The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

https://www.si.com/college/2023/03/14/nc...aily-cover

Quote:The men’s NCAA tournament field of 68 is out, and the march to Houston for the Final Four begins Tuesday with the First Four in Dayton. But in what is a transformational time in college athletics, conference commissioners, athletic directors and coaches have ignited dialogue in recent months about significant changes to March Madness. The biggest one discussed: expanding the NCAA tournament field.

No change is imminent, but with many of the sport’s most powerful people openly discussing it, it’s worth exploring what an expanded tournament would hypothetically look like with this year’s field.

Personally, I would as a stipulation that to qualify for any at-large bid, a team must finish at .500 or above in their respective conference. If a team can't meet that reasonable threshold, they don't belong in anyway. That would keep the bubble intrigue and the Cinderella aspect alive in any expanded format.

(03-14-2023 10:03 AM)blazerjay Wrote:  https://www.si.com/college/2023/03/14/nc...aily-cover

Quote:The men’s NCAA tournament field of 68 is out, and the march to Houston for the Final Four begins Tuesday with the First Four in Dayton. But in what is a transformational time in college athletics, conference commissioners, athletic directors and coaches have ignited dialogue in recent months about significant changes to March Madness. The biggest one discussed: expanding the NCAA tournament field.

No change is imminent, but with many of the sport’s most powerful people openly discussing it, it’s worth exploring what an expanded tournament would hypothetically look like with this year’s field.

Personally, I would as a stipulation that to qualify for any at-large bid, a team must finish at .500 or above in their respective conference. If a team can't meet that reasonable threshold, they don't belong in anyway. That would keep the bubble intrigue and the Cinderella aspect alive in any expanded format.

I believe if you give regular season AND tournament champions autobid, it would diminish the amount of sub .500 conference wins teams without expanding. Or if the P5 wants it expanded then have the play in for the last 4. Give Dayton 8 games.

I'm torn here--on one hand, I like the exclusivity of the tournament, but not at the expense of UAB being left out over a 18-13 P5 team.

If expansion is what it takes, I'm all for the opportunity. Still bummed we missed the NCAA this year with such high expectations. Honestly though, playing a 9 seed was our play-in game though, and we shat the bed, so I have no other reason to think we could win a 5/12 game vs Duke anyway. My biggest regret is that these Seniors don't even get to experience being on the floor for the NCAAs one last time.

Bring on expansion and I agree you should have to be above .500 to qualify for an at large in league play.

West Virginia went 7-11 in the Big 12 this season. Just sayin’.

Out! and feed them a fish head.

(03-14-2023 10:32 AM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  West Virginia went 7-11 in the Big 12 this season. Just sayin’.

Oklahoma State was 8-10 in the Big 12 and finished 7th in Big 12 (WVU finished 8th).
WVU is a 9 seed in the NCAA tournament and Okie State was first 4 out and 1 seed in NIT and will have to play AT Youngstown state because they have a conflict at their arena.

I'd keep it at 68, but make a rule like others have said where teams have to finish at least .500 in league play to get an at large.

(03-14-2023 10:52 AM)blazerblazer Wrote:  

(03-14-2023 10:32 AM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  West Virginia went 7-11 in the Big 12 this season. Just sayin’.

Oklahoma State was 8-10 in the Big 12 and finished 7th in Big 12 (WVU finished 8th).
WVU is a 9 seed in the NCAA tournament and Okie State was first 4 out and 1 seed in NIT and will have to play AT Youngstown state because they have a conflict at their arena.

They are both good teams. WVU has a KenPom of 17 and a NET of 25. Oklahoma State is at 38 and 43. But shouldn’t you at least be good in your conference? This is crap!

I’m willing to give 2 games under .500. Going 9-11 in this year’s big XII is still impressive, and with some unbalanced conference schedules, I could give in there. But a team like WVU, as good as they may be, doesn’t deserve to get in.

(03-14-2023 10:58 AM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote:  I'd keep it at 68, but make a rule like others have said where teams have to finish at least .500 in league play to get an at large.

68 makes no sense at all. I hate the uneven regions. At the very least make it 72 so each region is identical in size.

For years I've been arguing that you need to be at least .500 in your conference (including conference tournament) to get an at large. But really, it doesn't open up. that many spots.
This year, it only knocks out Arkansas, West Virginia and Mississippi State
Last year, only Alabama, Indiana, Iowa State and TCU.

If you knock it off at 64 (as 68 really doesn't make much sense), it doesn't change anything
If you left it at 68 and took the next 3 or 4 highest ranked teams in the NET, North Texas would've been in both this year and last

It should be expanded to 96 and end the NIT.

(03-14-2023 04:11 PM)DuelingDragon Wrote:  It should be expanded to 96 and end the NIT.

Exactly!

Expanding the tournament won't end the NIT. The NCAA would just sell the name rights to another organizer who would host a bastardized version with even more P5 bias (or they don't sell the name, someone still hosts an "NIBT" or something).

Granted, other than hardcore gamblers I'm not sure who wants to watch 3rd place teams from the MAC and Sun Belt or 12th place from SEC and B12 duke it out.

(03-14-2023 04:11 PM)DuelingDragon Wrote:  It should be expanded to 96 and end the NIT.

80 also would work especially witht the concern over expanding it too large.

Round 1 48 byes & Bottom 32 teams play. Tournament goes on from 64 teams in round 2.

Automatic bid should go to regular season champion. Make the games matter more during the season. Conference champions would get auto bid to NIT unless their record justified a NCAA tournament entry.