Oklahoma had a great non-con (12-1, with wins over USC, Iowa, and Providence-- only loss at a neutral against UNC). But they're currently 6-7 in the Big 12, with an expected 2-3 record in their final five games. Here's a question for everyone-- should a team with a KenPom in the mid thirties and a 8-10 record in a tough conference get an at large bid?

I'm thinking back to 2017 in the MVC, when Illinois State was 27-6 overall, a 17-1 record in the MVC, and a KenPom of 50. They got stiffed.

I'm against P6 conferences grabbing the best teams from mid majors and then expecting UNDER 500 teams in their 15-18 member conferences (that won't play mid majors at home or on the road) and EXPECTING they should get at large bids. I'll allow .500 teams in conference from P6s if they have great metrics otherwise. But how should a Big 12 team with a 8-10 record be allowed in the NCAA Tournament over either Indiana State/Drake or South Florida/FAU/Charlotte/SMU. Probably only one team goes from the MVC, and probably 1 or 2 (max) from the American.

If you join a mega-power conference, a hulking 18 or 20-team conference that is attempting to consolidate all the Q1 opportunities to deny mid major conferences from having ANY opportunities, how in the freakin' world can you possibly also expect that you should be able to get in the NCAA Tournament with a losing conference record?

And have you read the new criteria for NIT selection? They have specifically reserved two teams from the P6 as the top seeds for the NIT now. So if you're a team like Charlotte or Indiana State that misses out on the NCAA because they're taking 7-11 teams from the SEC, now you're going to get screwed in the NIT by 6-12 teams from the Big 12 and Big East.

And you know what? Below average power conference teams that knock mid majors out of the Dance and screw over mid majors with home games in the early rounds of the NIT deserve every bit of derision college basketball fans can muster. That includes as a perfect example, Oklahoma.

All love and appreciation for PM. Bringing OU back to prominence is an arduous task. Yes I hate OU ever since their AD weaseled himself up here to Wilmette. Slime moves. Not a fan.

I don't know about others, but discussions about PM is now old news and largely irrelevant. He's gone, never coming back and good for him in whatever he does. Unless and until he makes a move, I have no interest in OU basketball or him.

JCT...well said...(applause) Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. TV is the culprit. A fan base knows that there team does not belong and are not going to follow them to a meaningless NIT game...but millions of people with nothing to do at 8pm other than watch tv will tune in and advertisers will fill the slots and whoever gets the cash (athletic departments, conferences NCAA,etc) counts their money and loyal fan bases like Illinois St in 2017 sit angry and betrayed and wonder what is the point. I add to this the betrayal of mid major conference winners compared to Tournament winners...I would not be surprised if the next step is not the NCAA issuing public stock and eventually being bought out by a hedge fund....and when the UFO,s finally land and the little green men get out of their saucers they find zombie like humans,attached to a piece of furniture , not zombified by a virus but hypnotized by a 60 inch square illuminating lights and images , hopefully George Carlin is on.... Lets all start a protest and not watch any games from undeserving teams. Read a book. ....well I feel better!

Agree with the minimum qualification of .500 in conference, JCT. I’ve thought for a long time that’d be a fair reform…with a caveat that a below .500 team can still qualify by winning the conference tournament. Again, seems fair to reward a Cinderella in March.

The problem is just that, though…it’s fair. And the big conferences don’t care about being fair, they care about revenue for their teams.

I don't think we should have a hard and fast rule about losing conference records. As it stands today, the Big 12 has 6 or 7 teams in the top 25 polls and 9 teams in Kenpom's top 35. I realize there
are scheduling issues with the big conferences, which hurts our ranking. At the same time, I think it is hard to argue that Big 12 shouldn't get 9 teams in the tournament and some of these teams will have losing conference records.

THREE QUICK THINGS

1. I don't think its that people hate Porter. Loyola put its best foot forward and it was not good enough.
Think of it this way: you have a daughter who is asked to the prom. But before the big dance the guy asks out the pretty cheerleader
and your daughter is dumped.
So move on but the resentment is surely there.
2. the success record of coaches from the mid majors moving up to the power 5 or whatever is not always good. Expectations are very high and the fan base is less patient. that is the case at Oklahoma especially because of OU success is gymnastics, women's baseball have success let alone football.
He is feeling the heat. the key to success in men's bball in the Big 12 is being able to recruit mobile big men especially rim protectors. How many big men
did Porter recruit outside of Cam. He has recruited guards who are quick and good and the transfers are good at the mid major level but are inconsistent
at the higher echelon teams. Because of the NIL and the portal, the whole template of building a team and a "culture" have changed.
3. The NCaa is all about the $. Every team gets a share for their conference.the greater the number the bigger the pie is for the conference.the good old boys take care of each other. Why jeopardize the pool of cash by playing mid majors in an away game.
4; The NCAA crosses state lines and is interstate commerce. the mid majors need to grow a pair and challenge the collusion and scheme in court.

To me, it doesn't matter how good your conference is. The point of the NCAA tournament is to determine the best team in the country. If you have a losing record in your conference, you're nowhere near the best team in your conference. You had 18-20 games to show you could compete with the best and you didn't. If you're not close to the best team in your conference, you're not close to being the best team in the country.

Since they expanded the tournament to 64 teams, no team with a losing conference record has made the Final 4. A couple .500 teams have, but that's fairly rare, and all but 1 of them won at least one conference tournament game. Teams who win in the regular season tend to win come tournament time. I think the math even shows that mid-majors who have lots of wins out perform lower power conference teams relative to their seed.

We are naive to think decisions are not made with TV and therefor $ in mind, so notoriety, size of fan base etc. do figure in. Also naive to not think that NCAA favors the bluebloods in their decision making and rule making. The NCAA could easily manipulate the scheduling of top teams by making strength of non conference scheduling a significant factor. On the outside the lines factors I think LU has an upside with the celebrity status of Sr. Jean, LU's history, and the desire to get the CHicago market involved although almost all the B10 has a presence in the Chicago market. This year we probably scheduled to give ourselves a chance but just did not win any critical games..Now we have a lot of work to do. Would seem like Dayton is a must win and or Tournament title.

Then why did we leave for the A10?