Quantcast

Comments about ‘College basketball: A bigger dance? Timeout, some say’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Feb. 1 2010 8:58 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
lame

lame

Only Way

This would be the only way mediocre programs like the UofU could get in the big dance.

gbanksd

This smells of change for change sake. How could adding 3 teams to the tournement's possibly impact
for good or ill an event which is a world wide success. And then there is the notion that adding 31 teams will make the event more exciting. No one would remember how played in or won the event.

good

I think it is a good thing. It's a shame that the regular season conference winner in some of the mid major conferences gets upset by a lower seed and their season is overwith. Reward the regular season winner, not just the all to often lucky tournment winner

Aggie24 re: Only Way

I'm not even a UofU fan, but the condescension inherent in your comment is juvenile.

It wasn't very long ago that Utah was in the National Championship game. All programs go through ups and downs. Good players graduate. Good coaches move on. Schools go through growing pains. Whatever school you cheer for, it will happen to them too. Its just a matter of time.

I wish comments like this would stop appearing on these boards and we could have intelligent conversations.

Sports Insanity

96 or more would be even better,

and drop the NIT,


That way every team the belives they deserve to be in it would be in it.

One big end of season tournament, OH YEAH!

re: only way

I do hope you realize that it would add just that many more teams that would bounce your coogs out of the first round.

The Utes are afterall defending conference champions - of both the conference and the conference tournament. Oh shoot, maybe you forgot.

Go Utes!!! and Go USU!!! They are the only teams that can win the NCAA!!! Weber State might have won a tourney game more recent than the y...so Go Wildcats!!!

wet

Adding more teams-regardless of the number-just means more schools from the big conferences. Teams with 8-12 losses will be invited.

This will be just like the unwanted and unnecessary bowls that have teams with .500 records.

Forgetaboutit!

Red Headed Stranger

Why stop at 96? Currently teams have to win 6 games to be national champions.

2^6 = 64

Think how much more exiting it would be if teams had to win TWICE as many games.

2^12 = 4096

That way ALL college teams would get to play if there were a field of 4096! Even community college teams, or truck driving schools, or beauticians! Think how inclusive and diverse the representation would be, as well as the tickets sold and the tournament would last for a month and a half! March-April-May madness! Invite teams from strange, mysterious far-off places like Iceland, Curacao, Delaware and Micronesia. That sounds like a much better tournament to me.

leave it alone

The system is fine the way it is. The NCAA should be focusing on football and figuring out a way to fairly name a NC in that sport. This is just a way to make more money off the backs of college athletes.

defending champions

"The Utes are afterall defending conference champions"

that's true

but, the Cougars are 3-time defending conference champions and the odds on favorite to make it four straight, and, the Cougars have all but clinched a bid to their 4th straight NCAA tournament.

Utah has only played in one NCAA in the last 3 years, and it would take a minor miracle for the Utes to make the tournament this year.

Adding 3 teams

to create a play-in game in each regional makes some sense.

Expanding the field to 96 teams would just mean adding a bunch of .500 or sub-.500 record teams from the Power Conferences.

Do we really need or want 12 teams from the Big East or ACC?

The regular season for the Big East and ACC would become absolutely meaningless.

There will always be teams on the bubble that probably deserved to be in the tournament, but didn't make it because of upsets in the conference tournaments.

But, that's part of the intrigue of the conference tournaments. Giving a team that may have gotten off to a slow start, but is hot at the end of the season, one last chance to get an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament.

96 bottles of...

Expanding the NCAA tournament to 96 teams would ruin the tournament.

We'd have the basketball equivalent of football bowl games where every team with a winning record in the power conferences would make the tournament.

The Solution...

...is to do away with the conference tournaments altogether; they are a pointless exhibition that more often than not does not crown a true conference champion. That was already decided in the regular season. Rather, double the field to 128 teams. Have 32 groups of four teams play round-robin in the first round. That way everyone is guaranteed three games. Take the 32 group winners and regroup them into eight groups of four in round two for another three-game set. After two weeks of filtering you're down to the Elite Eight, who can then play a single elimination tournament. There. Problem solved.

danburtreynolds

I would like to echo Aggie 24, it just gets tiring.

I remember when the NBA moved the 3 point line, and Larry Bird said commented that we should just make every shot worth 3 points. Expanding the tourney makes me feel the same way, why don't we just let everyone in. It is already a joke that the conference championship means very little, and that teams get to host the tourney. Good grief, NCAA, don't you make enough off of these guys already?

LaVar the Utah Cat

Why even play a season? Why not just start out with the NCAA tournament with all teams. This is a not-very-smart idea to generate more revenue for the NCAA. Leave the tournament as it is currently.

BYUwishing

Sounds like BYU is wishing to extend the dance eh!

Maybe this way they will get a first round win agains university of polytech or University of Canyon state or something

Cougarf@n

I don't have a problem with expanding to create a couple more play in games to accomodate conference expansions, but I'd really hate to see the 64 team format blown up into 90+. If new conferences are made among crummy or spanking new programs and the NCAA wants to throw a play-in game their way that's fine with me, but do we really need to make the NIT or CBI any less relevant? I think not.

Always Dancing

Unlike that school up on the hill, BYU doesn't need the NCAA to expand to get an invitation to the Big Dance.

re: Only Way

Do you always have to turn any sports article into a BYU-UTAH trash talking event? Try reading the article and get over your anger by going to some anger management classes.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments