Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

141 - 160 of 176 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,120 Posts
Technically, the NCAA tournament has always included virtually every Division I team, unless their conference excluded them. When your conference tournament starts, you have a chance. Doesn't matter if you were 0-28, in a shitty conference, an at-large candidate, whatever. Even the Ivy went to a tournament right? And I don't think any conferences exclude lowest places anymore (like A10 used to).

So really, this isn't some novel (or noble) effort on the part of the ACC. If there's anything we do know, it's that some A10 team will still get screwed on seeding!
 

·
Piker
Joined
·
9,050 Posts
#297 Abilene Christian 87
#5 Duke 86
FINAL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
What they are really trying to do is make it a "double tournament" to make up for last year's lost revenue. Double the amount of games, double the amount of revenue. They don't care about Kennesaw State's 1-28 record.
 

·
Piker
Joined
·
9,050 Posts
What they are really trying to do is make it a "double tournament" to make up for last year's lost revenue. Double the amount of games, double the amount of revenue. They don't care about Kennesaw State's 1-28 record.
Maybe but due the trumpvirus they are probably looking for a way to make the season exciting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,154 Posts
Fordham will hang a banner.
Why not? I’m sure many programs would in this environment.

I have always been in favor of expanding the field to 72 annually, but having the 15s and 16s play into the first round ON SITE to cut travel.

There is no need for teams to fly to Dayton the day after Selection Sunday, practice, play, win, and then fly to their next destination. Just put the play-ins in their region’s arena(s).

You’d add a handful of at-large teams by doing this. Throw in a .500 or better league record requirement for at-large bids, and you’d have a far more equitable, interesting March.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,154 Posts
But.. First Four.. $$.. TV, spectacle.

Why is it that the BBF could fix all of the NCAA tournament inequities with a couple minor tweaks, yet the smartest guys in the room get it wrong every year?
Because. Stuffed inside some depressingly sterile conference/board room, Grinch-shaped “young professionals” in skinny suits/ties are presenting their latest analytical scheme to maximize golden doubloon intake.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,763 Posts
Why not? I’m sure many programs would in this environment.

I have always been in favor of expanding the field to 72 annually, but having the 15s and 16s play into the first round ON SITE to cut travel.

There is no need for teams to fly to Dayton the day after Selection Sunday, practice, play, win, and then fly to their next destination. Just put the play-ins in their region’s arena(s).

You’d add a handful of at-large teams by doing this. Throw in a .500 or better league record requirement for at-large bids, and you’d have a far more equitable, interesting March.
I like this but I would not make the 15-16 seeds do it. They won their leagues. The last at large teams should have to play. I think the First Four in Dayton has been great but logistically it sucks. EIther make Dayton a 1st round host every year too so teams can stay there or move the games to their actual sites
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,154 Posts
I like this but I would not make the 15-16 seeds do it. They won their leagues. The last at large teams should have to play. I think the First Four in Dayton has been great but logistically it sucks. EIther make Dayton a 1st round host every year too so teams can stay there or move the games to their actual sites
Ehhhh... I get that, but how much sense does it make that 11 and 12 seeds—teams who earned at-large bids—have to play an extra round instead of the bottom 16 (regardless of conference affiliation)? The winners get an extra NCAA unit for playing in the “First Four”, so that could be a selling point to those bottom 7-8 conferences.

Additionally, there are already conference champions playing in Dayton... just not all of them. This is almost exclusively for TV ratings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,531 Posts
Why are there 351 teams instead of 352?

Bottom 256 play 3 games against each other to get to 32.

That 32 plays against 96-65.
32 winners play against 64-33.
32 winners play against Top 32

P6 should go for that...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Why are there 351 teams instead of 352?

Bottom 256 play 3 games against each other to get to 32.

That 32 plays against 96-65.
32 winners play against 64-33.
32 winners play against Top 32

P6 should go for that...
I had this on my mind after reading the ACC proposal. If an "everyone's welcome" tournament happens, the format will come down to the trade-off between the power conferences getting byes in early rounds (because Power Conferences) vs. losing units and net share of overall revenue.
 
141 - 160 of 176 Posts
Top