Dana O’Neil: tournament expansion unlikely to go past 76 | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Dana O’Neil: tournament expansion unlikely to go past 76

QuickDraw

Hi Ho SILVER
Joined
Jul 23, 2019
Messages
862
Reaction Score
4,692
why not 128 and just add around, this is getting absurd.
 

Poe

Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
438
Reaction Score
2,099
Either reduce to 64 or go to 128 already and just add another full round if you want a boatload of money.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
3,517
Reaction Score
9,315
I read a piece that said basketball currently has a lower rate of participation in the championship event than the NCAA recommends for sports with more than 200 teams... But to me all that means is they've put too many teams in division 1.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2014
Messages
4,200
Reaction Score
41,925
Does anybody watch the play in games except for the friends and family of the teams playing?

I'm a pretty big college basketball fan and I don't.
I watch them but there's no real excitement to them because I don't fill out my bracket until after they're over.

The only way I could see expansion being more exciting is if they made 16 teams fight for 4 spots. So on Tuesday you get 8 games, and then those 8 winners play again the following day. The 4 teams that make it out of that are then placed in the 64 team bracket. THAT would be pretty fun. Of course though, the Big 10 would probably cry about it being unfair that there's no rest day for poor ol .500 Maryland to prepare for facing a .500 Xavier squad lol
 
Joined
Feb 9, 2023
Messages
27
Reaction Score
44
So long as the conference champs don't have to play in the play in games. All this is is the now bigger conferences saying its not fair and they should have more teams in because these new teams would have made it in their old conferences - it's not our fault that we have more competition. Hence they get more money. I am sure that's not how it would work out though and the sub 500 northwestern team will get in and not in a play in.
 

Inyatkin

Stairway to Seven
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
2,433
Reaction Score
9,426
Every expansion plan ignores the fact that basically any team, no matter how mediocre, can get itself a tourney bid right now. Just get hot and win your conference tournament.
 
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
391
Reaction Score
2,493
I would be ok with 96. A first round bye for the top 32, play-in for the next 64.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj

Waquoit

Mr. Positive
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
32,579
Reaction Score
83,984
The only way I could see expansion being more exciting is if they made 16 teams fight for 4 spots.
Maybe they could use brass knuckles. Ratings would be huge.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
533
Reaction Score
2,772
So long as the conference champs don't have to play in the play in games. All this is is the now bigger conferences saying its not fair and they should have more teams in because these new teams would have made it in their old conferences - it's not our fault that we have more competition. Hence they get more money. I am sure that's not how it would work out though and the sub 500 northwestern team will get in and not in a play in.
I think this is important. Either you are in the tournament or not. What are they playing into in the "play in" games if they are already in the tournament?

The current process disqualifies four "auto-qualifiers." Two teams are re-qualified and two teams find themselves disinvited.
 

McLovin

Gangstas, what's up?
Joined
Dec 3, 2018
Messages
2,870
Reaction Score
18,207
Does anybody watch the play in games except for the friends and family of the teams playing?

I'm a pretty big college basketball fan and I don't.
I’ll have it on if I’m not doing anything, but I don’t really care if I miss them. I could really care less though (it almost feels like watching the NIT).
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
10,608
Reaction Score
16,031
64 teams was fine, I have warmed to 68 teams a little the Tuesday and Wednesday is like the appetizer to the main dish, I do tend to fall asleep while it’s on though.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
1,472
Reaction Score
3,366
I’ll have it on if I’m not doing anything, but I don’t really care if I miss them. I could really care less though (it almost feels like watching the NIT).
Point being how much additional money is there if no one watches the games.
 

McLovin

Gangstas, what's up?
Joined
Dec 3, 2018
Messages
2,870
Reaction Score
18,207
Point being how much additional money is there if no one watches the games.
For the networks? I don’t know. For the power conferences who will rack up 4 or more extra win units, apparently enough for them to want this.
 
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
1,709
Reaction Score
4,364
Virginia is on the bubble right now. They are a dreadful team that has no chance and nobody wants to watch in March. Expand the tournament and there will just be two days of mid-offs between poverty programs, which nobody will watch except for dimwitted ACC and Big 10 fans
Ha. This was good.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2018
Messages
3,458
Reaction Score
11,258
I personally dont want any expansion but if it’s bound to happen just double the First Four to First Eight (not very catchy though)

72 teams. Still too much but better than 80-90
This is probably the way to compromise. But I hate even compromising on this. Just keep it 68. No matter how many teams are chosen for the NCAAT there will always be a few teams that cry and feel slighted-it's inevitable.

All of this adding teams nonsense is just for the Power 6 conferences to get more teams in the Big Dance and I really hate it.
 

Online statistics

Members online
302
Guests online
2,077
Total visitors
2,379

Forum statistics

Threads
157,293
Messages
4,092,002
Members
9,984
Latest member
belle


Top Bottom