Don't like conference tournaments

[thecat]

The real champion of a conference is the one who proved it over 3 months, not 3 days. League such as the MAC, usually only get 1 team into the big NCAA tourney and that lone team taken is the automatic qualifier, which is unfortunately the conference tournament winner. This makes no sense to me. A team can have a great regular season, maybe even undefeated in their league, then have one bad night in the conference tournament and they're done, seaon over.

[Rollo83]

The real champion of a conference is the one who proved it over 3 months, not 3 days. League such as the MAC, usually only get 1 team into the big NCAA tourney and that lone team taken is the automatic qualifier, which is unfortunately the conference tournament winner. This makes no sense to me. A team can have a great regular season, maybe even undefeated in their league, then have one bad night in the conference tournament and they're done, seaon over.

I agree that the season champ is more a true test of who's the best team in the conference. But the conference tournaments are the essence of college basketball. That's why we love it and call it March Madness.

Taking away the automatic bid would neuter the conference tournaments. The excitement starts because everyone starts over at 0-0 when the tournament begins. Every team and it's fans dream of making a run and going to the Big Dance.

Yes, we have teams that were dominate in mid-major conferences during the regular season that end up sitting home after an upset in the conference tourney. I realize that's unfair but that's what makes it all so appealing.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

Getting a top 3 seed is also a pretty huge advantage in the tournament, so the regular season isn't totally useless.

Part of me agrees with you though.