I have been seeing lately several schools win their conference tourney but aren’t eligible for the NCAA tournament because they transferred up divisions (from D2 to D1). This is how Fairleigh Dickinson (a name that sounds like either a porn star or Emily Dickinson’s orphan cousin who came to spend the summer) got into the show when Merrimack (who I thought had sunk during the Civil War) was ruled ineligible even though they won the tourney. NCAA, this is stupid. If you want to grow the game, then celebrate those who win. Period. Those fans (deceased sailors no doubt) of The Merrimack must be pissed because they proved they could make the ascent faster than expected. Heck, they might even still have former D2 players on their team. That’s remarkable. The silly rules of the NCAA never cease to amaze.
Do remember that the people who vote to make these rules are either the President of the University or the Athletic Director. That is who makes NCAA rules. This rule, I guess, was passed because schools were protecting themselves and their access to the NCAA tourney.
Understood, Dick. Just curious what your pov is on it. I’ve said I think it’s folly but maybe there’s another side to it I’m not seeing.
On this particular issue I think I agree with your take. I did not think it was fair to Bellarmine last year when they won their conference tourney and did not get the NCAA bid because of this rule.
My objection to what you said and what many people always seem to do is blame things they don’t like on the NCAA like it is some giant organization of unknown people with power. It is an organization of universities in which each university gets one vote and that vote is almost always made by either the AD or the President. They vote their own school’s interest. I guess their interest in passing this rule was to protect their own school’s chance to get into the NCAA tourney.
I appreciate you and your pov. The reason this issue seems comical to me is that it’s actually hurting the growth of D1 hoops as a brand, and possibly the school left out. And it’s not as if Merrimack wouldn’t split the revenue with its conference it made. If that wasn’t able to happen then I might see it the other way.
I think part of the rational of the NCAA is to protect from schools/teams jumping up for a brief period where they may have a competitive team and then dropping back down when they don’t. The NCAA doesn’t want that type of constant movement.
Who would drop down if they had success going up? I think that’s more of a threat in football as it costs a lot more to field a D1 team, no? I hadn’t considered your POV so just asking as I am curious now.
I don’t know that the fear is completely justified and but theoretically say a Bellarmine type school who is very successful at DII already and lands a recruiting class that they think would be competitive enough to make the tournament so they declare that in 2 years they will be D1. They have some initial success and are good enough to win a conference tournament, make the big dance and gain the exposure that comes with it. They don’t capitalize on that to sustain their momentum and fall to the middle of the pack or bottom of their mid-major conference, so they say this isn’t for us we want to go back to winning and move down.
Maybe? Either way, we are three wins from the show.
We aren’t going to be the rockets
No, we’re not! Nor are we going to be the Rockettes.
We have to beat the Rockets to be the Rockets. Wooooooooo!