NCAA is considering expanding the "Big Dance"

[clenz]

Going to 96 there is no fucking way the MVC doesn't get at least 3

[EPJr]

MY EXAMPLE OF 96 BIDS:

If the conferences want the "regular season" to have more importance - they can stop inviting everybody to their own post season tourneys. Only invite the top eight schools. You have to finish in the top eight to qualify for post season (that would break up the Big East Megaconference!).

The NCAA would then not consider anyone that did not make their "own" post season tourney.

Have only automatic bids and have them the same every year with only where the conferences finish by the 1st of February determine where they rank and consequently how many bids they will get. The February games including conference tourney games will help determine individual school rankings.

conferences ranked 1-6 get automatic 6 bids
conferences ranked 7-11 get automatic 5 bids
conferences ranked 12-14 get automatic 4 bids
conferences ranked 15-16 get automatic 3 bids
conferences ranked 17-18 get automatic 2 bids
conferences ranked 19-31 get automatic 1 bid

Each conference will decide on February 2nd the formula for how they will distribute their bids - so no one can blame the NCAA for not getting in.

[clenz]

Don't let people in because they won the post season tourney reward the regular season champ.

[GannonFan]

MY EXAMPLE OF 96 BIDS:

If the conferences want the "regular season" to have more importance - they can stop inviting everybody to their own post season tourneys. Only invite the top eight schools. You have to finish in the top eight to qualify for post season (that would break up the Big East Megaconference!).

The NCAA would then not consider anyone that did not make their "own" post season tourney.

Have only automatic bids and have them the same every year with only where the conferences finish by the 1st of February determine where they rank and consequently how many bids they will get. The February games including conference tourney games will help determine individual school rankings.

conferences ranked 1-6 get automatic 6 bids
conferences ranked 7-11 get automatic 5 bids
conferences ranked 12-14 get automatic 4 bids
conferences ranked 15-16 get automatic 3 bids
conferences ranked 17-18 get automatic 2 bids
conferences ranked 19-31 get automatic 1 bid

Each conference will decide on February 2nd the formula for how they will distribute their bids - so no one can blame the NCAA for not getting in.

Not sure why you need to equalize the number of bids from each conference. If the Big East can legitimately put 8-9 teams in (and let's face it, most years you can only really point to maybe one team from the Big East that doesn't deserve to be in the tourney, and they certainly would deserve to be in there if the tourney was expanded), even when you only have 65 spots, why would you reduce it once the tournament gets expanded to 96 teams? Likewise, why would you reward a conference like the Pac 10 that right now, may only have 1-2 teams that are tourney worthy, with so many extra bids? I'd rather teams be viewed on their merits than simpy pigeonholing them based on conferences.

[49RFootballNow]

No first round byes for the top 32 teams. NO! You're basically telling the current lower 32(33) teams that would make the 64(5) team tournament that they don't deserve to be there unless they have a play-in. I have no issue with the 64th team in being told that, but the 33rd team doesn't deserve that. What makes them different than the 32nd team? Most years, nothing!

This is probably a done deal because the NCAA is all about money and more games is more money, but if they're going to do this either do it right or do it lite.

If they won't go 128 teams then they should only expand the number of playins. I can see the top 4 seeds playing winners of playin games but no more and maybe less.

Any expansion beyond 80 teams should include autobids for all conference tournament and regular season champions before any open bids are granted, no conference champions should be in playin games, and no more than 2/3rds of any conference should get in. No way the Ah-She-She #9 or Big East #12 deserves to be in the tournament. NO WAY!

[grizzaholic]

So, if this happens, does the NIT disappear?

[Redwyn]

The Onion did a fantastic segment on this -

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/n ... madness_to

Enjoy

[EPJr]

So, if this happens, does the NIT disappear?

yes since the NCAA owns it.
NCAA - 64 + NIT - 32 = 96

[Shellin]

Eh, I personally think this is a silly idea. All it does is dilute the field a little more with teams that have no real shot of making noise. Sure there are 3 or 4 teams in the NIT field every year who could potentially make the second weekend if they got good matchups, so why not just expand the NCAA tournament to 68ish teams and have a few play in games for the final 4 at large spots as has been suggested. That seems to make the most sense to me. Those teams that get blown out in the first round of the NIT have no place in the NCAA tournament, this is no different than unnecessarily expanding the FCS field or having 34 (or however many there are now) bowl games. It is just letting more teams in that ultimately does nothing but make the tournament longer and less exciting...

[clenz]

I can see the bubble watch now. DePaul, who had 10 wins on the year has a slight edge over a 20 win mid major program because they play in the big east.

[GannonFan]

Nothing is magical about 65 teams. I'm sure plenty of people complained when the tournament expanded to 64 back in the '80's. After a year or two people wouldn't remember what it was like to have 65 teams and will wonder how we even managed without the bigger tournament.

[kdinva]

65th team was needed to keep number of at-larges equal or greater than auto-biz as required by NCAA rules

[kdinva]

If it were up to me, they'd go back to 64 teams, but I know that will never happen. I'd rather see 68 teams, make the "bubble" teams play on Tuesday night, no conference champion should have to play their way in. The winners would then be seeded 11th or so.

I agree 120% about the idea of the "play-in" game(s) being contesed by the final at-large teams selected , not the Conf. champs from RPI Conf. #30 and #31 . Play in game should be (for example), between a Louisville and Florida St., or a Marquette v. ODU (assuming they don't rally and win their tourneys) not Alabama A&M vs. Mt. Saint mary's, etc.

[tampajag]

I can see the bubble watch now. DePaul, who had 10 wins on the year has a slight edge over a 20 win mid major program because they play in the big east.

your level of hyperbole is astounding. you always aim for the lowest possible point.

[Evolution Prime]