Would it be unfair to a team that earned a bye if they had to host a team that got in via earned access rather than get the week off? I guess, but that has to be less unfair than a team being left out, don't you think?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
EA should not displace another team, If anything take away the 1 seed's bye
Collapse
Support The Site!
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Mk63NuclearBomb View Post
Instead of the #1 seed getting a bye, they would play an #8 seeded EA team, thereby adding a team to the playoffs rather than pushing an otherwise-deserving #7 seed out.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Turbonium View Post
What about the poor #9 team though? I was confused about the randomness of the thread I guess. What if there isn't an EA team? It's not all that common for a team to get in via EA so what then? All four #1 seeds would need an EA team to play against and that's never going to happen. Or are we just using the term EA for any #8 seeded team that was chosen?
Comment
-
Originally posted by BearsLRU View PostI'm assuming you mean if there is an EA team the 1 seed loses its bye. I don't think thats fair, I do think we should have 8 teams in each reason and conference champs should get auto bids.
Comment
-
Originally posted by boyblue View Post
The idea is simply that if there is a EA qualifying team in a particular SR, that region's one seed hosts that team instead of getting a bye, everything else stays the same.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by BearsLRU View PostI'm assuming you mean if there is an EA team the 1 seed loses its bye. I don't think thats fair, I do think we should have 8 teams in each reason and conference champs should get auto bids.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Inkblot View Post
The GNAC wouldn't have enough teams for an auto bid.
Comment
Ad3
Collapse
Comment