How to make NCAA Tournament better?

[wkuhillhound]

Read Gene Wojciechowski's article about the NCAA Tournament. There are some interesting suggestions. I especially like .500 rule.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=3291117&sportCat=ncb

Discuss.

[brownbear]

I think maybe a way to do it is to make conference tournaments just 4 teams. They still will get the ESPN money for the championship, but teams that went 4-12 (Georgia) in conference play can't make the tournament.

I've always thought the play-in game was retarded. Shove a small school that legitimately won its conference out of the real madness, and replace them with a big BCS-conference school that will have a big media following come tournament time. It's all about the $$.

[bonarae]

I'd agree with his suggestions (especially with the .500 rule and the Switzerland-like options), but...

- What'll happen to the NIT with all this talk on expanding the Big Dance? Focus more on that.
- Give more attention to the small-time schools. I think the Ivies dislike their football teams playing against Southern/Midwestern schools because of the schools' performance in other sports' in-season/postseason tournaments (especially men's basketball and baseball), but that's another story.

[UNCBears2010]

What about making the play-in game between the last at-large team in and the first at-large team out? The game would be better and easier to sell and all of the small conference champions gat to have the tournament experience.

[SO ILLmatic]

Dont expand to 96 or 128 teams.


I would like to see four play-in games. 65 teams to 68 teams.
Less griping from the "big-boys" if they get 3 more chances to get their teams in.

[tribe_pride]

With his recommendations,
1. I'd like the play-in game if there needs to be one be between the last at-large teams and have the winner be a #13 seed or where ever they belong. No need to punish the #1 seed by having that play in winner be a 16 seed

4. Student Athlete - very few of these guys are going pro in basketball -I have no problem.

5. 500 rule. I like this as long as you still allow winners with a below 500 record who won their conference tourney make it in. May be bad for the smaller conferences but it's fun to watch the Cinderellas

6. Never knew about the refs advancing. Advancing as a team is better.

11. Re-seed - Don't like it. They already seed 1&4, 2&3 - these teams have made it to the Final Four. LEave it as is. (Also tougher to do a bracket - the right way)

[Thunderstruck84]

Dont expand to 96 or 128 teams.


I would like to see four play-in games. 65 teams to 68 teams.
Less griping from the "big-boys" if they get 3 more chances to get their teams in.
I think the 4 play in games would be a great idea. It would give the smaller schools national exposure that they'll never get in a 1 vs 16 slaughter. Having 8 teams compete won't alienate the two schools who play the play in with the current system. The atmosphere the game(s) could also improve with having 8 teams compete instead of 2.

Of course this is all my deduction for what it's worth, it could end up pissing off 8 schools instead of 2.

[brownbear]

I think the 4 play in games would be a great idea. It would give the smaller schools national exposure that they'll never get in a 1 vs 16 slaughter. Having 8 teams compete won't alienate the two schools who play the play in with the current system. The atmosphere the game(s) could also improve with having 8 teams compete instead of 2.

Of course this is all my deduction for what it's worth, it could end up pissing off 8 schools instead of 2.

Yes, play-in games give some teams national exposure, but the 12-seeded mid-majors move down to 13. Everyone knows that 12-5 upsets are very common (on average between 1 and 2 every year), and with big conference schools winning those games, the upsets aren't nearly as big of upsets.

I don't think the 7th or 8th place team in a conference (no matter how "power" of a conference it is) should take precedence over a 1st place team (no matter how weak the conference is).

[CatFan22]

-Keep the 64 (65)
-Stop the conference tourney's. Or at least take only the top 6 or 8 into a conference tourney.

[AshevilleApp2]

I like the earlier start on Monday night.

[813Jag]

Yes, play-in games give some teams national exposure, but the 12-seeded mid-majors move down to 13. Everyone knows that 12-5 upsets are very common (on average between 1 and 2 every year), and with big conference schools winning those games, the upsets aren't nearly as big of upsets.

I don't think the 7th or 8th place team in a conference (no matter how "power" of a conference it is) should take precedence over a 1st place team (no matter how weak the conference is).
Even though my conference is one of those weak conferences, there's no way I can say with a straight face that our #1 is as good as a 7,8, or 9 place power conference team. That's just the truth. xreadx But do agree that you should be at least .500 to get a bid.

Play in game is a joke, though. They very quietly announced the teams yesterday.

[tribe_pride]

Play in game is a joke, though. They very quietly announced the teams yesterday.

That's because they didn't even put the right 2 teams in there (only got one of the 2 right)

[Peems]

I won't be able to put it as eloquently as Bob Knight did but I like the idea of expanding to 128. As Knight said have last teams in play each other so ASU would play like a Syracuse and after these games we have the 64 best teams. with 128 no one gets left out.

[brownbear]

I won't be able to put it as eloquently as Bob Knight did but I like the idea of expanding to 128. As Knight said have last teams in play each other so ASU would play like a Syracuse and after these games we have the 64 best teams. with 128 no one gets left out.

Then the 129th team complains, and they expand to 256. Then the 257th team complains, and they just allow everyone in the tournament. You have to draw the line somewhere.

[Thunderstruck84]

Then the 129th team complains, and they expand to 256. Then the 257th team complains, and they just allow everyone in the tournament. You have to draw the line somewhere.
xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx xnodx

There will always be whiners unless they put every single team in the tournament. I think they should expand a little though, 80 would be a good number. Have the 13-20 seeds play an extra game on the first Tuesday of the tournament.