NCAA Tournament Expanding to 76 | Page 3 | The Boneyard

NCAA Tournament Expanding to 76

nelsonmuntz said:
I don’t have a problem with this. It will help the Big East.

Expand ...

I doubt it helps the Big East. Maybe every few years an extra Big East team gets in, but that’ll be because the committee doesn’t want to weather allowing a 15-18 Auburn team in.
nelsonmuntz said:
It is good for the players, and also just facing the modern reality.

With players getting paid, many don’t want to risk injury in the NIT. 5 major conference teams declined NIT bids this year. More NCAA tournament games means more opportunities for players to showcase their talent on the biggest stage.

Also, with players getting paid, it is almost impossible for a 16 or 15 seed to win. The chasm between even the mid majors and low majors is massive. There is no overcoming it anymore. The bottom 12 conference champs should have a play in. It gives those teams a chance to win a game, and gets the best possible 15 and 16 seeds for the round of 64.
Expand ...

Schools have been bailing on the NIT for years. Expanding the NCAAT won’t change that.
 
You have one of the greatest sports events. It's up there with the Super Bowl and The Masters. So the NCAA says, "Let's change it."

The current portal/transfer situation is widely criticized by most, including the coaches who have to deal with it and the NCAA says, "Let's do nothing or if we do, let's think about adding a 5th year of eligibility to make it even more confusing and chaotic."

Same old NCAA, I guess.
 
Hunt for 7 said:
As long as we make the tournament every year then I really don’t care what else they do to try and create more revenue to feed the machine.

Look at the Vanderbilt QB he is about to take a huge pay cut to go from college football to pro football. It is already happening, college is now a jr professional sport, then they move onto the NFL and NBA, the next thing that happens is the Senior NBA, Senior MLB…..just like golf. Sr NBA will be a shooting competition and the Sr MLB will be a slow pitch softball game. Cannot think of a version of football that can be played without injury.
Expand ...
Your last sentence is the main reason I have not watched a football game in at least 25 years
 
.-.
LBird33 said:
This is to get more P4 at large mediocre teams in. Means more money for the p4 teams Has nothing to do with helping the mid major’s whatsoever
Expand ...
As if the mid majors weren't overcompensated for their actual contribution to the tournament.

There is no need to expand the tournament but we don't have to pretend that the MAAC is a valuable part of determining a national title or bringing in a large share of the viewing audience.
 
Bad news for the Field of 68 podcast guys - a major rebrand will have to be undertaken.
 
EnochRoot said:
I doubt it helps the Big East. Maybe every few years an extra Big East team gets in, but that’ll be because the committee doesn’t want to weather allowing a 15-18 Auburn team in.


Schools have been bailing on the NIT for years. Expanding the NCAAT won’t change that.
Expand ...

8 more major conference and high mid-major teams getting bids will reduce the number of teams cancelling on the NIT.


A lot of the complaining about this change falls into the "old man yells at cloud" level of analysis. People are mostly complaining because they don't like change. The world has already changed, we need a tournament that reflects that world.
 
.-.
storrsroars said:
I disagree. I believe matching 14 and some 15 seeds vs the worst of the at-larges will give you surprisingly competitive games. And the 16 seeds will get at least a puncher's chance.

The issue here is about the conference tournaments taking out the best team in too many cases. That's how you get a Prairie View A&M (301 NET) instead of a Bethune Cookman (260), or a Queens (192) instead of Austin Peay (164), or other examples. A number of these conferences did not send their best team to the tourney because of a conference tournament upset.

Your 14 seeds were ND State (116), Kennesaw St (147), Penn (146), and Wright St. (125). Note that Penn won the Ivy over Yale (74), and Kennesaw won over Liberty (102). I believe the regular season conference champs in each of these leagues would be very competitive vs the lowest of the at-larges. The games would also be more meaningful than simply beating up on the 16 seeds.

I can't and don't speak for everyone. But for myself, it feels more egalitarian and interesting as a fan to see the sisters of the poor fare against the born on third base mediocrity. I'd watch those games to root for the underdog. As it is now, I don't watch the First Four. Just don't care.
Expand ...

Walk me through how a team with maybe a $500k budget, or less, stays on the court with a major conference team that has a $5 million budget. These games were mostly blowouts before the players were getting paid. Now they are just silly.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Walk me through how a team with maybe a $500k budget, or less, stays on the court with a major conference team that has a $5 million budget. These games were mostly blowouts before the players were getting paid. Now they are just silly.
Expand ...

IMG_0539.jpeg
 
The expansion is simply a method to make sure as many of the credits as possible are scooped up by the P2. We're going to go from the current 19-20 P2 bids to 30+. They blew the size of their conferences up and now they need to find a way to get the 16th place school into the NCAAs.

If you think the Big East is a winner here, let me know how large a bridge you're in the market for.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Walk me through how a team with maybe a $500k budget, or less, stays on the court with a major conference team that has a $5 million budget. These games were mostly blowouts before the players were getting paid. Now they are just silly.
Expand ...
Brother both 16 over 1 upsets happened in the last decade.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
Walk me through how a team with maybe a $500k budget, or less, stays on the court with a major conference team that has a $5 million budget. These games were mostly blowouts before the players were getting paid. Now they are just silly.
Expand ...
Also we know you only care about the Big East which is fine, but this is not done for the benefit of the Big East whatsoever. This is done solely for the benefit of the SEC and BIG 10. It is a money grab, pure and simple.
 
it’s a terrible idea . 1) every team has a chance to get in via conference tournament 2) how does a 16-14,team four games under 50 in their conference make the tournament better 🤷🏻‍♂️ or be deserving
 
nelsonmuntz said:
8 more major conference and high mid-major teams getting bids will reduce the number of teams cancelling on the NIT.


A lot of the complaining about this change falls into the "old man yells at cloud" level of analysis. People are mostly complaining because they don't like change. The world has already changed, we need a tournament that reflects that world.
Expand ...

You’re being delusional here if you think the NIT will thrive as a result of this (as much as thinking the mid-majors will come out on top, too).

And, no offense intended, but I don’t get an ‘old man yells at cloud’ vibe here so much as I do a ‘Baghdad Bob’ from you. Don’t fix what isn’t broken.


giphy.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,617
Messages
4,585,747
Members
10,497
Latest member
Orlando Fos


Top Bottom