How about a true NCAA national tournament where every team plays..............
SanctionII
Posts: 12,119 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
regardless of regular season record.
Cut out the conference tournaments and add one extra weekend to March Madness. With an extra weekend, the field of teams would expand from 64 to 256. If 318 D-1 programs exist, take the 60 teams ranked from 257 through 318 and have them do a "play in" game with the 60 teams ranked from 197 to 256. The winners of these 60 "play in" games, plus the teams ranked 1-196 then make up the 256 team field. These 256 teams play in opening round games and the 128 winners play round two games with the 64 winners going on to the part of the tournament we have now.
Expanding the field to include all D-1 teams, regardless of regular season record, would be great. Just like high school hoops in some mid west states.
Talk about cinderella stories. Everyone plays and everyone has a chance to win. A truly "National" event that would give pleasure to schools, fans, players and coaches across the county.
Doing this would stop the whining from bubble teams that did not make it and would end the post season NIT (with the NIT Champ proclaiming "We are #66"). Make the NIT the "preseason tournament" for college hoops.
Cut out the conference tournaments and add one extra weekend to March Madness. With an extra weekend, the field of teams would expand from 64 to 256. If 318 D-1 programs exist, take the 60 teams ranked from 257 through 318 and have them do a "play in" game with the 60 teams ranked from 197 to 256. The winners of these 60 "play in" games, plus the teams ranked 1-196 then make up the 256 team field. These 256 teams play in opening round games and the 128 winners play round two games with the 64 winners going on to the part of the tournament we have now.
Expanding the field to include all D-1 teams, regardless of regular season record, would be great. Just like high school hoops in some mid west states.
Talk about cinderella stories. Everyone plays and everyone has a chance to win. A truly "National" event that would give pleasure to schools, fans, players and coaches across the county.
Doing this would stop the whining from bubble teams that did not make it and would end the post season NIT (with the NIT Champ proclaiming "We are #66"). Make the NIT the "preseason tournament" for college hoops.
0
Comments
Therefore, not a realistic possibility.
Sincerely,
BCS Selection Committee
I am sure that the NCAA, its member schools, coaches, players, sports media (TV, Radio, the net) and business interests would welcome an expansion of the tournament if it meant "more money" for all (except the players who will have to settle for being on TV).
Conferences and alumni may resist somewhat if it means dropping conference tournaments.
Heck in the 1960's only 16 teams made it to the "Dance" and some very good teams had no where to go. The NCAA expanded from 16 (to 24 or 32) in the 70's I think and then in the 80's expanded again (to 48 and then 64).
Bigger is better if you ask me when it comes to college hoops, so I say let everybody play. Who knows, maybe one day college D-1 basketball will have a real life "Hoosiers" where a small D-1 school runs the table and claims the national championship with "Jimmy Chitwood, the 3rd or 4th" hitting the winning jumper (just like the small town Indiana school claimed the state championship in the movie when Jimmy Chitwood hit the game winning jumper at the buzzer).
Go Phillies
Of course TV would love it but college sports are commercialized enough as it is. Being in the NCAA tournament should be a reward
for having a good season not something given automatically. IMO.
<< <i>Well, that would be just too dam easy.
Therefore, not a realistic possibility.
Sincerely,
BCS Selection Committee
The BCS is for football only...
<< <i>The BCS is for football only...
Except that the NCAA selection committee follows the BCS lead in determining which conferences get the lion's share of the booty.
I am sure that in the 1960's people thought a 16 team National Tournament was just fine also. Would you like to cut back from 65 teams to 16 [why is there 65 teams with tonites "play in game" anyway?, why not just 64 teams?]?
Maybe it will not happen soon, but I expect that with advancing communications technology and with more and more D-1 colleges fielding teams with very good players recruited from around the world, March Madness will expand beyond 65 teams. If more money can be made by expanding the number of teams that play, the NCAA will do so [as they have done so multiple times in the past].
During the regular season teams start hot and finish cold, start cold and finish hot, and everything else in between. The concept of a truly "National" tournament with the winner being crowned National Champion is very appealing. What is even more appealing is the concept of letting everyone into the tournament so that everyone can take a shot at the brass ring. The concept has a "Horatio Algier"/"Rocky" appeal to it and is so quintessentially "American" [the land of opportunity for those who work hard] that it would appeal to a mass audience in this country and in other parts of the world.
<< <i>Michigan.
I am sure that in the 1960's people thought a 16 team National Tournament was just fine also. Would you like to cut back from 65 teams to 16 [why is there 65 teams with tonites "play in game" anyway?, why not just 64 teams?]?
Maybe it will not happen soon, but I expect that with advancing communications technology and with more and more D-1 colleges fielding teams with very good players recruited from around the world, March Madness will expand beyond 65 teams. If more money can be made by expanding the number of teams that play, the NCAA will do so [as they have done so multiple times in the past].
During the regular season teams start hot and finish cold, start cold and finish hot, and everything else in between. The concept of a truly "National" tournament with the winner being crowned National Champion is very appealing. What is even more appealing is the concept of letting everyone into the tournament so that everyone can take a shot at the brass ring. The concept has a "Horatio Algier"/"Rocky" appeal to it and is so quintessentially "American" [the land of opportunity for those who work hard] that it would appeal to a mass audience in this country and in other parts of the world. >>
I still think it makes the regular season basically meaningless. Being in a tournament should be something that was earned and not something automatic. Maybe that goes against the Horatio Algier / Rocky all American scenario you envision but I still like it that way.
Going back to 16 teams is not that bad an idea, the playoffs in all sports have been expaned for only one thing and that is money.
I don't remember what the reason is for the "play in" game exactly but to me it is basically meaningless since the winner has to go
against a #1 seed so it is about guaranteed as a loss for the next game they play anyway.
<< <i>If the NCAA cut back the tournament to 16 teams [as in the 1960's], just think about how loud the screaming would be by the additional 48 newly minted "bubble teams"
Oh yeah, that would be pretty bad. Realistically they can't cut back like that because of all the money involved.