Here is what you do:There are 32 D1 conferences. Give the regular season
champion from each of the 32 conferences an automatic bid. Do away with the
traditional post-season conference tournaments, but each conference selects a
second team to enter the NCAA tournament by holding a 4 or 8 team conference
tournament (this tournament would exclude the conference champion). The NCAA
tournament would then consist of 64 teams. This plan has a number of
advantages:1. Places emphasis on the regular season by giving the
automatic bid to the regular season champion. 2. Makes the regular season even
more important in that not every team gets into the post-season conference
tournament (example, only the top 4 teams play). 3. All conferences are equally
represented, which would eventually lead to more parity across conferences. 4.
Allows for continuation of the NIT tournament, which would include some pretty
good teams. 5. There would no longer be six teams from some conferences in the
NCAA tournament. (I contend that if you are the 5th or 6th best team in any
conference you shouldn't be playing for the NCAA championship.
Or maybe the uties. They afterall fit into the category of those other schools
you mentioned. That is of course unless the uties played SW Baptist in the
first round, then the Cougs wouldn't play them.
this year | 3:22 p.m. Feb. 2, 2010 they would have to go to 160 to get the
utes in!Aggie24 said something about having an intelligent
conversation.... good luck with that Aggie24.Back to "this year";
Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to
say something. - PlatoHave a nice night everyone.
they would have to go to 160 to get the utes in!
to expand it to nearly 200 for the utes to get in. They're really bad.
Unless your team is playing in the NIT, do you watch? NO!!! What would it mean
to get an invite to the NCAA tourney if they invite almost everybody. Ratings
have already fallen (regular season and coference tourney games other then the
conf. tourney championship) because games mean less and less, this would make it
so that they meant practically nothing. I will agree that the
conference champion and the conf.tourney champ should get auto bids and the rest
should be at large. This makes the season and the tourney mean more (if they're
the same team then there is one more at large). This also makes sure the best
teams from each conference are represented. Without looking it up
tell me who won the Alamo Bowl. No one cares that's what will happen if your
bloat the NCAA Tourney!
Say no to 96 teams! It'll just give the NBA an excuse to expand to a 30 team
playoff. And what about the NIT!?!?
Delaware--nice. Laughed out loud at work when I read that one.--MT
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
Unlike that school up on the hill, BYU doesn't need the NCAA to expand to get an
invitation to the Big Dance.
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
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
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.
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?
...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.
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.
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.
"The Utes are afterall defending conference champions"that's truebut, 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.
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.
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 = 4096That 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.
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
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!!!
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!
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.
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
This smells of change for change sake. How could adding 3 teams to the
tournement's possibly impactfor 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.
This would be the only way mediocre programs like the UofU could get in the big