Former Players Who Could Play in the NCAA Tournament

[EvanJ]

We already posted that Caleb Burgess of UNC Asheville made the NCAA Tournament. Grambling just won a Southwestern Athletic Conference (SWAC) Semifinal, and Shawndarius Cowart scored 15. He entered averaging 11.3 points and 3.4 assists. Cowart played three games for us in 2021-2022. I thought he would be our starting point guard, but it turned out to be Burgess, who led the CAA in assists. Grambling lost the tiebreaker for the 1 seed to Alcorn State, but 8 seed Texas Southern won that half of the bracket.

[Polito]

Ah, this is an exciting thread. Nothing like some good salt in the wound.

[EvanJ]

You might be happy to know that Grambling scored 18 in the first half and lost 61-58 to Texas Southern. Texas Southern won their third consecutive SWAC Tournament, and Grambling has never been in the NCAA Tournament. Texas Southern has 20 losses, so they will be in the First Four.

[Wags]

Texas Southern has 20 losses, so they will be in the First Four.

And they shouldn't be, despite their awful record. They just earned their way in to the NCAAT by qualifying automatically. They shouldn't have to qualify again. The First Four (which is also named wrong, because it's the first four GAMES, inconsistent with the Final Four and the final four TEAMS) should be for the last eight bubble teams - let those teams all decide it on the floor. Never understood why they went halfway with this - half bubble teams, half automatic qualifiers playing for 16 seeds. It's unfair to those automatic qualifiers, it's worse for making money, and it generates less interest - who wouldn't want to watch four bubble games rather than only two bubble play-ins + two games with teams fighting for 16 seeds?

That said, the system (as we already know) is so screwed up, but this year, seemingly even more so - Charleston likely had no more of a chance to reach the NCAAT playing in the CAA final at 16-2, 30-3 as these teams:

Lafayette: played in the Patriot League final at 7-11, 11-22
Texas Southern: played in the SWAC final at 7-11, 13-20, and is going to the NCAAT at 14-20
Northern Arizona: played in the Big Sky final at 5-13, 12-22
Last-place Marist: playing in the MAAC final at 6-14, 13-19

[Flying Dutchmen]

And they shouldn't be, despite their awful record. They just earned their way in to the NCAAT by qualifying automatically. They shouldn't have to qualify again. The First Four (which is also named wrong, because it's the first four GAMES, inconsistent with the Final Four and the final four TEAMS) should be for the last eight bubble teams - let those teams all decide it on the floor. Never understood why they went halfway with this - half bubble teams, half automatic qualifiers playing for 16 seeds. It's unfair to those automatic qualifiers, it's worse for making money, and it generates less interest - who wouldn't want to watch four bubble games rather than only two bubble play-ins + two games with teams fighting for 16 seeds?

Don't the schools get money for winning those games? That is a great incentive for the SWAC and NEC this year to be in one of the opening round games.

I tend to agree with your point, but if there is a chance to win a NCAA Tournament game, and get paid 5 years for winning it, that's not a bad deal, especially if you were under .500 in the regular season.

[Wags]

And they shouldn't be, despite their awful record. They just earned their way in to the NCAAT by qualifying automatically. They shouldn't have to qualify again. The First Four (which is also named wrong, because it's the first four GAMES, inconsistent with the Final Four and the final four TEAMS) should be for the last eight bubble teams - let those teams all decide it on the floor. Never understood why they went halfway with this - half bubble teams, half automatic qualifiers playing for 16 seeds. It's unfair to those automatic qualifiers, it's worse for making money, and it generates less interest - who wouldn't want to watch four bubble games rather than only two bubble play-ins + two games with teams fighting for 16 seeds?

Don't the schools get money for winning those games? That is a great incentive for the SWAC and NEC this year to be in one of the opening round games.

I tend to agree with your point, but if there is a chance to win a NCAA Tournament game, and get paid 5 years for winning it, that's not a bad deal, especially if you were under .500 in the regular season.

Yes, they get money but it's a BS "tournament win." Shouldn't even be counted as one. And if they lose it, they don't get the opportunity they should get against one of the big teams. And it's just worse for the sport. There's a chance to settle the last eight bubble spots on the floor, where it should be settled, and for some stupid reason, they only go halfway with that. And why don't some other bad teams get the same opportunity to make money and get a BS tourney win? Why is that only halfway as well? It'll all so stupid to do it half & half. When it was 64, that was never the point of expanding to 68. That was supposed to be only for bubble teams, yet somehow, that turned into this half & half nonsense we've had ever since.

[EvanJ]

They do half and half because top conferences do not want to give up 2 spots in the final 64.

[Wags]

They do half and half because top conferences do not want to give up 2 spots in the final 64.

They're already halfway there. They could have refused to give up all four but they did already give up two. They need to be pushed further to make the First Four what it should be, which is the last eight bubble teams playing their way in.