Expanding The NCAA Tournament !

[RockyMTblue2]

I had no idea this was in the works. This article says it is all but a done deal and the hop will be from 68 to 76. For me the early rounds are already too soft but what do you think?

Sources: NCAA nears decision on larger tourney

A decision on whether or not to expand the NCAA men's and women's basketball tournaments will be made in the upcoming weeks, sources told ESPN.

www.espn.com

 

[jcoton56]

Follow the money, I mean which conferences are gobble up these extra berths? Esp. Now that NCAA pays money out of the revenue pile. Little guys are not gonna benefit from this one bit in my opinion. If the P5 gang does not get most of these spots prepare to hear bloody murder.

 

[CTBballfan243]

Follow the money, I mean which conferences are gobble up these extra berths? Esp. Now that NCAA pays money out of the revenue pile. Little guys are not gonna benefit from this one bit in my opinion. If the P5 gang does not get most of these spots prepare to hear bloody murder.

P5 LOL, Try P2

 

[Centerstream]

With the adding of more schools they should also make regular season champions that are upset in their conference tourney automatic qualifiers. This most likely would only apply to mid majors or lower level conferences.
But there's no money in inviting another team from these conferences, so....

 

[Bigboote]

Follow the money, I mean which conferences are gobble up these extra berths? Esp. Now that NCAA pays money out of the revenue pile. Little guys are not gonna benefit from this one bit in my opinion. If the P5 gang does not get most of these spots prepare to hear bloody murder.

I think it’s also a way to insure that fewer of the winners of the smaller conferences play in the real tourney games. Again, it’s about money.

I’d be fine with this if all of the teams that have won automatic bids were going to play in the round of 64. The way it is, they play in half of the play-in games, thus not experiencing the atmosphere of the tourney. Give all of the play-in spots to the teams that were gifted spots by a flawed committee rather than those who have won spots.

 

[EricLA]

I have no idea how it would work, but i see no reason not to have a "play in tournament" - just like they do in the majors in tennis.

Currently there are 60 auto bids right? then there is a play in for 8 teams and the 4 winners round out the 64? so why not just increase it to 16? have 16 teams fighting for 4 spots. single elimination, play every 3rd day for a week, and go from 16 to 8 to 4 invited to the round of 64? Seems like a no brainer and would give the current bubble teams a chance to earn a spot.

The losers could still be eligible for the other post season tournaments IMHO. But I'm NOT in favor of decreasing the auto bids from 60 to lower to make room for the "others" who have to play in. Make it hard for them.

 

[Cuango]

This is a really bad idea! They already have the one sporting event that everyone loves and they just won’t be satisfied until they ruin it as well! Unbelievable!

 

[Blakeon18]

Uhh...should go back to 64.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

No. These kids already play too many games as it is.

 

[Viet Vet]

Call me old school, but no team (men or women) should be eligible with a league record under .500.

 

[Forego]

Oh no!!!! There go my chances of filling out a perfect bracket.

 

[hoopsfan22]

They should cut back to 32 or 48 if anything. There just aren't enough good teams.

 

[JellyBean]

I laugh after reading some of the comments because those of us that have been with the women's tournament since 1978 range, can remember (hopefully) when it was only 16 teams in the tournament (AIAW era). Then it went to 24 teams. Folks were complaining how those additional 8 teams would ruin the game. It was "all about the money" The counter argument was "Think about the growth of the game. Teams that need the exposure" That comment came from legendary Pat Summit.

Jump to the NCAA taking over from AIAW and we get 32 teams and slowly they build up to where we are today with the current slate of teams. The game has not been impacted in a negative manner. When Texas won it all in '86, ESPN just started airing some of the tournament but like it was geared towards certain markets. Midwest folks got the Lady Vols coverage and back then only CBS showed the title game. We had to read Sports Illustrated or a newspaper to find out the outcome of a game/tournament.

The point I am making is, R-E-L-A-X people. The game will be okay. We have seen the tournament go from 16-68 teams over the last 4-5 decades and we have seen some incredible programs develop and some great games in that timespan. Stop tripping people. More teams. More money. The game just keeps getting better.

 

[rugbymate]

Agree that it’s a tip of the hat to the P5 schools….but who wants to watch the 72nd ranked team play the 75th ranked team. It’ll be worse than watching NIT games where lower ranked schools at least have a chance of winning the tournament.

 

[Stagnant]

I want contraction. Shrink the field to 64.

 

[The CDR-Ret]

I laugh after reading some of the comments because those of us that have been with the women's tournament since 1978 range, can remember (hopefully) when it was only 16 teams in the tournament (AIAW era). Then it went to 24 teams. Folks were complaining how those additional 8 teams would ruin the game. It was "all about the money" The counter argument was "Think about the growth of the game. Teams that need the exposure" That comment came from legendary Pat Summit.

Jump to the NCAA taking over from AIAW and we get 32 teams and slowly they build up to where we are today with the current slate of teams. The game has not been impacted in a negative manner. When Texas won it all in '86, ESPN just started airing some of the tournament but like it was geared towards certain markets. Midwest folks got the Lady Vols coverage and back then only CBS showed the title game. We had to read Sports Illustrated or a newspaper to find out the outcome of a game/tournament.

The point I am making is, R-E-L-A-X people. The game will be okay. We have seen the tournament go from 16-68 teams over the last 4-5 decades and we have seen some incredible programs develop and some great games in that timespan. Stop tripping people. More teams. More money. The game just keeps getting better.

There were two other end of season tournaments WBIT & WNIT with 48 & 32 teams, making 148 of the 364 team making a post-season tournament. The WNBA has eight of 13 making the post season (was 8 of 12 last year).

I don't mind if the regular season conference champions, and Conference tournament champions are auto-qualifiers for the NCAA tournament, as that would make many mid-major conferences have 4 or 5 eligible for the THREE end of year tournaments.

However, a Holiday Invitational for the top eight ranked teams that do not count against the 40 (or 39) games should be added between 12/26 & 12/30, so UConn would have a shot at 43-0, or as low as 40-3 with another NC. Also, have consolation brackets for 3/4, and 5/6 (do not play the 7/8 game, so that a third loss is not attached to those who both lost in the first and second rounds).

That would help with the rankings/seedings for the NCAA.

Go Huskies!!!

 

[nwhoopfan]

With the adding of more schools they should also make regular season champions that are upset in their conference tourney automatic qualifiers.

There shouldn't be conference tourneys then. There are many leagues that are deservedly one bid only. If somebody upsets the regular season champ, that's the price to be paid.

 

[Centerstream]

There shouldn't be conference tourneys then. There are many leagues that are deservedly one bid only. If somebody upsets the regular season champ, that's the price to be paid.

Oh well. I think a team's regular season should be rewarded, not just a 3 or 4 game winning streak. Especially when teams with losing conference records, that don't win the conference tourney, are invited.
And like I inferred...my suggestion would never be considered because the minds in charge have the same opinion as you do...and I am not saying anything against you. It's the reality in the big $$$$$ decisions.
And to be clear, I still want the tournament winners to get the automatic bids.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

Here’s one of my measuring sticks when it comes to expansion. It’s when clearly bad teams claim they were snubbed from the field. In my mind…you shouldn’t expand. There should be a few potential Cinderellas…not a dozen.

 

[topogigio]

Uhh...should go back to 64.

Correct, there are too many teams in the tournament now. If you really want to add more teams, get rid of the league tournament champs from the chump leagues. They get soundly trounced every year and need a miracle to get out of the second round if they even make it that far. Maybe in a few more years when there is enough talent to go around, but not right now!

 

[PacoSwede]

what do u think of this:

no more than 3 (or 4) teams get into the NCAA tournament from any conference ...

hahaha

that will give the P4, 3, 2 something to think (or tremble) over. mayhaps they might decide to BREAK THEMSELVES UP into a bunch of reasonably sized conferences with a more regional flavor.

this would save money (on travel) and be better for the players (less travel and more time to be students, which is allegedly why they're in college enjoying their brief respite from reality).

BONUS: it would create a more fan-friendly situation ... easier to access away games; fewer of their favorite teams will be losing in overloaded power conferences -- they might actually post a winning record, and it will mean something since bottom dwellers -- although they might have better WNBA wannabes and better teams -- won't get into the tourney. logically the better teams would be better off in smaller conferences where they could actually win more.

the ncaa would not lose money in the process. more teams that have winning ways will attract more fans ... and tv viewers. voila, more $$ for the greedy institution.

of course. the powers running the "power conferences" (and the NCAA, it appears) would never endorse this because they would lose precious power. they must keep things under their thumbs. power is more vital to such folks than anything, not the students, not colleges ... not even $$$$. what matters is their personal power, and their continuing membership in the cabal of ego worshippers,

 

[RockyMTblue2]

I'm of the if it ain't broke crowd.

 

[and one]

I'm not all that fond of the play in model. Rocky is right - don't screw up a good thing for a few extra bucks.i get that if you're a student at some nice little college in northern kind of nowhere and your team plays in a gym that seats 3,000 and they went 29 and 2 and they get into a playoff game for the big dance (!!!) and you and a couple hundred of your best buddies get to spend a cold afternoon crammed into a sports bar to drink many beers and cheer on the home team, well this is an epic way to spend your time. More than 50 miles from campus no one gives a damn. Go team...