This is absolutely terrible
AWFUL AWFUL AWFUL. as a 64 team tournament this thing is absolutely perfect. (I mean given there are over 300 DI teams I am fine with 64 making the dance). The 65th team was a joke, but the power conferences didn't want to lose a bid when the number of conferences getting automatic bids increased...ok. Now we are really going to be rewarding mediocrity. WORST DECISION EVER. I love selection Sunday precisely because some good teams get left out (though none are championship worthy). I don't want to change a great system. Give me 64 teams and make my squad earn it.
So we can add 31 more games to basketball, but not 6 more to football?
March Madness is officially dead if this deal goes through.
so does this mean Mick can finally get us back in the tournament. :)JK
I'll go out on a limb and predict that UC makes the tournament next year.
Yes, let's reward mediocrity. Dumbest decision ever. It's going to dilute a perfectly good product. Going to a 65th was weird enough, going to 96 is pure garbage.
You kidding? Another day to skip work to watch games in a bar, more games to bet on and 2 sheet office pools? Where do I sign?
(02-01-2010 10:32 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]You kidding? Another day to skip work to watch games in a bar, more games to bet on and 2 sheet office pools? Where do I sign?
yeah, instead of leaving for Vegas on Wednesday, might as well go out the previous Thursday and spend 10 days out there.
Someone dig up some op-ed articles from when it went from 32 to 64. Wonder what the reaction was?
The difference is you're going to be including plenty of at-large teams that are at or below .500. To me, that doesn't equal being deserving of a bid. It makes the regular season and conference tournaments much more insignificant.
What's next, go the high school route and have everyone in the tournament?
I'd prefer it stay at 65 ... Actually, I'd prefer they move it to 68 with a play in in each region. But man, I just can't get worked up about this. I have not even read the article so I don't know what the rumored plan is. Would guess something like the top 32 getting a 1st round bye? Whatever the format, would mean the end of the NIT. Don't think for a minute that when the NCAA settled that lawsuit and bought out the NIT this wasn't in the backs of their mind. Another batch of revenue to correspond with the bidding for the new TV contract rights.
(02-01-2010 11:00 PM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote: [ -> ]The difference is you're going to be including plenty of at-large teams that are at or below .500. To me, that doesn't equal being deserving of a bid. It makes the regular season and conference tournaments much more insignificant.
What's next, go the high school route and have everyone in the tournament?
How cool would that be to see Oak Hill Academy beating some mid-level A-10 team?
I'm not 100% against it. I mean, UC and probably 10-12 Big East teams would be in it every year.. Idk though, it's not broke so don't fix it.
I have not read the article either, but seems to me there will be more bitching when one team gets a bye that is ranked LOWER then a team that doesn't.
I love the way the tournament is set up now and i really hope this doesn't happen.
NCAA - DO NOT CHANGE THE TOURNEY. The only thing maybe I would buy is having 3 more play-in games so that each 1 seed faces a play off winner. But I still think that lets in 6 more teams that really have little chance to win. You are always going to have complaining about "deserving" teams not getting in.
If they can make more money expanding the tournament, that's exactly what they'll do. With that said, they shouldn't mess with the perfection of the tournament's imperfection.
(02-01-2010 11:07 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]I'd prefer it stay at 65 ... Actually, I'd prefer they move it to 68 with a play in in each region.
68 makes perfect sense given the other options. Then every #1 seed is rewarded with a play-in game opponent. At most, there's usually 2-3 teams that have a legitimate argument for making the NCAA Tournament field. After that, it's your own fault for not making a convincing case to the selection committee.