NCAA Tournament Expanding to 76 | The Boneyard

NCAA Tournament Expanding to 76

...would expand to 12 games played by 24 teams at two sites, one of which was expected to remain in Dayton.

Good lord, 24 teams in "play-in round"....what will that be all the 15 & 16 seeds & the last 8 at large teams?
 
Last edited:
.-.
Hi-Low said:
...would expand to 12 games played by 24 teams at two sites, one of which was expected to remain in Dayton.

Good lord, 24 teams in "play-in round"...what will that be all the 15 & 16 seeds & the last 8 at large teams?
Expand ...
I may be in the minority but i do not like the First Four.
Perhaps if it was all the mediocre bubble teams playing each other than maybe. But it’s crummy to make the 16 seeds play their way in. They win a conference they should get a chance to hang with the big boys. Thats the real “dream”. The losers of the 16-16 game must feel so ripped off to make the NCAA and then never actually be on the big stage.
Like you said. Guarantee all 16 seeds will have to play their way in at a minimum. Maybe the 15s as well. Which is a shame.
 
Hi-Low said:
...would expand to 12 games played by 24 teams at two sites, one of which was expected to remain in Dayton.

Good lord, 24 teams in "play-in round"....what will that be all the 15 & 16 seeds & the last 8 at large teams?
Expand ...

I hope so. The era of a traditional 15 or 16 beating a 1 seed is over. All the 16's should have play in games. I wouldn't mind at least half the 15's doing the same. We would have stronger 15's and 16's, and the 12's, 13's and 14's would all be better too.
 
Hi-Low said:
...would expand to 12 games played by 24 teams at two sites, one of which was expected to remain in Dayton.

Good lord, 24 teams in "play-in round"....what will that be all the 15 & 16 seeds & the last 8 at large teams?
Expand ...
For the most part, I'm okay with it, but having to listening to the talking heads arguing what programs outside the top 76 should have made the field will be insufferable.
 
Hi-Low said:
...would expand to 12 games played by 24 teams at two sites, one of which was expected to remain in Dayton.

Good lord, 24 teams in "play-in round"....what will that be all the 15 & 16 seeds & the last 8 at large teams?
Expand ...


1777421524096.png
 
Chonky said:
I may be in the minority but i do not like the First Four.
Perhaps if it was all the mediocre bubble teams playing each other than maybe. But it’s crummy to make the 16 seeds play their way in. They win a conference they should get a chance to hang with the big boys. Thats the real “dream”. The losers of the 16-16 game must feel so ripped off to make the NCAA and then never actually be on the big stage.
Like you said. Guarantee all 16 seeds will have to play their way in at a minimum. Maybe the 15s as well. Which is a shame.
Expand ...
The only thing is the 16 seeds like the play in game because it allows them to earn a NCAAT credit ($$) for a victory. Let's face it, 16 seeds are not winning a game against a 1 seed with the exception of 2 games and a few close calls.
 
.-.
I hate this so much. I am glad Miami of Ohio got in and not a mediocre half-ass Auburn got in this past year. I am not convinced this will help the Big East, but rather the P4 or P-whatever.

I don't want to see majors with losing conference records going into the NCAAT, I really don't. All this expansion does is cheapen the regular season.

I Dont Like It Ron Burgundy GIF
 
gsmooth said:
The only thing is the 16 seeds like the play in game because it allows them to earn a NCAAT credit ($$) for a victory. Let's face it, 16 seeds are not winning a game against a 1 seed with the exception of 2 games and a few close calls.
Expand ...
The school and the conference may very well like it.

I doubt the players do.
 
.-.
First th article says this

"The primary driver of this move hasn't been money,"

Then it says this

" but rather access for at-large bids for power conferences. The expansion has been pushed by power conferences, which have grown throughout the course of the current deal"


Which translates to more bids equals more units for power conferences, which means more $$$

This is such BS reporting by ESPN, how the hell can you say it's not about money then indicate that more money will be made.

The article is insulting intelligence. Screw you ESPN and the power conferences placated by trash articles like this
 
Last edited:
.-.
If they're really doing this, then I don't want to see AQ vs AQ in the play-in games. I'd rather see the best AQ in the play-in field play the worst P4, second best play second worst, and so on.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,608
Messages
4,585,492
Members
10,496
Latest member
rONIn


Top Bottom