NCAA Tournament Expanding to 76

[champs99and04]

What's your point? The 12 play-in teams from majors will have little to no chance of beating 1, 2 or 3 seeds.

I don't know why you continue to completely ignore the point that we're talking about P5 underachievers in play-in games, not the top seeds. I'll remind you this thread is to discuss the expansion of the play-in field from 8 to 24 teams. Top seeds have zip to do with the topic.

I think people are arguing two different things here. Nelson has rightly pointed out that the gap has widened between majors and low-majors. Most people agree with that. If you're taking his argument literally, then yes, Duke-Siena disproves his assertion that no low major can ever hang with a top seed. But that was an outlier. The trend over the last two years would indicate that these early round match-ups may be a waste of time moving forward. If you don't think the P4 will try to use that recent data as evidence that mid-majors can no longer compete and should be excluded in the future, then you're not familiar with how they operate. This has all been carefully orchestrated by the powers that be to make the demise of Cinderella look organic. In reality, they know they're deliberately ruining the sport. They just don't care because it's making them rich.

And that's just the problem. No one at the negotiating table cares about the good of the sport. The NCAA wants to make its money. The conferences and the networks want to make their money. So too, of course, do the players.

Anyone that's pro-expansion is essentially arguing that apathy will ultimately prevail, and that what must be done eventually should be done immediately. I don't really share that perspective, in large part because I think I'll quit college sports altogether before it can reach that point. But I can follow the logic. Purists and optimists probably aren't going to like what comes next.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Matt Norlander does a good job pointing out the "endless greed from the power conferences."

The Unspoken Threat was: Expand the tournament or else.

Or else what?

Or else the Big Ten, SEC, Big 12 and ACC could eventually consider starting their own national basketball tournament? That was The Unspoken Threat. This unhealthy velvet-hammer sentiment was shared to me by various NCAA and conference sources across the past three years. The NCAA felt it had to work its way to expansion, eventually, to get the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and ACC to put down their swords.

Why March Madness expansion is really happening: NCAA unnecessarily folded to a bluff from power conferences

March Madness is going to expand because of soft threats and endless greed from the power conferences, Matt Norlander argues

www.cbssports.com

The declining number of upsets is not the fault of expansion of the tournament. House and Alston, together with the Transfer Portal, took care of that. There are more blowouts and fewer upsets across college basketball every November and December, not just March. This reality makes BCU’s performance last year even more brutal. The power conference teams are better because they are older, more developed, and more professional, and not losing their marginal NBA players to Europe anymore, while the low major teams are worse because they can’t hold their top talent.

I reject the article’s premise for a couple of reasons. First, this new system will result in 2 or maybe 3 more mid major bids a year, so it is not all the conspiracy that the article makes it out to be. I think Tulsa, New Mexico and SDSU would have gotten bids this year with an expanded tournament.

Secondly, pushing the better low majors down will result in more upsets, not less. They will be taking 4 teams that would have been 15’s and 14’s and will put them into play ins for 15. The 16s and 15s that emerge will be better. And the 14s, 13s and 12s will be better because these slots will pick up some at large teams that have a shot to win. 3 and 4 seeds will lose first round games again.

It is ironic that the same posters that ignore the obvious issues with the efficiency ratings helping the SEC believe this tournament expansion is a conspiracy theory to help the SEC. The expansion will result in about one more team per major conference, because there aren’t that many P2 teams left before expansion. This year, I think expansion would have added 1 SEC, 1 Big 10, 2 ACCs, and 1 Big East.

House, Alston and the Transfer Portal are changing sports, and this tournament expansion is simply reflecting the reality of that. I do think the CFP expansion is a cash grab that will result in a lot of blowouts, but whatever. Try it and see what happens.

 

[John]

The declining number of upsets is not the fault of expansion of the tournament. House and Alston, together with the Transfer Portal, took care of that. There are more blowouts and fewer upsets across college basketball every November and December, not just March. This reality makes BCU’s performance last year even more brutal. The power conference teams are better because they are older, more developed, and more professional, and not losing their marginal NBA players to Europe anymore, while the low major teams are worse because they can’t hold their top talent.

I reject the article’s premise for a couple of reasons. First, this new system will result in 2 or maybe 3 more mid major bids a year, so it is not all the conspiracy that the article makes it out to be. I think Tulsa, New Mexico and SDSU would have gotten bids this year with an expanded tournament.

Secondly, pushing the better low majors down will result in more upsets, not less. They will be taking 4 teams that would have been 15’s and 14’s and will put them into play ins for 15. The 16s and 15s that emerge will be better. And the 14s, 13s and 12s will be better because these slots will pick up some at large teams that have a shot to win. 3 and 4 seeds will lose first round games again.

It is ironic that the same posters that ignore the obvious issues with the efficiency ratings helping the SEC believe this tournament expansion is a conspiracy theory to help the SEC. The expansion will result in about one more team per major conference, because there aren’t that many P2 teams left before expansion. This year, I think expansion would have added 1 SEC, 1 Big 10, 2 ACCs, and 1 Big East.

House, Alston and the Transfer Portal are changing sports, and this tournament expansion is simply reflecting the reality of that. I do think the CFP expansion is a cash grab that will result in a lot of blowouts, but whatever. Try it and see what happens.

Executive summary: you prefer the Everyone Gets a Trophy tournament format. Coach takes the team out for ice cream after the game.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Executive summary: you prefer the Everyone Gets a Trophy tournament format. Coach takes the team out for ice cream after the game.

Sure thing, grandpa.

 

[Umami Zen]

So..Are Dauster and Goodman now employed at "The Field of 76"?

 

[RashadRay11]

So..Are Dauster and Goodman now employed at "The Field of 76"?

Very patriotic!

 

[AZHuskiePop]

Not enough info to determine if this helps us or not
The.only important thing is by how much of any the distribution number.changed
$16,000,000. Increase Is break even for the men’s tourney less snd we lose money
The women’s number are still too small to pay many bills .
The UConn men have earned close to 40 million dollars for the Big East since 2021. 36 million in the last 4 years
Since. The Big east has an uneven top secret distribution based on performance
Also
Starting in 2026 the FF teams got $2 million for each win . So our 2026 team earned more than 23 and 24NC

 

[freescooter]

This would be an ok move if it were combined with a limit on conference bids like no more than 50% or something similar like no non-aq teams without a winning record in conference. Let’s be honest. Not a soul is screaming to see the #14SEC team play #13 from the Big 10.

If you are going to insist on this approach I’d go the opposite way. Give the top 4 or 8 first round byes. Everyone else plays the first round. First round would need to be 120 but who cares at this point. Or take Coach K’s proposal during Covid and just have a come-one come-all thing where you bring in everyone. Ditch the conference tournaments.

 

[giddyup]

All about squeezing dollars while diluting the product until people puke. The continual corporatization and monetization of collegiate sports because lord knows we can’t have competition for the sake of the sport itself. Why every blessed good thing must be monetized speaks to how far our culture has descended into empty materialism.

 

[pepband99]

The declining number of upsets is not the fault of expansion of the tournament. House and Alston, together with the Transfer Portal, took care of that. There are more blowouts and fewer upsets across college basketball every November and December, not just March. This reality makes BCU’s performance last year even more brutal. The power conference teams are better because they are older, more developed, and more professional, and not losing their marginal NBA players to Europe anymore, while the low major teams are worse because they can’t hold their top talent.

I reject the article’s premise for a couple of reasons. First, this new system will result in 2 or maybe 3 more mid major bids a year, so it is not all the conspiracy that the article makes it out to be. I think Tulsa, New Mexico and SDSU would have gotten bids this year with an expanded tournament.

Secondly, pushing the better low majors down will result in more upsets, not less. They will be taking 4 teams that would have been 15’s and 14’s and will put them into play ins for 15. The 16s and 15s that emerge will be better. And the 14s, 13s and 12s will be better because these slots will pick up some at large teams that have a shot to win. 3 and 4 seeds will lose first round games again.

It is ironic that the same posters that ignore the obvious issues with the efficiency ratings helping the SEC believe this tournament expansion is a conspiracy theory to help the SEC. The expansion will result in about one more team per major conference, because there aren’t that many P2 teams left before expansion. This year, I think expansion would have added 1 SEC, 1 Big 10, 2 ACCs, and 1 Big East.

House, Alston and the Transfer Portal are changing sports, and this tournament expansion is simply reflecting the reality of that. I do think the CFP expansion is a cash grab that will result in a lot of blowouts, but whatever. Try it and see what happens.

And yet, you've spent MONTHS proclaiming the SEC's kenpom ranking signifying them them the "OMG CONFERENCE EVER" and "they're cheating the system blah blah" like it's a violation of Geneva Convention. Despite everyone telling you you're wrong. Repeatedly. And trolling and misquoting everyone who disagrees with you. Repeatedly.

The mid and low majors have dropped, per you. Likely correct.

Guess who the "average team" likely is that this SEC ranking is being rated against. A mid-major.

At some point the light bulb will go off.

 

[CL82]

Matt Norlander does a good job pointing out the "endless greed from the power conferences."

The Unspoken Threat was: Expand the tournament or else.

Or else what?

Or else the Big Ten, SEC, Big 12 and ACC could eventually consider starting their own national basketball tournament? That was The Unspoken Threat. This unhealthy velvet-hammer sentiment was shared to me by various NCAA and conference sources across the past three years. The NCAA felt it had to work its way to expansion, eventually, to get the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and ACC to put down their swords.

Why March Madness expansion is really happening: NCAA unnecessarily folded to a bluff from power conferences

March Madness is going to expand because of soft threats and endless greed from the power conferences, Matt Norlander argues

www.cbssports.com

The men's basketball tournament is the only thing that makes money for the NCAA. You lose that, you lose everything. The NCAA dies. That's the power of The Unspoken Threat.
...
It would never happen.

The most powerful people in college football's "Power Four" do not carry the collective guts, gumption nor stupidity to actually go through with such a doomsday act. To leave the NCAA Tournament and start your own would mean to leave the NCAA altogether. All the other sports have to come with you, and all those sports cost a lot of money. What do you even do with the Big East, which doesn't have football but boasts three of the most historically significantly programs in the sport's history? Do you have a national tournament without UConn? Get all the way out of here with that.

Personally, I think they would. Greed and hubris has already destroyed a lot of what we loved about college athletics. Why not March madness as well?

The notion that it wouldn't make the P4 money because they'd have to pay for all their non-revenue sports is a fallacy, because March madness is already doing that, and doing it for the G6 and it's also paying for DII and DIII. That's where the money grab is.

Still, the NCAA acts of appeasement are pointless. If the only thing that stops you from being murdered is committing suicide, it's not much of a victory.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

And yet, you've spent MONTHS proclaiming the SEC's kenpom ranking signifying them them the "OMG CONFERENCE EVER" and "they're cheating the system blah blah" like it's a violation of Geneva Convention. Despite everyone telling you you're wrong. Repeatedly. And trolling and misquoting everyone who disagrees with you. Repeatedly.

The mid and low majors have dropped, per you. Likely correct.

Guess who the "average team" likely is that this SEC ranking is being rated against. A mid-major.

At some point the light bulb will go off.

Your reactive desire to disagree with everything I post is both petty and makes you look like a clown.

You spent months denying that the efficiency ratings had overrated the SEC despite obvious problems, such as the SEC's losing record against the other majors during the season. What happened when the SEC got to the tournament? It faceplanted. You had data that you were wrong in December, you continued to argue a position that was wrong despite that data, and then you were proven wrong again. People get fired from their jobs every day for being a lot less wrong than that.

I am pointing out that the additional tournament teams will be spread out across conferences, you are claiming all the additional teams will be SEC teams. We will see who is correct.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The men's basketball tournament is the only thing that makes money for the NCAA. You lose that, you lose everything. The NCAA dies. That's the power of The Unspoken Threat.
...
It would never happen.

The most powerful people in college football's "Power Four" do not carry the collective guts, gumption nor stupidity to actually go through with such a doomsday act. To leave the NCAA Tournament and start your own would mean to leave the NCAA altogether. All the other sports have to come with you, and all those sports cost a lot of money. What do you even do with the Big East, which doesn't have football but boasts three of the most historically significantly programs in the sport's history? Do you have a national tournament without UConn? Get all the way out of here with that.

Personally, I think they would. Greed and hubris has already destroyed a lot of what we loved about college athletics. Why not March madness as well?

The notion that it wouldn't make the P4 money because they'd have to pay for all their non-revenue sports is a fallacy, because March madness is already doing that, and doing it for the G6 and it's also paying for DII and DIII. That's where the money grab is.

Still, the NCAA acts of appeasement are pointless. If the only thing that stops you from being murdered is committing suicide, it's not much of a victory.

I am struggling with the conspiracy angle. Conspiracy against who? The NIT has turned into a low and somewhat mid-major tournament. I have no problem with that, but there are a few decent teams on the fringe that don't belong in the NIT. Rather than split these teams with the NIT, the NCAA is just pulling 8 of them up. Not a big deal. I actually think it will make the selection process less political because there will be enough at-large spots to get every team that is remotely deserving into the tournament.

It is also not a conspiracy to point out that the days of a 13, 14, 15 or 16 seed winning a first round game are close to over, with those kind of upsets becoming exceptionally rare, at least the way the tournament is currently constructed. If you want more big upsets, you need better 13 through 16 seeded teams.

There are a lot of huge threats to college sports in the next few years. Adding 8 more mediocre teams to the NCAA tournament and making the MEAC play the NEC champion for a shot against UConn or Duke in the first round are not even among the top 20 of those threats.

 

[John]

I am struggling with the conspiracy angle. Conspiracy against who? The NIT has turned into a low and somewhat mid-major tournament. I have no problem with that, but there are a few decent teams on the fringe that don't belong in the NIT. Rather than split these teams with the NIT, the NCAA is just pulling 8 of them up. Not a big deal. I actually think it will make the selection process less political because there will be enough at-large spots to get every team that is remotely deserving into the tournament.

It is also not a conspiracy to point out that the days of a 13, 14, 15 or 16 seed winning a first round game are close to over, with those kind of upsets becoming exceptionally rare, at least the way the tournament is currently constructed. If you want more big upsets, you need better 13 through 16 seeded teams.

There are a lot of huge threats to college sports in the next few years. Adding 8 more mediocre teams to the NCAA tournament and making the MEAC play the NEC champion for a shot against UConn or Duke in the first round are not even among the top 20 of those threats.

All AQs must avoid the play-in.