Came here to post it haha. It's intriguing! We'll see how it works this season. I can see the logic behind it for sure.

A scheduling nightmare for:

1) Players and classes
2) Traveling fans
3) Promotions and special events


In a one bid league such as the MAC, this would not change anything.

I applaud the effort to do something different. Would be easier in a more regionally concentrated conference like the MAC in regards to travel arrangements although admittedly still a challenge. Maybe a bye week prior to this transition would help? Probably not enough to ensure a 2nd bid for the MAC with the current state of the conference BUT doing more of the same isn't going to improve our chances either.

I would rather sit back this year and see what happens. Because the other thing this does too is leave yourself open to potential losses as well. Can very easily be a double-edged sword, similarly to the double-byes in conference tournaments.

For me personally, I always thought the Ivy League had the best answer to the problems faced by mid-majors. But they went and messed that up with a conference tournament and are leaving themselves at the mercy of potentially getting their #4 seed in the dance versus their best team. Let me get back on my rocker before everyone casts stones.

You are definitely right that the best option for getting the best team into the NCAA tournament is for the regular season champ to go. The conference tournaments are all about giving every other team something to play for (and money).

I'm not sure how this scheduling idea will work out either, but for a conference like Conference USA, it's worth a try, and it's a good idea for the MAC to pay attention and see how it plays out. I have concern for certain negative consequences being possible as much as positive ones.

It is - and if you haven't looked around in a little while, we're in desperate times. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

We haven't gotten two teams into the NCAA tournament since 1999.

That's 19 years for those of you in Rio Linda.

Yep, if you're one of those five teams that can be very exciting but if not, it's like you're playing in the B league of your league.

I'm going to say I applaud the CUSA for trying something new and thinking outside the box on this one. But, in the end, I think it's going to do more harm than good.

A lot of good mid-majors are going to have to play a couple extra tough games. Some/half of them on the road. And, similar to the now defunct Bracket Buster - instead of getting the hypothesized bump in SOS and quality wins for those that win, it will more realistically just act as a way to eliminate more mids from the equation by adding a couple extra losses to their resume (and they won't be considered "quality losses" either) for the teams that lose.

No committee is going to add Western Kentucky to the at-large line just because they beat Old Dominion a 2nd time. But - it sure will remove all doubt that Old Dominion is out (for a random example).

No - the only way to get committee respect is to play and beat P5 schools. And those P5 schools know it and thus will only play on their court. So good luck.

It's all about national perception.

Western Kentucky tops Old Dominion - that gets a scroll at the bottom of ESPN.
Western Kentucky beats Louisville - that gets it's own segment on SportsCenter.

One gets national attention and changes perception. One doesn't.

Okay, it was a little vague on the seeding. Do they freeze the seeding prior to playing the last games or could a team screw themselves for the conference tournament? The article said they seed the teams but it doesn't specify if that seeding is the seeding also used for the conference tournament or whether they reseed after 18 games.


It's nice to try something different but I don't see this as having any real impact.

The A-10 I believe has its top programs play more frequently by design boosting quadrant wins. Their scheduling approach has helped the A10 stay a 3 bid conference. The MAC should scrap divisions and go to something similar, a 15 game schedule where you play everyone 1 time aside for teams from the previous season playing twice (1-4, 5-8, 9-12) based on the previous season standings.

It'll get CUSA a lot of press but probably won't make much difference. You improve your RPI primarily by playing and beating Quadrant 1 teams (basically, RPI 1-75). After the regular season last year, CUSA had three teams that could be considered Quadrant 1: MTSU (28), WKU (54), and ODU (71). If this plays out next year, at least two of the top five will be Quadrant 2 or lower. Which means playing those two teams won't help your RPI much; you have to beat them on the road to get any real bump. (Last year, the next two were T'erd (101) and UTEP (155)).

The real problem for CUSA is overall strength of schedule. Only two teams (MTSU and WKU) had a SOS under 100. Only four other teams had a SOS under 200 (ranging from 136-187). CUSA's #3 RPI team, ODU, had a SOS of 207. The MAC at least had opportunities for improving its RPI -- the worst SOS in the MAC was BG's at 188. The MAC just didn't take advantage of its opportunities.

Actually, i THINK that CUSA's hope is that this will lead to a better seeding, not necessarily additional bids. I could certainly be wrong.