There is zero need from a fairness/competitiveness standpoint to expand the tournament. Even factoring in the auto-bids from the crappy conferences, roughly the top 45-50 teams in the country get into the field every year. If you don't clearly belong in that group, you've got no real case to play for a championship.

This is about money, pure and simple, regardless of why various coaches and others might support it.

Quote: Originally Posted By AlCheez on 3/21/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 3/21/2010
they aren't expanding the tournament so they can wind up with multiple representatives from the Patriot League.

No,they're expanding so 13 teams from the Big East can play. That's the # that would've received a bid if we had 96 teams this year. Talk about making the regular season irrelevant!

Two of the 13 are St. John's and Seton Hall, who've already fired their coaches. Wonder if they'd still be there if they qualified for the NT

We'll also see fewer BCS schools willing to play tough teams in non-conference. With an NCAA berth almost guaranteed, they'll want as gaudy a record as possible. St. John's this season was 6-12 in the Big East but 17-16 overall. A winning record isn't required to get an at-large bid to the NCAA but I believe the selection committee would bypass a losing record even if it was North Carolina.

This is clearly a step in the wrong direction...its sad that everyone is a money-grubbing whore nowadays. This is beginning to take the exclusivity out of the tournament.

bleeeaaaccchh!

they are doing to make filling out brackets more fun.... how can you not see this

Quote: Originally Posted By robs_wife on 3/22/2010they are doing to make filling out brackets more fun.... how can you not see thi

Even so, it would probably just make it more difficult. Selections are made on a Sunday and less than 2 days later brackets would be due. There's already a lot of strain on bracket organizers to get their pools together, given the 3.5 days or so they have to get it together...cutting that to 1.5 days makes it better...I think not.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally posted by jetsons on 3/21/2010These upsets this year are great, but when was the last time a 13 seed won the tourney? When was the last time a 16 seed won a game? This somehow justifies going to 24 seeds?

If this is your case then why not strip the NCAA tournament down to 8 teams? Have no auto-bids and go at it that way since all you want is a champion. No reason to have over 1/2 the teams that will never have a chance.

On the other hand I would love to see more of the mid-major vs major schools battling it out in the middle/bottom of the bracket. I love the tournament because of match-ups that would never happen during the season except for home games for the major conference schools.

It is totally unacceptable to Big Business (NCAA) that North Carolina, Arizona, UCLA and UConn are not in the tournament. They were fortunate to manufacture a bid for an undeserving Florida this year.

Big Business will continue to expand the tournament until all schools with a God-given right to be playing are included. They may need to expand to 192 in a few years just to get Indiana back into the mix.

I'm calling Stony Brook as the first #24 seed to knock off a #9 seed.

I hope wis doesn't decide to follow suit with hd.

The point is that many student athletes are missing out on the experience of going to the big dance and many coaches are as well. I think the expectations will change but many more teams will still have the opportunity to win a national championship. They should give regular season auto bids as well as conference tourney bids. Then some mid majors who do really well all year and lose in the CT to some team that got hot would get rewarded for actually honoring games in the regular season. If the argument is that it will dilute regular season games, that is false because the regular season will actually matter to small conference schools. It is fair to make the argument that the reason behind this is more money. But I don't see who is hurt by tourney expansion either. The tourney has expanded before, and the argument always was that the ncaa tournament would get worse and more unwatchable, but it has grown into the fantastic event full of parity that it is today. Expansion will be good for the mid-majors, who don't have equal schedules to the Big 6 schools because they need to play "guarantee" games for money. Well now with more teams making the tournament and getting exposure, mid-majors are on a more level playing field making the tournament even more interesting to watch (teams like UNI taking down the big boys and so forth). I think that if there was ever proof that the tourney should be expanded, it is this year. With mid-majors competing with the power conference teams, we are probably missing some small schools that could get it done in the tournament as well. Maybe 96 is too many, but a 10 team expansion would be good for ncaa basketball and everyone involved.

And it won't hurt the Kentuckys and those guys because they'll get bye in the first round and still only have to win 6 to get a title.

I love college b-ball. But I'll be done watching the NCAA tournament when they expand. I'll never go to another site game again,even though Spokane and Portland are right next to me. Not that they'll miss me with their massive t.v. contract, but they'll lose a fan for life when this gets put in.

Quote: Originally Posted By gbousley314 on 3/22/2010The point is that many student athletes are missing out on the experience of going to the big dance and many coaches are as well.

How ridiculous! Are you the same guy that wants to give kids that finish last in little league a ribbon/trophy?

If they expand the tourney any more, it will make the regular season completely irrelevant, especially for the power conference teams. It is PERFECT right now how it is.

Everyone wants to see a cinderella play a powerhouse, but NOBODY wants to see 2 cinderellas play each other.