96 teams. Good or bad?

[jadennis]

Do you like the idea of expanding the tournament or not?

At first I didn't like the idea.  But I think I've come around to liking it.  If they give the top 32 seeds a bye for the first round, then I like it.  Essentially it would end the nearly pointless 16 vs 1, 15 vs 2, etc games that we don't care much about.  A 16 had never beaten a 1, and the 15 has only beaten the 2 four times since 1985.  In all, the top 12 seeds (the 1s, 2s, and 3s) are 292-20 against the bottom 12 seeds (16s, 15s, and 14s).  That's a 94% winning %.  #1 seeds are even 52-4 all time verses #9s in round two (9s beat 8s 54% of the time).

However, the problem isn't so much 1 vs 16, if that #16 was, in fact, one of the best 64 teams in the country.  The problem right now is that they typically are not.  They are typically some team from the MEAC that upset a decent team in the conference tournament and got an automatic bid.  Out of over 300 D-1 teams, the #16 seeds are often not in the top 100-125 teams in the country.

So by giving the top 32 a bye, we stop that non-sense.  Instead, each region would have 24 seeds.  Numbers 1-8 have a bye.  So #9 starts off against #24.  That #24 is likely a team that used to be a #16.  They are now eliminated early, weeding out the automatic qualifiers that shouldn't have been included in past tournaments.

Also in that first round you get a 16 vs 17 match-up that likely would include teams like last years Auburn team, or this years UNC or last years Baylor.  You'd match-up what used to be bubble teams.  #16 is the team that used to barely get in, #17 is the team that barely missed out.  Now they get to prove on the court, head to head, why they should be in.

So after the first two days of the tournament, you've weeded out 32 teams.  Now the first games for #1 and #2 seeds come against teams that actually have a decent shot at beating them.  It won't happen a lot, but the top 12 seeds will no longer have a 94% winning % in opening games.  A team like last year's Auburn team that potentially could have one a game or two in the NCAA tournament won't have to stay home while Coppin State and Fairleigh toolinson get in with 17-14 records from the ABC123 Conference.

The one reason it really sucks?  History.  It will not begin a new era of what it means to be a tournament team.  You won't necessarily keep a coach just because he "got you to the tournament".  You may get to 18-20 wins and not have quite the urgency down the stretch to win that one last big game to "get off the bubble".

But new things will start.  Being one of the top 32 seeds will start to be a big deal, etc.

Essentially, it will create 32 "play-in" games to see who, of all those "bubble" teams of the past, really should have been in and should have been out

Thoughts?

[The Prowler]

Bad

[Kaos]

96 teams? 

Why bother having a season.  Just have an exhibition season of six to ten games and than a nationwide double elimination tournament from there on out.

[AUTiger1]

96 teams? 

Why bother having a season.  Just have an exhibition season of six to ten games and than a nationwide double elimination tournament from there on out.

^^This^^

Not a good idea at all IMO.  Keep it as is.

[CCTAU]

I agree with the previous two posters who agree with each other.


I mean why should anyone have to work extra hard and earn a post season berth? We are all one and equal under the mystical heavens anyway. Aren't we?

[Townhallsavoy]

Awful idea.  64 is almost too much. 

Hell, think of it this way.  The Final Four is tonight.  I forgot all about it until I saw a link on ESPN.com.  Imagine if the Final Four had to wait another two weeks to arrive.  No one would care.  I don't care as it is. 

Besides money, has anyone stated a good reason for expanding the tournament? 

[Jumbo]

Awful idea.  64 is almost too much. 

Hell, think of it this way.  The Final Four is tonight.  I forgot all about it until I saw a link on ESPN.com.  Imagine if the Final Four had to wait another two weeks to arrive.  No one would care.  I don't care as it is. 

Besides money, has anyone stated a good reason for expanding the tournament? 

Thats the only reason.

[Godfather]

and yet we still can't have a football playoff.   Nor a good reason as to why....pathetic!

[War Eagle!!!]

and yet we still can't have a football playoff.   Nor a good reason as to why....pathetic!

There is a perfectly good reason that we don't have a football play-off and that the basketball tourny is moving to 96 teams...

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[Snaggletiger]

Bad, bad, bad.  In my opinion, the biggest reason that March Madness is so successful centers around one word...brackets. Millions across the country have their bracket and they watch the tourney for that very reason.  It's like plunking down $2.00 on #6 at the Dog Track.  Slightly interesting to watch them run.  Place $2.00 of hard earned cash on a dog and you're going crazy when the rabbit takes off.

People have a stake in it.  They want to know how their picks are doing and where they rank.  That means people pay attention.  They watch the games they would NEVER watch during the regular season.  That's where the whole money issue comes in.  Without the fans, without the interest, there are no mega-million $$$ deals.

Fast forward to a tourney with 96 teams. Sorry, I'm not filling out any bracket and honeslty don't give a rat's ass about watching two .500 ball clubs go at it in Spokane Washington during the first of 27 rounds.  As said above, 64 is almost too many...but still manageable.  If it ain't broke...     

[jadennis]

I think most everyone just sees the number 96 and doesn't give it much thought beyond that.  It's a big number, but if you give the first 32 teams a bye for the first round, it's not that big of a deal.

Look at the list below that are an example of the 32 teams that may have gotten in this year.  I listed their RPI next to them.  Notice that not one team is over 94 in RPI.  If you're in the top 94 in RPI, you are in roughly the top 25% of all D-1 teams.  Letting in teams that are in the top 25% of all teams is not watering it down.

To me, what it does is create a better field of 64 by adding only two days to eliminate the current #14, #15, and #16 seeds that are a waste of time (in most years).  You could play those two days on the Monday and Tuesday of the current opening week.  If the Monday team wins, they get to play one of the top 32 seeds on Thursday, just as we currently have scheduled.

In a field of 96, we would be adding 32 teams. It's actually not as hard as you think to find 32 teams that are as worthy as a lot of the teams that are in the current field (and more worthy than quite a few as well).

Team - RPI
Rhode Island - 40
Wichita State - 43
UAB - 45
Kent State - 46 (same as Cornell, UNLV, Notre Dame)
Memphis - 53
Dayton - 54
Mississippi State - 55
Virginia Tech - 59 (same as Minnesota)
William & Mary - 57 (same as Florida)
Seton Hall - 61
Ole Miss - 61
Cincinnati - 63
Arizona State - 63
UConn - -63
Va Commonwealth - 66
Marshall - 67
Nevada - 67
Tulsa - 69
South Florida - 70
Texas Tech - 73
Illinois - 74
Northwestern - 74
Charlotte - 77
St. John's - 82
Morehead State - 84
Saint Louis - 85
Akron - 89
UNC - 90
S. Carolina - 93
Miami - 94
NC State - 94
Arizona - 94

Below are the bottom 32 teams from this years field...which would be the 32 teams the above added 32 teams would have faced in the opening round (by the way, this format would only add one round to the tournament, not two extra weeks).

Team - RPI
Northern Iowa - 17
San Diego St - 18
Old Dominion - 27
Utah st - 30
Siena - 30
Georgia tech - 33
St Mary's - 35
UTEP - 37
Louisville - 37
Wake Forest - 37
Florida St - 41
Washington - 41
Missouri - 44
Cornell - 46
Oakland - 51
New Mex St -51
Murray St - 56
Florida - 57
Minnesota - 59
Sam Houston - 70
Wofford - 70
Ohio - 94
UC SB - 94
Montana - 94
Morgan st - 103
North Texas - 104
Houston - 107
Vermont - 117
ETSU - 117
Robert Morris - 127
Lehigh - 151
Ak Pine Bluff - 181

Notice in the 32 added teams, not one has an RPI over 100. The average RPI of those teams is 70. Of the bottom 32 teams in this years tournament, the average RPI is 68, with 8 teams with RPIs over 100.

As you can see, the weakest teams in a field of 96 are ALREADY in the current tournament of 64.  We wouldn't be adding weaker teams and watering things down.  For one, we would have better teams eliminating those pitiful teams that happen to get lucky and win their suck-ass conference tournaments.  Secondly, we would no longer have to pick 15 teams out of a group of 30 teams that are all nearly identical (ie bubble teams).  We can let those teams play their way in....as it should be.

And for those who like to act like we should just play the whole season as a giant tournament...that's just retarded.  There are 347 teams in D-1 basketball.  This format will also put an emphasis on trying to make the top 32, so as to avoid the opening round game.  

Instead of having Kentucky's first game be against ETSU (RPI 117), you might have Kentucky facing Dayton (RPI 54), who won the NIT this year, as their first game of the tournament.  This wold be after Dayton eliminated ETSU and Kentucky had a bye.  Dayton can beat Kentucky, ETSU cannot.

So after you get Monday and Tuesday out of the way, the remainder of the tournament is exponentially more interesting and undeniably more competitive in those next 32 days (compared to the current opening 32 games).

For me, my initial reaction was that I didn't like it.  But if you actually go through the steps of what it would mean, and how it would actually improve on the deficiencies of the current format, I've decided I like it.

[Snaggletiger]

I don't disagree with a lot of that.  However, I still maintain that the one and only reason this tourney is so successful is the fan interest or "Participation."  As simple as it sounds, that's it.  If I have no bracket, I honestly don't care who wins or loses in the first round unless Auburn is in it or Duke is playing.  The office bracket pool gives the secretary who hasn't watched a game all year a reason to pay attention.  More viewers, more sponsors, more money.  Start with a a bracket that's so daunting and convoluted, half the people will say, fuck it, I don't have the time.

[The Prowler]

I think most everyone just sees the number 96 and doesn't give it much thought beyond that.  It's a big number, but if you give the first 32 teams a bye for the first round, it's not that big of a deal.

Look at the list below that are an example of the 32 teams that may have gotten in this year.  I listed their RPI next to them.  Notice that not one team is over 94 in RPI.  If you're in the top 94 in RPI, you are in roughly the top 25% of all D-1 teams.  Letting in teams that are in the top 25% of all teams is not watering it down.

To me, what it does is create a better field of 64 by adding only two days to eliminate the current #14, #15, and #16 seeds that are a waste of time (in most years).  You could play those two days on the Monday and Tuesday of the current opening week.  If the Monday team wins, they get to play one of the top 32 seeds on Thursday, just as we currently have scheduled.

In a field of 96, we would be adding 32 teams. It's actually not as hard as you think to find 32 teams that are as worthy as a lot of the teams that are in the current field (and more worthy than quite a few as well).

Team - RPI
Rhode Island - 40
Wichita State - 43
UAB - 45
Kent State - 46 (same as Cornell, UNLV, Notre Dame)
Memphis - 53
Dayton - 54
Mississippi State - 55
Virginia Tech - 59 (same as Minnesota)
William & Mary - 57 (same as Florida)
Seton Hall - 61
Ole Miss - 61
Cincinnati - 63
Arizona State - 63
UConn - -63
Va Commonwealth - 66
Marshall - 67
Nevada - 67
Tulsa - 69
South Florida - 70
Texas Tech - 73
Illinois - 74
Northwestern - 74
Charlotte - 77
St. John's - 82
Morehead State - 84
Saint Louis - 85
Akron - 89
UNC - 90
S. Carolina - 93
Miami - 94
NC State - 94
Arizona - 94

Below are the bottom 32 teams from this years field...which would be the 32 teams the above added 32 teams would have faced in the opening round (by the way, this format would only add one round to the tournament, not two extra weeks).

Team - RPI
Northern Iowa - 17
San Diego St - 18
Old Dominion - 27
Utah st - 30
Siena - 30
Georgia tech - 33
St Mary's - 35
UTEP - 37
Louisville - 37
Wake Forest - 37
Florida St - 41
Washington - 41
Missouri - 44
Cornell - 46
Oakland - 51
New Mex St -51
Murray St - 56
Florida - 57
Minnesota - 59
Sam Houston - 70
Wofford - 70
Ohio - 94
UC SB - 94
Montana - 94
Morgan st - 103
North Texas - 104
Houston - 107
Vermont - 117
ETSU - 117
Robert Morris - 127
Lehigh - 151
Ak Pine Bluff - 181

Notice in the 32 added teams, not one has an RPI over 100. The average RPI of those teams is 70. Of the bottom 32 teams in this years tournament, the average RPI is 68, with 8 teams with RPIs over 100.

As you can see, the weakest teams in a field of 96 are ALREADY in the current tournament of 64.  We wouldn't be adding weaker teams and watering things down.  For one, we would have better teams eliminating those pitiful teams that happen to get lucky and win their suck-ass conference tournaments.  Secondly, we would no longer have to pick 15 teams out of a group of 30 teams that are all nearly identical (ie bubble teams).  We can let those teams play their way in....as it should be.

And for those who like to act like we should just play the whole season as a giant tournament...that's just retarded.  There are 347 teams in D-1 basketball.  This format will also put an emphasis on trying to make the top 32, so as to avoid the opening round game.  

Instead of having Kentucky's first game be against ETSU (RPI 117), you might have Kentucky facing Dayton (RPI 54), who won the NIT this year, as their first game of the tournament.  This wold be after Dayton eliminated ETSU and Kentucky had a bye.  Dayton can beat Kentucky, ETSU cannot.

So after you get Monday and Tuesday out of the way, the remainder of the tournament is exponentially more interesting and undeniably more competitive in those next 32 days (compared to the current opening 32 games).

For me, my initial reaction was that I didn't like it.  But if you actually go through the steps of what it would mean, and how it would actually improve on the deficiencies of the current format, I've decided I like it.

Okay...it's good.  Actually it would be better doing it that way.  There were 10 teams that should've been in the NCAA Tournament.  Now, doing it that way, we'd get to see if those 10 or more teams deserve to be in the Tournament.  Also, I would've loved seeing a Dayton/Kentucky matchup.

[GH2001]

I think most everyone just sees the number 96 and doesn't give it much thought beyond that.  It's a big number, but if you give the first 32 teams a bye for the first round, it's not that big of a deal.

Look at the list below that are an example of the 32 teams that may have gotten in this year.  I listed their RPI next to them.  Notice that not one team is over 94 in RPI.  If you're in the top 94 in RPI, you are in roughly the top 25% of all D-1 teams.  Letting in teams that are in the top 25% of all teams is not watering it down.

To me, what it does is create a better field of 64 by adding only two days to eliminate the current #14, #15, and #16 seeds that are a waste of time (in most years).  You could play those two days on the Monday and Tuesday of the current opening week.  If the Monday team wins, they get to play one of the top 32 seeds on Thursday, just as we currently have scheduled.

In a field of 96, we would be adding 32 teams. It's actually not as hard as you think to find 32 teams that are as worthy as a lot of the teams that are in the current field (and more worthy than quite a few as well).

Team - RPI
Rhode Island - 40
Wichita State - 43
UAB - 45
Kent State - 46 (same as Cornell, UNLV, Notre Dame)
Memphis - 53
Dayton - 54
Mississippi State - 55
Virginia Tech - 59 (same as Minnesota)
William & Mary - 57 (same as Florida)
Seton Hall - 61
Ole Miss - 61
Cincinnati - 63
Arizona State - 63
UConn - -63
Va Commonwealth - 66
Marshall - 67
Nevada - 67
Tulsa - 69
South Florida - 70
Texas Tech - 73
Illinois - 74
Northwestern - 74
Charlotte - 77
St. John's - 82
Morehead State - 84
Saint Louis - 85
Akron - 89
UNC - 90
S. Carolina - 93
Miami - 94
NC State - 94
Arizona - 94

Below are the bottom 32 teams from this years field...which would be the 32 teams the above added 32 teams would have faced in the opening round (by the way, this format would only add one round to the tournament, not two extra weeks).

Team - RPI
Northern Iowa - 17
San Diego St - 18
Old Dominion - 27
Utah st - 30
Siena - 30
Georgia tech - 33
St Mary's - 35
UTEP - 37
Louisville - 37
Wake Forest - 37
Florida St - 41
Washington - 41
Missouri - 44
Cornell - 46
Oakland - 51
New Mex St -51
Murray St - 56
Florida - 57
Minnesota - 59
Sam Houston - 70
Wofford - 70
Ohio - 94
UC SB - 94
Montana - 94
Morgan st - 103
North Texas - 104
Houston - 107
Vermont - 117
ETSU - 117
Robert Morris - 127
Lehigh - 151
Ak Pine Bluff - 181

Notice in the 32 added teams, not one has an RPI over 100. The average RPI of those teams is 70. Of the bottom 32 teams in this years tournament, the average RPI is 68, with 8 teams with RPIs over 100.

As you can see, the weakest teams in a field of 96 are ALREADY in the current tournament of 64.  We wouldn't be adding weaker teams and watering things down.  For one, we would have better teams eliminating those pitiful teams that happen to get lucky and win their suck-ass conference tournaments.  Secondly, we would no longer have to pick 15 teams out of a group of 30 teams that are all nearly identical (ie bubble teams).  We can let those teams play their way in....as it should be.

And for those who like to act like we should just play the whole season as a giant tournament...that's just retarded.  There are 347 teams in D-1 basketball.  This format will also put an emphasis on trying to make the top 32, so as to avoid the opening round game.  

Instead of having Kentucky's first game be against ETSU (RPI 117), you might have Kentucky facing Dayton (RPI 54), who won the NIT this year, as their first game of the tournament.  This wold be after Dayton eliminated ETSU and Kentucky had a bye.  Dayton can beat Kentucky, ETSU cannot.

So after you get Monday and Tuesday out of the way, the remainder of the tournament is exponentially more interesting and undeniably more competitive in those next 32 days (compared to the current opening 32 games).

For me, my initial reaction was that I didn't like it.  But if you actually go through the steps of what it would mean, and how it would actually improve on the deficiencies of the current format, I've decided I like it.

Only one piece of info missing here - as Kaos said - it would make the regular season ALMOST meaningless. There would be no incentive. Many Big East teams would sandbag the season.

[jadennis]

I just don't believe that.   The Big East teams can't sand bag a season, they have to play each other.  It's like saying SEC teams sand bag in football because they don't play a tough NC schedule.  And remember, most people say that it would do that because "everyone" would get in.  But like I mentioned, there are 347 D-1 teams.  Everyone is not getting in.  And by opening it up to 96, for every St. John's and Illinois that thinks they're getting now, there is a Dayton and a Rhode Island fighting for a spot too.  There would still be no guarantees.  

As for scheduling, unlike football, the top teams in the country don't play other top teams so much to boost their resume (although that is a small part of it), they primarily play those teams to prepare for March.  That would not change.  I guarantee you that Tom Izzo would NOT cease to schedule Texas and North Carolina because there are 96 teams in the tournament.  Syracuse wouldn't stop scheduling Florida and Memphis.  Boeheim plays those games to prepare for the NCAA tournament, and nothing more.  He would continue to do so.

Also, you would see teams fighting to be in the top 32 so that they can avoid the first round games.  It would be a new challenge and goal.  You'd see teams that are normally "safe" in the 64 team field now concerned with making sure they are part of the top 32 teams.

To me, there would be minimal change to the regular season.  Teams still want to get better for the tournament, they still want to get a high seed, and they still have to play their conference schedules and tournaments.  

At the worst, it would make conference tournaments less important for bubble teams (like Auburn and Kentucky last year, or Ole Miss, Florida, and Mississippi State this year).  But beyond that, I don't think it would change much.  

[The Prowler]

I just don't believe that.   The Big East teams can't sand bag a season, they have to play each other.  It's like saying SEC teams sand bag in football because they don't play a tough NC schedule.  And remember, most people say that it would do that because "everyone" would get in.  But like I mentioned, there are 347 D-1 teams.  Everyone is not getting in.  And by opening it up to 96, for every St. John's and Illinois that thinks they're getting now, there is a Dayton and a Rhode Island fighting for a spot too.  There would still be no guarantees.  

As for scheduling, unlike football, the top teams in the country don't play other top teams so much to boost their resume (although that is a small part of it), they primarily play those teams to prepare for March.  That would not change.  I guarantee you that Tom Izzo would NOT cease to schedule Texas and North Carolina because there are 96 teams in the tournament.  Syracuse wouldn't stop scheduling Florida and Memphis.  Boeheim plays those games to prepare for the NCAA tournament, and nothing more.  He would continue to do so.

Also, you would see teams fighting to be in the top 32 so that they can avoid the first round games.  It would be a new challenge and goal.  You'd see teams that are normally "safe" in the 64 team field now concerned with making sure they are part of the top 32 teams.

To me, there would be minimal change to the regular season.  Teams still want to get better for the tournament, they still want to get a high seed, and they still have to play their conference schedules and tournaments.  

At the worst, it would make conference tournaments less important for bubble teams (like Auburn and Kentucky last year, or Ole Miss, Florida, and Mississippi State this year).  But beyond that, I don't think it would change much.  

^^Bingo^^

[War Eagle!!!]

If the NCAA can make a 96 team bracket fit on one page, and be easy to fill out for people that have no fucking clue what they are doing, then the tourny will still be successful. If they can't, a lot of the fair weather fans are not going to fill out as many brackets and interest is going to fade. Part of the reason this thing is so popular now is because everyone and their mom fills out a bracket. If you make the shit too complicated and people don't fill out there brackets, people will not follow the tourny as close. No one will really give a damn if Purdue is upset by Milwaukee-Wisconsin or not...especially if they don't have brackets filled out...

[Snaggletiger]

If the NCAA can make a 96 team bracket fit on one page, and be easy to fill out for people that have no phuking clue what they are doing, then the tourny will still be successful. If they can't, a lot of the fair weather fans are not going to fill out as many brackets and interest is going to fade. Part of the reason this thing is so popular now is because everyone and their mom fills out a bracket. If you make the poop too complicated and people don't fill out there brackets, people will not follow the tourny as close. No one will really give a damn if Purdue is upset by Milwaukee-Wisconsin or not...especially if they don't have brackets filled out...

It's like you read my mind...or my earlier posts.   

[War Eagle!!!]

It's like you read my mind...or my earlier posts.   

I said it much betterer...

[Snaggletiger]

I said it much betterer...

Fuck you...people live for my take.  I'm well respected by very important people.  I once drove a Volvo.