldn't hinge on a tie-breaker.

I'm for either going back to the old system or something else. I like having the bottom half of the league playing at campus sites (12-7, 11-8, 10-9); then those three winners playing 6, 5 and 4 in the second round at Cleveland; then 12/7/6 playing 3 and 11/8/5 playing 10/9/4 in the quarters; and the winners playing 2 and 1, respectively, in the semis. This doesn't over-penalize the 5 and 6 seeds, while still rewarding the 1 seed by guaranteeing that its first game will be against a team that's playing at least its third game in three days.

My recommendation would be to copy the Pac12 completely:

- 18 game conference schedule
- eliminate divisions
- 4 round tournament, single bye for top 4 seeds. Eliminate the first round games on campus and do all 4 rounds Wed-Sat in Cleveland. With all 12 schools playing the first round in Cleveland fans from every program can have the confidence to plan for an annual trip to the Q without having to take a wait and see approach. Continuity could have a positive affect on attendance/overall support.

the problem with the format is you have, for the second year in a row, a #4 and #5 seed that have an identical conference record. But one team has to play 2 games, in 2 different cities, in 3 days just to play the other team that has been resting the whole time, and its decided by a tie breaker. That's too much disparity for two teams with identical records. And if you look at this year 1 win separates the #1 seed from the #5 seed.

I have no sympathy for a 5 seed. But losing an 8 team Thursday has killed the fun.

None. Win more games. Losers make excuses.

If OHIO is a one or two seed next year, I suspect that this discussion will have an entirely different tone: We earned it. We deserve to have the riffraff of the conference play as many bone-wearying games as possible for the right to play OHIO. ETC. I'm hoping we have that discussion.

Here is my comment for next time we are a 1 or 2 seed: I still don't like the format but I am glad were are good enough to be a 1 or 2 seed.

Win more games? I'm talking about two teams that won the SAME number of games. SAME. As in NOT LESS.

Oh I see, I didn't realize dolling out tough life lessons was more important than creating a tournament based on reasonable equity. SUX2BU is great for a bumper sticker, less so for a tournament structure.