Yep - one more weekend puts you at 128Originally Posted by boxerdog
|
|
|
|
|
Yep - one more weekend puts you at 128
''Don't be a bad dagh..."
My dream - 256 teams would give you another 2 NCAA tournament games Thursday - Monday. There would be 128 games at home sites on Thursday/Friday, 64 on Saturday/Sunday/Monday. Highest 128 seeded teams get the home games Thursday/Friday. Higher seeded team of the two playing Sat/Sun/Monday would get the home game. This would still give the advantage to the power conferences because of seeding. You would probably see lots of upsets in games between teams in the middle of the seedings.
Get rid of one week of regular season play. Allow conferences to keep the conference tournament. If no conference tournament, teams could play two additional games.
Teams could still play the same number of regular season games leading to the tournament, but it would have to be done in a shorter period. Have 3 games in a week by playing Thu, Sat, and Monday a couple of times to keep the number of games in the season the same. Another option would be to have more holiday tournaments during the Christmas break.
The conference tournament would become just for the glory of winning, so the need for the tournament is lessened. I expect most conferences would end it unless they are making a lot of money.
Of course, moving to more participants (which I favor) would KILL the NIT. And the NIT is a tournament that I like and truly believe LA Tech has benefitted from.
After the 256 team field is cut to 64, then the NIT picks up any 32 of the 192 teams eliminated. There might be some big names available.
Exactly. It is waaaaaaaaay overdue for ALL conference REGULAR SEASON champions to get automatic bids to the NCAA tournament. The conference tournament auto-bid nonsense needs to die or at least get relegated to "last chance NCAA tournament" or NIT bids.
Makes sense to me for the team who remains consistent over he course of a season to be rewarded. It also makes sense for a team who gets hot at the right time to be rewarded. This can happen if the field goes to 96. Bigger than that is watered down too much, IMO.
Did I miss something?
The conferences decide to have a post season tournament.
The conferences decide to send the tournament champ to the NCAA.
Some seem to believe the NCAA is forcing this, but conference commissioners and thier TV deals are what forces this. Correct me if I'm wrong.
That is better than what we have now, but I would still go with 128.
Automatic qualifiers plus generally the top 100 teams gives you pretty much everyone who has a chance to make some noise.
With the top 100 you still are at less than a third of all the teams in the country which is basically comparable to the playoffs in every major sport if you consider the bowls as play-offs.
And a lot more valid than the putrid bowl system where everyone but the bottom 20 or 30 teams go to a bowl
''Don't be a bad dagh..."
I think you're right. Somebody needs to pitch the idea to the commissioners because I'd imagine any revenue lost from the conference tournaments could be re-paid in spades from getting the revenue of more teams in the tournament.
Have you considered those Dogs?
I think the key to continued parity and upsets, what drives the first weekend of the NCAA Tournament, is that games are played at neutral sites. That really levels the playing field. Having the higher-seeded team host the first few rounds would diminish the overall craziness, and quality, of the tournament, in my opinion.
the bold, the beautiful, theprofessor
I agree. As bad as UAB was on the road, no way they pull the upset in Ames, IA or Georgia State winning in Waco.
While I agree that a neutral site levels the playing field, economics will, more than likely, be the deciding factor. For that reason top seeds will get home court advantage in the first two rounds.
My idea would be to seed the top 128 seeds (in a 256 team field) and then match up their opponents geographically to cut travel costs. This would allow fans of the lower seed the opportunity to travel to the first round game.
It may be years before the NCAA tournament field expands to 256, but I hope to see it in my lifetime. Then it will be closer to a true national championship.
Nope - the NCAA tourney is a CASH COW and will continue to be so thus mandating neutral sites
Now I could see the top 8 seeds given byes into 2nd round of games just like the old system
The UK-ND matchup was the largest viewed sporting event EVER in the history of cable/sat tv
''Don't be a bad dagh..."
I'm advocating quadrupling the tournament field to 256 teams and adding one more 2 game weekend of play to the NCAA tournament. The first two rounds would be at home courts of the higher seeds to get the field down to 64.
This would cut travel costs by having only one team traveling. All ticket proceeds, minus expenses, would go to the NCAA. Ticket proceeds would probably be higher than playing at all neutral courts. If you pair teams geographically, many fans of the visiting team could buy tickets and watch the upset.
Once the field is down to 64, neutral court play would begin.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
