CBS: Its ridiculous that AP Top 25 voter left Kansas, Duke and Tennessee off ballot

[BleedGopher]

per CBS:

Kansas, Duke and Tennessee are, rightfully so, the top three teams in this week's AP Top 25 poll. But the Jayhawks, Blue Devils and Volunteers did not appear on all 65 AP ballots.

Graham Couch is the reason.

For those unfamiliar, Couch is a good columnist for the Lansing State Journal in Michigan, as well a fine podcast host, and I mean those things sincerely. He's not one of the many AP voters who spends little-to-no time on his ballot each week. He's not somebody who doesn't take his responsibilities seriously. But for reasons that make no sense to any sensible person, he has a rule that prevents him from ranking teams that haven't played a true-road game by a certain point in December. And it's that rule that led to him submitting a ballot this week that omitted No. 1 Kansas, No. 2 Duke, No. 3 Tennessee, No. 8 Auburn and No. 11 Texas Tech.

Simply put, this is a dumb rule that leads to stupid results.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-b...eft-kansas-duke-and-tennessee-off-his-ballot/

Go Gophers!!

 

[Gopher Skipper]

If he were doing it to be a homer and inflate the Michigan teams' rankings I'd be mad. Sure, kind of stupid, but then again so is not scheduling a true road game at this point in the season. Sounds like he's trying to prove a point and call out coaches for scared to lose on the road...at least he's being consistent across the board.

 

[UpAndUnder43]

This doesn't bother me at all. Rankings are for fans/media to get excited. Its not like the tournament committee looks at rankings in mid-December, sees this clown didn't include them and knocks them down a spot in their seedings.

 

[gopher7]

I'm ok with this. Polls are a conglomeration of opinions and diverse voting criteria and that's what makes them fun. If he were intentionally trying to sabotage teams he doesn't like that is one thing, but I can buy an argument he finds it difficult to accurately rank teams who are not playing road games when the other 98% are.

 

[SelectionSunday]

I have no problem with what Couch is doing. He's making a point about coaches like K and Cal who year after year rarely (if ever) schedule true road games unless they're forced to (rivalry or mandated conference challenge game).

Gary Parrish is a pansy. I hold what he has to say about college basketball in the same regard as Myron Medcalf. ... no regard at all.

 

[theczar]

Couch is being a total clown...vote honestly for poll...do not be a jerk who votes to make a personal statement on scheduling policy

 

[gopherguy15]

I have no problem with what Couch is doing. He's making a point about coaches like K and Cal who year after year rarely (if ever) schedule true road games unless they're forced to (rivalry or mandated conference challenge game).

Gary Parrish is a pansy. I hold what he has to say about college basketball in the same regard as Myron Medcalf. ... no regard at all.

Agreed. What about this? If you don't play a single true road game (or make it two road games!) in the non-conference:
1) You will be docked one seed-line in the NCAA tournament (if you make it)
2) Or you drop 10-20 points in the NET rankings

That would scare some coaches into scheduling road games...

 

[Holy Man]

I have no problem with what Couch is doing. He's making a point about coaches like K and Cal who year after year rarely (if ever) schedule true road games unless they're forced to (rivalry or mandated conference challenge game).

Gary Parrish is a pansy. I hold what he has to say about college basketball in the same regard as Myron Medcalf. ... no regard at all.

Fighting words. No greater insult can be launched on this board!

 

[SelectionSunday]

Agreed. What about this? If you don't play a single true road game (or make it two road games!) in the non-conference:
1) You will be docked one seed-line in the NCAA tournament (if you make it)
2) Or you drop 10-20 points in the NET rankings

That would scare some coaches into scheduling road games...

I like your thinking.

This is another example where the NCAA (read: Mark Emmert in conjunction with the Selection Committee) needs to grow a pair of nuts. Like you said, mandate that every school must play such & such number of non-conference true road games (2?), at least one of which must be vs. a "smaller"/mid-major program. They could do it if they really wanted to (the NCAA is the member institutions, people forget that), but they're too afraid of egomaniac pu**ies like Coach K. They could come up with something, something good for the overall game of college basketball, where the big schools are required to go play at a MVC school, or a Summit League school, a Big Sky school, etc., schools and conferences the big boys deem below their pedigree.

 

[UpAndUnder43]

I like your thinking.

This is another example where the NCAA (read: Mark Emmert in conjunction with the Selection Committee) needs to grow a pair of nuts. Like you said, mandate that every school must play such & such number of non-conference true road games (2?), at least one of which must be vs. a "smaller"/mid-major program. They could do it if they really wanted to (the NCAA is the member institutions, people forget that), but they're too afraid of egomaniac pu**ies like Coach K. They could come up with something, something good for the overall game of college basketball, where the big schools are required to go play at a MVC school, or a Summit League school, a Big Sky school, etc., schools and conferences the big boys deem below their pedigree.

They could. But they won't. And we all know they won't because NCAA sports are about the coaches. Players come and go but Saban's, Meyer's, Coach K's and Self's are what people know. You don't talk about Michigan State in March, you talk about Izzo in March.

Its a corrupt system that continuously allows the blue bloods to remain blue bloods because thats how you get rich. Same reason they get slaps on the wrist, or less, for cheating.

 

[GopherJake]

#1 is enforceable only if the team is an obvious 1 or 2 seed.

#2 is a good idea.

 

[bizzle22]

The guy can do what he wants with his own ballot, but his little crusade is pretty dumb.

Maryland plays a 10 home games, 0 neutral site games, and 1 true road game in non-conference play.
Duke plays 8 home games, 5 neutral site games, and 0 true road games in non-conference play.

Calling out Duke while not calling out Maryland is just begging for attention.

Frankly, there is no reason to schedule true road games in non-conference play. Last time I checked all NCAA tournament games are at neutral sites. And every major conference team gets their share of road games during conference play. It's not like any power conference team is going to be able to go through the whole season without playing a couple good teams on the road. As long as you play some quality teams in non-conference (which both Duke and UK do) then I don't really care where you play them.

 

[SM_25]

I'm not a fan of this. Its just a little stunt to bring attention to himself. If you're voting, just vote on who you think the top 25 teams are. Look at the Gophers schedule for example, We've played one road game in the non-conference slate and that was in the ACC-Big Ten challenge. We played Ohio State, but that was a conference game. Who cares if teams schedule true road games or not? The only teams that should be scheduling true road games are teams that think they'll be average or below average in conference play. Scheduling those games could be a boost to the resume.

Look at the amount of game Duke, Kansas, and Tennessee have played against the top 25 teams. That a tougher task than Kansas scheduling a road game at Illinois. The logic is badly flawed and makes little to no sense.

 

[Tim1406]

Frankly, there is no reason to schedule true road games in non-conference play.

I think it’s a great way to help your team get mentally tougher against winnable competition. Better to play true road games against bad teams with a fan base that will show up unlike BC.

 

[bizzle22]

I think it’s a great way to help your team get mentally tougher against winnable competition. Better to play true road games against bad teams with a fan base that will show up unlike BC.

I get it. I think a neutral site game in many cases will also build mental toughness. With the crowd the Gophers saw at BC, that was basically like playing a neutral site game. I just don't get what it has to do with whether or not a team is deserving of being in the top 25.

If a voter wants to knock a team down a few spots for not playing a true road game that is fine. But excluding them altogether is dumb. This guy voted Gonzaga number 1. He didn't put Tennessee in his top 25 even though Tennessee is 7-1 and just beat Gonzaga. The Gonzaga-Tennessee game was played almost 2,000 miles from Tennessee's home court! Is Tennessee all of a sudden a very different team if they had beat Texas A&M-Corpus Christi on the road instead of at home? Is Duke drastically different if they had beat Stetson on the road instead of at home?

 

[Gophers7NatTitlesBadgers0]

I think it’s a great way to help your team get mentally tougher against winnable competition. Better to play true road games against bad teams with a fan base that will show up unlike BC.

I'd say Izzo has been pretty successful with this approach.