1) Who is considered the Big12 BB champion? KU because they won the regular season, or ISU because we won the Conference Tournament? Seems to me it should be ISU; the season champion gets the best seeding for the conference tourney, but the conference tourney champion should be considered the conference champ. (This might work better if we had 2 divisions in the conference.)
2) Would Big12 teams do better in the NCAA Tourney, in general, if we did not have such a grueling season immediately followed by a grueling conference tournament? Seems to me that winning the Conference Tourney kinda puts a damper on getting the energy re-set for the grueling NCAA tourney. I suppose all conferences have a tourney immediately prior to the NCAA though.
I know I'm re-hashing some of the threads below this one, but I'm really concerned that the Big12 may be between a rock and another hard place by having the grueling season, followed by a grueling conference tournament, immediately followed by the NCAA Tournament. Would adding more universities to the conference, allowing for 2 divisions, help this? Maybe, maybe not, but I think it is something worth putting a lot of time and energy into evaluating.
2) Would Big12 teams do better in the NCAA Tourney, in general, if we did not have such a grueling season immediately followed by a grueling conference tournament? Seems to me that winning the Conference Tourney kinda puts a damper on getting the energy re-set for the grueling NCAA tourney. I suppose all conferences have a tourney immediately prior to the NCAA though.
I know I'm re-hashing some of the threads below this one, but I'm really concerned that the Big12 may be between a rock and another hard place by having the grueling season, followed by a grueling conference tournament, immediately followed by the NCAA Tournament. Would adding more universities to the conference, allowing for 2 divisions, help this? Maybe, maybe not, but I think it is something worth putting a lot of time and energy into evaluating.
