NCAA Tourny to 96 teams? wtf?

pjhawks

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/source-ma ... deal-27742

just plain stupid in my opinion if they do this. the 1st weekend is the most interesting to watch and they are going to ruin that. i just don't understand the need to go to 96 fn teams. i guess so the bcs teams can get all their shitty teams in there. what a bunch of morons to f with one of the best sporting events going. ESPN on it's way to ruining sports in america.

eyedclaar

Crazy! How about instead they fix the football system before ruining the basketball one.

81

so the top 32 teams get a bye and the other 64 get to play an extra game.

it's all about money. no real need for the extra round. why not go to 128 or 256.....just let everyone body with a winning record in and call it a day.

no team below 64 is going to win it. and it makes my brackets that more fucked up

Sawyer

the ncaa is only concerned with $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.....so crooked

mfc2006

this idea sucks. if they stretch it by a couple of teams, i don't see the harm. but 96 is ridiculous!!

pjl44

Am I the only one who thinks this is a great idea? The top 32 teams essentially wind up with a bye, thus adding a little more emphasis to the regular season. It also allows more teams from smaller conferences in. You would now have 4 days with 16 games on the schedule vs. just those first two. (And how great are those first two days?) Plus, the games will all be more competitive with, essentially, "9" and "10" seeds knocking off the 15s and 16s that barely got in by catching fire in their conference tournaments. I'm all for this, if it's true.

pjl44

pjhawks wrote:

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/source-march-madness-with-96-teams-done-deal-27742

just plain stupid in my opinion if they do this. the 1st weekend is the most interesting to watch and they are going to ruin that. i just don't understand the need to go to 96 fn teams. i guess so the bcs teams can get all their shitty teams in there. what a bunch of morons to f with one of the best sporting events going. ESPN on it's way to ruining sports in america.

No BCS in college basketball, by the way.

FenwayFaithful

So that means Providence might get in now with their horrible record? Sweet!

jimed14

College hockey is still the best of all college sports.

Exciting game, great tournament ... and still isn't overblown by the commercialism and money that are ruining college football and basketball.

(edit for Fenway Faithful ... and Providence has a shot in hockey as well )

pjhawks

pjl44 wrote:

pjhawks wrote:

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/source-march-madness-with-96-teams-done-deal-27742

just plain stupid in my opinion if they do this. the 1st weekend is the most interesting to watch and they are going to ruin that. i just don't understand the need to go to 96 fn teams. i guess so the bcs teams can get all their shitty teams in there. what a bunch of morons to f with one of the best sporting events going. ESPN on it's way to ruining sports in america.

No BCS in college basketball, by the way.

no sh-- - but when you refer to the major conferences they are referred to as the BCS schools. as per football the big schools (or BCS schools) are going to try and get control of basketball and keep as much of the pie for themselves - keeping the smaller non-bcs schools out. simply put the more bcs teams in a 96 team field will generage a larger portion of money for the bcs schools than a lesser number of teams in a 65 team field.

RainierWolfcastle

A 96 team NCAA tourney would mean the death of the NIT, wouldn't it? Who would be left for the NIT?

jimed14

RainierWolfcastle wrote:

A 96 team NCAA tourney would mean the death of the NIT, wouldn't it? Who would be left for the NIT?

Does anyone even watch the NIT?

Indeed, it probably would be the end of it ... but I don't think anyone cares.

aspoonfulweighsaton

RainierWolfcastle wrote:

A 96 team NCAA tourney would mean the death of the NIT, wouldn't it? Who would be left for the NIT?

They could just take all the losers from the first round to further drive the point home that the teams in the NIT aren't good enough for the real thing. Just imagine: Your team wins its on to March Madness. You lose you go the NIT.

pjl44

pjhawks wrote:

pjl44 wrote:

pjhawks wrote:

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/source-march-madness-with-96-teams-done-deal-27742

just plain stupid in my opinion if they do this. the 1st weekend is the most interesting to watch and they are going to ruin that. i just don't understand the need to go to 96 fn teams. i guess so the bcs teams can get all their shitty teams in there. what a bunch of morons to f with one of the best sporting events going. ESPN on it's way to ruining sports in america.

No BCS in college basketball, by the way.

no sh-- - but when you refer to the major conferences they are referred to as the BCS schools. as per football the big schools (or BCS schools) are going to try and get control of basketball and keep as much of the pie for themselves - keeping the smaller non-bcs schools out. simply put the more bcs teams in a 96 team field will generage a larger portion of money for the bcs schools than a lesser number of teams in a 65 team field.

No one refers to these conferences as "BCS" conferences in basketball (or any other NCAA sport, for that matter). Not only is the BCS unique to football, but the conferences don't exactly match up from sport to sport. (The Big East is probably the most obvious example of this.) Yes, more schools from major conferences will get in, but so will many of the better teams from smaller conferences. This will only increase competition and cause you to have a stronger field of 64 teams after the first "round."

And no one cares about the NIT.

pjhawks

No one refers to these conferences as "BCS" conferences in basketball (or any other NCAA sport, for that matter). Not only is the BCS unique to football, but the conferences don't exactly match up from sport to sport. (The Big East is probably the most obvious example of this.) Yes, more schools from major conferences will get in, but so will many of the better teams from smaller conferences. This will only increase competition and cause you to have a stronger field of 64 teams after the first "round."

And no one cares about the NIT.

[/quote][/quote]

you must not watch games or read about college bball then because absolutely they refer to the ACC, Big East, Pac 10, SEC, Big 12, and BIG 10 as 'BCS' conferences - at least my tv and my papers refer those conferences as BCS conferences even during basketball season.


if you are not good enough to make the 65team tourny how can the new 'first round' be stronger? by having the likes of Seton Hall, NC State, etc. who are .500 or below in conference play in the tourny? those are the types of teams that will mostly make up the other 31 teams.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

pjl44 wrote:

Am I the only one who thinks this is a great idea? The top 32 teams essentially wind up with a bye, thus adding a little more emphasis to the regular season. It also allows more teams from smaller conferences in. You would now have 4 days with 16 games on the schedule vs. just those first two. (And how great are those first two days?) Plus, the games will all be more competitive with, essentially, "9" and "10" seeds knocking off the 15s and 16s that barely got in by catching fire in their conference tournaments. I'm all for this, if it's true.

I dont understand the problem with the tournament expanding either....

Whats wrong with adding more teams???
32 more teams get to play in the tourney......
More kids get to fulfill a dream of playing a game in the NCAA tourney, on National TV......

The more the merrier....right????

81

why not let all 347 D1 teams in.

Solat13

81 wrote:

why not let all 347 D1 teams in.

Well in theory, 326 teams are in . Everyone except the 7 independents, the 7 members of the Great West conference which doesn't have an automatic bid and the 7 members of the Ivy League other than the conference champion because the Ivies have never gotten an at large bid and don't have a conference tournament.

Every other team in D1 can win their conference tournament to get into the big dance and then win the whole thing.

pjhawks

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

pjl44 wrote:

Am I the only one who thinks this is a great idea? The top 32 teams essentially wind up with a bye, thus adding a little more emphasis to the regular season. It also allows more teams from smaller conferences in. You would now have 4 days with 16 games on the schedule vs. just those first two. (And how great are those first two days?) Plus, the games will all be more competitive with, essentially, "9" and "10" seeds knocking off the 15s and 16s that barely got in by catching fire in their conference tournaments. I'm all for this, if it's true.

I dont understand the problem with the tournament expanding either....

Whats wrong with adding more teams???
32 more teams get to play in the tourney......
More kids get to fulfill a dream of playing a game in the NCAA tourney, on National TV......

The more the merrier....right????

ghost of every kid gets a trophy.

pjsteelerfan

I just love how the NCAA tourey can move to 96 teams, plus all the confernece tourneys the weeks before it, yet they can not get a playoff for Football. Amazing. The NCAA is a joke.

aspoonfulweighsaton

The odds of me winning a bracket pool just got a lot less likely

know1

Maybe they should just give every Div 1 team a 1st place trophy and not have the tournament.

FenwayFaithful

know1 wrote:

Maybe they should just give every Div 1 team a 1st place trophy and not have the tournament.

Haha, just like youth basketball leagues, everyone's a winner!

tcaporale

Terrible idea. It would stretch the tournament too long. It would be too cluttered.

Also, it wouldn't be as much of an achievement to get there. All you would have to do is have a winning record in a big conference to get in.

Plus the fun of filling out brackets would get much more tedious, and people would be turned off from it.

mca47

eyedclaar wrote:

Crazy! How about instead they fix the football system before ruining the basketball one.

Exactly!