The whole West Virginia vs North Carolina debate has sent me down a little bit of a rabbit hole, and one of those stops revolved around how conferences will handle conference tournaments going into the future.
It's pretty apparent that despite what the committee says or doesn't say about conference tournaments, the one thing you can say about them is that they are hypocritical, because they absolutely let UNC in because they made a run in the ACC tournament and almost beat Duke, and West Virginia lost to 16 seed (out of 16 teams) Colorado in the 1st Rd of the Big 12 tourney.
So, how will conferences continue to handle their tournaments as we get deeper into this super conference era and NIL era? How do you think conferences should approach their tournaments going forward, or do you think they should just do away with them and let the regular season champs claim the automatic qualifer?
It's pretty apparent that despite what the committee says or doesn't say about conference tournaments, the one thing you can say about them is that they are hypocritical, because they absolutely let UNC in because they made a run in the ACC tournament and almost beat Duke, and West Virginia lost to 16 seed (out of 16 teams) Colorado in the 1st Rd of the Big 12 tourney.
So, how will conferences continue to handle their tournaments as we get deeper into this super conference era and NIL era? How do you think conferences should approach their tournaments going forward, or do you think they should just do away with them and let the regular season champs claim the automatic qualifer?
