Time to expand Tourney

[LoboDude!]

For years I thought the tourney was perfect but after looking at the brackets this year I believe the tourney is becoming a medicore event. It is not because the Lobos are not in the tourney but because many match-ups points to the BCS taking over College Hoops. They have ruined post season football and I believe that they are on the way to doing it to college basketball.

Look at some of the first round match-ups, they are set up to eliminate the smaller conferences quickly. For example

Butler/ South Alabama
UNLV/ Kent
Gonzaga / Davidson
Drake / W. Kentucky

It is set up to favor the Power Conferences to have the tourney by next week to themselves. The Mountain West. Mid American, Missouri Valley, Con- USA, Atlantic 10 and even the WAC are being pushed out of the NCAA more and more every year. By expanding or set up that every team must have a winning regular conference record to be eligible for an at large bid.

If the tourney is expanded more teams will come from the Near Major conferences. The NIT looks more interesting than the NCAA tourney. The tourney is stuck with all the smaller conferences and their automatic bids and keeping the Power(BCS) conferences happy!!!

Time to expand to 128 teams ( I agree with Bobby Knight for once) to get the best teams from all conferences not just the ones with the Big Money Football teams.

[wallyhopp]

id love if there was maybe 8 or so playi-in games.

similiar to the one tonight where the winner faces the #1 seed. Why not push the san diegos or other lower tier teams to play one more game

[zoom]

an added benefit would be pitting the #1 seeds against #32's in a "who cares" first round...but i think you and bob knight are right on this one...the only way to make room for many deserving teams alongside the pre-ordained bcs 7-9 teams is to expand...i'd hate to be #129 though...

[Loboexpat]

If you're going to do this, shorten the regular season to maybe two exhibition games and conference games since it won't carry any weight other than conference bragging rights.

[Mark]

No! I like it the way it is. I consider it the very good teams that deserve to be there. Not a bunch of average teams who needed a extra grant to get in. Just my 2 cents.

[Pause The Noose]

I like it the way it is too. I'm not sure about the selection process most of the time but the number of teams and games is good for now.

[zoom]

the trend by the power brokers at espn will be to have more and more bcs teams and less and less of the non-bcs...how do you counter that trend...the "haves" are getting richer while using their influence to keep it a closed club...

[loborick]

I like Knight's idea, but they first need to put the selection process in basketball people's hands. We should see how that works. But I do like the idea of 128 teams and a one game playoff to get into the 64.

[Lobo237]

Rather than expand the tournament I think the NCAA needs to limit how many teams one conference can send. There are 31 conferences total. Of the 65 bids 34 went to teams from 6 of them. That leaves 25 conferences fighting for 31 slots. You limit each conference to 4 teams and that frees up an additional 10 slots. You limit each to 3 and you free up 22 at large bids this year. It'll never happen. The BCS conferences don't have quite he monopoly in basketball that they enjoy in football, but it's not far off either. Such limitations would cost them money and eventually recruits.

I'd happily accept limiting it to no more than 4 teams per conference. No teams with a losing record (in conference or overall) making the field without winning their conference tourney. Make the process crystal clear on how teams get selected for an at-large bid. It's ridiculous that 6 conferences have more teams than they other 25 field combined.

[dcrowley]

http://basketballprospectus.com/arti...?articleid=248

This guy brings up the same issue with the "mid-major" schools playing each other in the opening rounds.

[loborick]

I think you need to not allow teams with .500 or worse conference records to participate in the tourney. That would eliminate a lot of those teams that got in. If you can have a winning record in conference, you don't belong in the national championship tourney.

[Roob]

http://basketballprospectus.com/arti...?articleid=248

This guy brings up the same issue with the "mid-major" schools playing each other in the opening rounds.

Let me play devil's advocate on this one. Isn't the flip side of this argument also true? That by making the power conference teams play each other instead of the non-power teams, that there's a bias towards eliminating the power conference teams early on? Those 8 non-power conference teams playing each other in the first round is one way to guarantee that 4 of those non-powers are still alive going into the 2nd round.

[Loboexpat]

The ironic thing about the BCS conspiracy is that the two most prominent coaches that I've heard propose tourney expansion are Jim Boeheim and Bob Knight.

[dcrowley]

Let me play devil's advocate on this one. Isn't the flip side of this argument also true? That by making the power conference teams play each other instead of the non-power teams, that there's a bias towards eliminating the power conference teams early on? Those 8 non-power conference teams playing each other in the first round is one way to guarantee that 4 of those non-powers are still alive going into the 2nd round.

Yes, you are right. If 8 mid-majors were to play 8 "majors" then anywhere from 0 to 8 mid-majors would advance and anywhere from 0 to 8 major schools would get dumped. I was just pointing out the article since I ran across it. After you get past the 4 to 5 seeds, as far as I can tell, seeding is pretty much a crap shoot.

[cherrypicker]

I think the tourny should expand to 128 teams...eliminate the conference tournamnents....have the top two teams from each conference receive automatic bids, the remainder would be at large bids.