Ten teams every year get booted who are absolutely stronger than the ten weakest teams in the tournament. If you’re not capable of understanding that it’s not my problem.
Ncaa president "the goal is to have 72 to 76 teams by 2026 in the ncaa tournament "
- Thread starter jeffky
- Start date
Stop picking at it.
If they want to add a round then just do it and dump all the play in games and weird half measures.
If you cannot be one of the best 128 teams then surely there is nothing left to cry about from anyone and a bunch of dodgy,, maybe even sub .500 teams will have their moment in the sun.
If they want to add a round then just do it and dump all the play in games and weird half measures.
If you cannot be one of the best 128 teams then surely there is nothing left to cry about from anyone and a bunch of dodgy,, maybe even sub .500 teams will have their moment in the sun.
So long as we do not have to play 7 games in the tournament and the top 32 kind of get a bye and the remaining have to play to get into the first game or something similar in structure. The numbers may be off there, but I do not want to add a 7th game for everyone.
Basketball always has been and always will be a tournament sport how many times have we seen the best team in the nation not win the National championship? I have always contended every team should be allowed to participate in the tournament possibly the top 50 or 60 may get a double bye.
Why screw up a good thing? If a team can't make the field then they obviously aren't a team with much of a chance to win a championship.
Don’t water down the quality just to generate more money and appease a few universities. Where does it end? Next it'll be outrage over the 78th rated team being left out.
Get rid of the NCAA intervention and oversight. They could screw up a wet dream.
Don’t water down the quality just to generate more money and appease a few universities. Where does it end? Next it'll be outrage over the 78th rated team being left out.
Get rid of the NCAA intervention and oversight. They could screw up a wet dream.
Let’s say the goal is to increase revenue and fan engagement. Which of these changes would move the needle more for the NCAA?
- Adding a few ultimately non-meaningful “play-in” style games to expand the field to 72–76 teams.
- Shifting the later rounds (Sweet 16, Elite 8, or Final Four) to a best-of-three series format to guarantee multiple big time matchups, potentially boost TV ratings, and create more compelling storylines?
Last edited:
No I get it. You are advocating for low level dog crap conference champs to get in. If they want in they just need to make their regular season champs the auto bid. We don't need more dog crap low level conference teams n.
Basically already exists in the form of conference tournaments where just about every team has to be unceremoniously officially eliminated in a playoff game of some sort regardless of how bad their regular season was and it exists only because the rights to televise those games, and mainly its conference championship is the only inventory that is worth anything to networks from 95% of the conferences.
All expansion will do is increase additional at large berths for the power conferences unless it’s mandated a chunk of the new slots will go to regular season champions that don’t win their tournament.
No you don't get it. Short bus.
I'm saying I'll be happy if mid-tier P5 teams get in who are much stronger than low level conference champs that got in by automatic bid.
And I'm not ADVOCATING for anything. This is happening. All I'm doing is stating my personal opinion on it.
And you're going to pieces and pooping your little diaper because you don't have the inner strength to let other people politely state their opinion near you if their politely-stated opinion happens to be different than your own.
I think every region should have the #16 seed play in game. It really benefits those small programs. They get 1 cut of the NCAAT money win or lose. And it’s most likely their only chance at an NCAAT win.
The 11 seed play in doesn’t do much for me, but if two regions are going to have them then should make the other regions have them also.
So that would add 8 teams. For a total of 72 teams.
I think 48 is the best number. But they will never go back.
I think it's a great idea !
We need to get out in front of this to mix up both the women's and men's sides, include all teams from both sides, and then seed them, put 'em in one big ole' bracket, and let's see some REAL MARCH MADNESS ensue !
Opening up the field to every team ( and gosh, I have been wanting to see the McNeese State women's team play the Cal-Poly men's team, like, forever ..... wow !!!!! it could happen with the new format! I'm so excited ! )
So many quality teams out there that lost a close game (or dozen) and couldn't *quite* get over that 5 win hump... can now get a shot !
And it gives a great opportunity for those deserving teams that didn't even win a game to get a Division 1 win for the year, ya' know, so it's not a total loss !
definitely onto something, that N.arcoleptic C.ollective A.sswipe A.ssociation....
brilliant !
p.s. - This has never, in my time of all these years ever reading our board that this was actually suggested in the history of Rupp's Rafter's. So ... I am taking credit for being the first here with such an awesome idea.
* Trademarked
We need to get out in front of this to mix up both the women's and men's sides, include all teams from both sides, and then seed them, put 'em in one big ole' bracket, and let's see some REAL MARCH MADNESS ensue !
Opening up the field to every team ( and gosh, I have been wanting to see the McNeese State women's team play the Cal-Poly men's team, like, forever ..... wow !!!!! it could happen with the new format! I'm so excited ! )
So many quality teams out there that lost a close game (or dozen) and couldn't *quite* get over that 5 win hump... can now get a shot !
And it gives a great opportunity for those deserving teams that didn't even win a game to get a Division 1 win for the year, ya' know, so it's not a total loss !
definitely onto something, that N.arcoleptic C.ollective A.sswipe A.ssociation....
brilliant !
p.s. - This has never, in my time of all these years ever reading our board that this was actually suggested in the history of Rupp's Rafter's. So ... I am taking credit for being the first here with such an awesome idea.
* Trademarked
Hell I don’t even consider the Tuesday and Wednesday games to be the tournament. I can’t imagine having more of those games would make me think they’re any more or less tournament games than before. They just seem so insignificant.
NCAA President says goal is to expand March Madness to '72 or 76' teams in 2026
Prepare for a field of 72 or 76 with NCAA Tournament expansion no longer in doubt, according to NCAA President Charlie Baker.www.on3.com
I think it's good right now but more games equals more money 💰
64 with 6 to win is and will always be great memories and what the stanard should be but we know it’s never going back.
If there were 10 worthy teams, maybe. Generally there aren't. 64 is just enough where there are MAYBE 4 teams that feel slighted that have a semi-legit argument. Just enough to create talk from January on from the likes of Lunardi.
Most of the people posting on this board will live to see the tournament at 128. Which, interestingly, was something Bob Kinght used to advocate for.
31 conferences with automatic bids. Only 5 power conferences.
You're asking me to believe those 26 schools mostly from the sticks are all on average better than more half of the collective first 10 out from legit conferences every year. LOLOLOLOLOLOL no thank you.
Even in years when only "MAYBE 4 teams" get thrown over for crap schools with autobids, it's infinitely better to have a slightly expanded play-in round, which is all this would come to, than keep screwing people over.
The tournament should be the best teams, regardless of field size. Selection committees will never be perfect and don't need to be. But if you are going to funnel in weak teams through basically Affirmative Action, you're always going to create legitimate gripes.
The 4–8 team expansion is a great start at a pressure-release valve to address that. Why else do you think it was "the consensus among coaches." Not hardly just a Lunardi thing LOL.
Just a greedy money grabbing ploy! In any given year, there’s roughly 12 or so teams that have a legitimate chance to make a FF, but let’s add more useless teams!
I mean, why stop at 76 teams, why not open it up to all 330 teams and have it play out over 3 months? More money = more FF contenders 🤣
I mean, why stop at 76 teams, why not open it up to all 330 teams and have it play out over 3 months? More money = more FF contenders 🤣
I was thinking the same thing. Each team has a chance to advance through their conference tournament, so technically they are in the tournament. Like High School basketball in the state of Kentucky, each team makes the district tournament.
My guess would be they would add more play in games. If you are a #1 seed I would say it is still 6 wins for the title.
Have eight 11 seeds, eight 12 seeds and eight 16 seeds play on Tuesday and Wednesday. So 24 teams fighting for 12 spots. Play six games on Tuesday (which feeds into the Thursday slate of games) and six games on Wednesday which feeds into the Friday schedule. Pick a second site (probably more Midwest/West oriented) to run games along with Dayton (which would now focus more on the East/South). Now Tuesday and Wedneday would have a full slate of games and the tournament starting on Thursday would be unaffected. Everyone who plays an 11, 12 or 16 would play a team that has already played a game in the tournament for balance.
JB
JB
I don't watch any play in games now and doubt many others really do either. 64 was too many in my opinion but it was the top number to go with. Please leave it at that and quit growing the number of teams getting in and watering down the tournament which was one of sports best times of the year.
I recall that there was an interim period from 32 to 64. During that time many higher seeded teams with a bye were upset by teams with a game under their belt.
Greed has destroyed sports and the moment gambling became legal, it has become a slippery slope.
This is ridiculous and unnecessary.
This is ridiculous and unnecessary.
