(01-31-2018 11:43 AM)69topper Wrote:  I've always thought they should go to 128 teams being invited. It would only be one more game and after one game you are down to 64 teams and back on schedule. Think of all the revenue that would be generated from just one more game plus you would for sure have all the team's in that truly deserve to be in the tournament. No team could truly ***** about being left out. The teams that are on the bubble couldn't complain too much if they are the first team out if they are that low. I'm sure some would but nothing's perfect unless everyone is invited. The main things is that no team would finish at 27-3 and be left out while some p5 team gets in at 18-13.
The NIT and other sideshow tournaments would go by the wayside but I guarantee that every college kid would rather play in the ncaa tournament than the nit. I've been proposing this for 40yrs. Seems like a no brainer to me. Thoughts on this anyone?

Somebody will always find a way to *****. Merica.

I believe 80 is the right number rather than 128. Give the top 8 seeds a bye -- seeds #1 and #2 in each bracket and carry the tournament from there as usual.

Following on 69's thoughts above, only seeding the top 32 presents some problems. Eight and nine seeds are virtually interchangeable. If you are an eight seed and 32nd seed overall but then draw what would be a 16 seed while the #1 seed gets what would otherwise be a nine seed in the first round then you have some consternation. Seed is therefore necessary. The problem is the fact that too much subjectivity is intertwined into both seeding and the selection process. The only way around this is to sign all teams an indiscriminate number randomly generated that then can be matched without bias to their record, results, and other metrics. Removing team names would create at least a little bit of objectivity. "Eye test" should not be a selective factor as it invites way too much bias and subjectivity.