(03-01-2021, 01:02 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: [for men's BB] Stanford and Arizona opposed it, but everyone else supported it. The P10 tournament was reinstated in 2002.IIRC (which I very well may not), the AQ bid was an important consideration. Stanford and AZ hadn't needed it to make the tournament for years by 2000 (and I guess didn't foresee needing it now!). UCLA had also opposed a tournament historically because it didn't need it either, but at that time it had years in which it did. Only 3 "no" votes were needed to sink the proposal, but UCLA voted for the conference tourney in 2000. For the conference, the AQ bid gives the conference more $ when the AQ bid is won by a team that otherwise would not have gone to the tournament.
My even shakier recall is that the 1987-1990 conference tourney was tried on the theory that the reason the Pac-12 teams were getting drummed out of the NCAA tourney so early was that its teams weren't toughened by a conference tournament like everyone else. That was a dumb theory and a short-lived experiment.
Please correct my errors of memory if necessary!