Now that another college basketball season is in the books, I thought it would be interesting to take a nostalgic look back at what the D-I landscape looked like when I was in college. What a difference.

In 1965, UCLA won its second NCAA championship. To get to the Final Four, the Bruins only had to win its five team West Regional, beating BYU (100-76) and San Francisco (101-93). After getting past Wichita State (108-89)in the semis, they prevailed over Michigan (91-80) in the Finals.

There were 23 teams in that tournament - 15 conference champions and 8 at-large teams. The 16th D-I conference, the 6 team Big Sky, was in its first year and didn't get an autobid. Six teams in that tournament field were Catholic schools, including two conference champs and 4 of the 8 at-large teams.

That year, one out of every ten D-I schools (18) were Jesuit run, and another 16 were also Catholic. If you're keeping score, that's 34 out of 180 D-I schools.

Three conferences had more than 8 members: the SEC (11), Big Ten (10) and SoCon (9). Another 8 conferences had 8 members, one had seven, and three had six members each. The eight at-large tourney teams came from a pool of 53 independents.

Fast forward to 2019 and we see that 178 of the 353 members were not yet in D-I for that 1965 season. Same for the 17 new conferences with autobids in 2019. There are no more independents. Of those 178, five won their first round game in the tournament and all lost their next game. Those five were conference champs Buffalo, Liberty, UC Irvine and Wofford, plus at-large entry Central Florida.

Just a little different.

The biggest difference in the NCAA tournament then was the NCAA's dumb rule (which wasn't changed until the 1975 tournament) that limited the tournament to conference champs and independents. Some of the best teams were not in the tournament and the "at large" places went to independent teams that often were not as good as some of the 2nd or 3rd place conference teams.

Now, more than half the teams in the tournament are at-large teams, and that average carries through to the final four and eventual tournament champs. There have been lots of final four teams and national champs that would have been excluded from the NCAA tournament "back in the day".

In 1965, the Missouri Valley Conference had won 4 of the past 20 National Titles. They had 10 Final Four teams in 20 years. In 1965, MVC champ Wichita State made the Final Four, making it the 11th time in 21 years that the MVC's representative had made the Final Four.

In 1965, Wichita State Sr. Dave Stallworth made 2nd team All-American. This made 10 All-Americans in the past 8 years for the MVC, but it broke a streak of 7 straight years with a consensus 1st team All-American.

7 of the 8 MVC teams had a winning record in 1965.

At the beginning of the 64-65 season, Cincinnati had been to 5 of the last 6 Final Fours. Bearcats' alumni in the NBA included two future NBA Hall-of-Famers (Jack Twyman and Oscar Robertson). But they went 14-12 in 1965 and finished 7th in the 8-team MVC. Ed Jucker (their legendary coach) left UC after the 1965 season.

(04-16-2019 11:40 AM)Wedge Wrote:  The biggest difference in the NCAA tournament then was the NCAA's dumb rule (which wasn't changed until the 1975 tournament) that limited the tournament to conference champs and independents. Some of the best teams were not in the tournament and the "at large" places went to independent teams that often were not as good as some of the 2nd or 3rd place conference teams.

Now, more than half the teams in the tournament are at-large teams, and that average carries through to the final four and eventual tournament champs. There have been lots of final four teams and national champs that would have been excluded from the NCAA tournament "back in the day".

Not to mention the mess that was north eastern college basketball.

(04-16-2019 11:40 AM)Wedge Wrote:  The biggest difference in the NCAA tournament then was the NCAA's dumb rule (which wasn't changed until the 1975 tournament) that limited the tournament to conference champs and independents. Some of the best teams were not in the tournament and the "at large" places went to independent teams that often were not as good as some of the 2nd or 3rd place conference teams.

Now, more than half the teams in the tournament are at-large teams, and that average carries through to the final four and eventual tournament champs. There have been lots of final four teams and national champs that would have been excluded from the NCAA tournament "back in the day".

And the dumb rule now is allowing teams that didn't even finish in the top half of their league into the tournament.

The small regions, which were actually regional, meant you could play the same team frequently. Kentucky has played Marquette 10 times in the NCAA tournament, 5 of those from 1968-1975 in the Mid-East Regional.

(04-16-2019 04:33 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-16-2019 11:40 AM)Wedge Wrote:  The biggest difference in the NCAA tournament then was the NCAA's dumb rule (which wasn't changed until the 1975 tournament) that limited the tournament to conference champs and independents. Some of the best teams were not in the tournament and the "at large" places went to independent teams that often were not as good as some of the 2nd or 3rd place conference teams.

Now, more than half the teams in the tournament are at-large teams, and that average carries through to the final four and eventual tournament champs. There have been lots of final four teams and national champs that would have been excluded from the NCAA tournament "back in the day".

And the dumb rule now is allowing teams that didn't even finish in the top half of their league into the tournament.

You can blame the selection committee for that one. There's no rule requiring them to give at-large bids to teams that are under .500 in conference.

(04-16-2019 04:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  The small regions, which were actually regional, meant you could play the same team frequently. Kentucky has played Marquette 10 times in the NCAA tournament, 5 of those from 1968-1975 in the Mid-East Regional.

I remember the strict regional assignments. (I was very young) It went basically:

East: ACC, ECAC and nearby conferences and independents..pre-Big East days
Mideast: Big Ten, SEC, other nearby conferences and independents
Midwest: Big 8, SWC, MVC, nearby conferences
West: Pac 8/10, other western conferences

Conference champions stayed within their regions. Independents were shipped to other regions when needed to fill out the bracket. Once at-large teams were added, they were shipped to other regions.

Conferences were anchored to regions. For example, in 1976, Indiana went undefeated and won the national championship. As part of that, they won the Big Ten. The Big Ten was locked into the Mideast Regional. The Mideast Regional was played in Baton Rouge that year. Indiana, as Big Ten champion, was sent to the Mideast Regional. Meanwhile, the Midwest Regional was played in Louisville (much closer to Bloomington). Michigan, as the second Big Ten team, was sent to the Midwest Regional, and won it, becoming the first at-large team to make the Final Four. In the modern tournament, Indiana, as the #1 overall seed, would have been bracketed for Louisville, regardless of the name of the regional.

Those days were quaint. Tournament games were primarily played on college campuses and were televised by NBC on the weekends.

Divisions II and III still operate on a regional model.

(04-16-2019 11:40 AM)Wedge Wrote:  The biggest difference in the NCAA tournament then was the NCAA's dumb rule (which wasn't changed until the 1975 tournament) that limited the tournament to conference champs and independents. Some of the best teams were not in the tournament and the "at large" places went to independent teams that often were not as good as some of the 2nd or 3rd place conference teams.

Now, more than half the teams in the tournament are at-large teams, and that average carries through to the final four and eventual tournament champs. There have been lots of final four teams and national champs that would have been excluded from the NCAA tournament "back in the day".

Did not know that.

I'm not the biggest fan of the current setup, but I guess it's a lot better than it used to be.

It wasn't a dumb rule, just archaic and in some ways fair. All sports and organizations have archaic rules, including on the field of play when it comes to sports as we're discussing.

Any Final Four before 1980 and especially the 1960's should be taken with a grain of salt.

(04-16-2019 11:40 AM)Wedge Wrote:  The biggest difference in the NCAA tournament then was the NCAA's dumb rule (which wasn't changed until the 1975 tournament) that limited the tournament to conference champs and independents. Some of the best teams were not in the tournament and the "at large" places went to independent teams that often were not as good as some of the 2nd or 3rd place conference teams.

Now, more than half the teams in the tournament are at-large teams, and that average carries through to the final four and eventual tournament champs. There have been lots of final four teams and national champs that would have been excluded from the NCAA tournament "back in the day".

Best rule ever. Not the best team in your conference, can't be the best team in the country. It should be a tournament of champions like on Jeopardy.

It certainly raises the stakes come March. At the very least, conference champions should be given priority over at-large teams like division champions in baseball.

(04-16-2019 10:57 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  It certainly raises the stakes come March. At the very least, conference champions should be given priority over at-large teams like division champions in baseball.

I especially don't think any conference champions should be in the play-in games. Those should be reserved for mediocre, undeserving at-large bids.

One thing they did up to 1978 was the regions were truly regions. Teams from the West played teams from the West, East played East etc. Arenas were always full, and it was a better environment. Battles between regional rivals were intense and IMHO the current match ups just aren’t are fun.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(04-16-2019 11:47 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  One thing they did up to 1978 was the regions were truly regions. Teams from the West played teams from the West, East played East etc. Arenas were always full, and it was a better environment. Battles between regional rivals were intense and IMHO the current match ups just aren’t are fun.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

They weren't always intense in the West. For most of its championships UCLA had a virtual bye into the Final Four. Most of the schools they played in the regional weren't rivals at all.

(04-16-2019 10:53 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-16-2019 11:40 AM)Wedge Wrote:  The biggest difference in the NCAA tournament then was the NCAA's dumb rule (which wasn't changed until the 1975 tournament) that limited the tournament to conference champs and independents. Some of the best teams were not in the tournament and the "at large" places went to independent teams that often were not as good as some of the 2nd or 3rd place conference teams.

Now, more than half the teams in the tournament are at-large teams, and that average carries through to the final four and eventual tournament champs. There have been lots of final four teams and national champs that would have been excluded from the NCAA tournament "back in the day".

Best rule ever. Not the best team in your conference, can't be the best team in the country. It should be a tournament of champions like on Jeopardy.

Agreed, still grinds my gears that Bama got a shot a few years back when they didn't win the SEC, and then to make it worse they justified it by winning

(04-17-2019 10:51 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-16-2019 11:47 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  One thing they did up to 1978 was the regions were truly regions. Teams from the West played teams from the West, East played East etc. Arenas were always full, and it was a better environment. Battles between regional rivals were intense and IMHO the current match ups just aren’t are fun.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

They weren't always intense in the West. For most of its championships UCLA had a virtual bye into the Final Four. Most of the schools they played in the regional weren't rivals at all.

True to a point. I can remember UCLA having very close games vs LB State and Montana. Also, in 1977 Idaho State beat UCLA, which ended the dynasty and got Gene Barstow fired, so he could start UAB program. But, yes they had their way a lot, but Western teams did no worse than the rest against them.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk