Sounds like an interesting idea but it can’t work because the schedule is pretty much locked in with the NCAA tourney and the conference tournaments
BACATOLOGY: 2/20 NCAA TOURNAMENT ANALYSIS...UPDATE RUTGERS NOW A 9 SEED AS OF 2/24
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
They could push the "NCAA tournament" another week if necessary.
7 million viewers seems pretty good to me
The longer first 4 is a thing the more it will seem like a normal part of the tournament
Makes me wonder what a team that goes 31-0 against all Q4 teams would rank in the NET
I think too many get caught up in recency thus Michigan too far back on their lists. Even if Michigan wins today, which does give them one of their biggest wins of the season, it does not mean they leap in. Have to see how they compare to usc in the morning. Its the bulky loss total that is their biggest issue.....that Central Michigan game looming large
It's the kind of thing that isn't possible until it is, but I believe I read that college basketball sets its title game a week before the Masters and goes from there. The CBS/Turner contract runs through 2032 and if there's one institution that's resistant to change it's Augusta.
Not as long as CBS has the rights. Pushing the NCAA final four back would be in conflict with the Masters, and you know that ain’t moving
Coaches already hate playing conference games before the calendar flips. Not sure you'll get them on board with more.
My personal hot take is that basketball should be a spring sport with the season running from January through May (May Madness!). But of course that would never happen.
If Rutgers at Wisconsin was just too darn fast-paced for you, grab your ESPN+ subscription and tune into North Texas (363rd in tempo) at Charlotte (362nd in tempo). Literally the two slowest teams in the country.
The bracket matrix consensus is interesting right now on how few teams are listed for the last at-large spots across 114 brackets tallied by the matrix. Last at-large team is Wisconsin, listed on 75 brackets. First team out is New Mexico, listed on 20, followed by Utah State at 15 and UNC at 14, Clemson on 4, Texas Tech 3, Arizona State 2, Penn State 2, Oregon 1, and North Texas 1.
Other at-large teams not on all 114 brackets: Pitt 113, WVU 106, Memphis 112, Miss State 107, and USC 108. That's it.
Other at-large teams not on all 114 brackets: Pitt 113, WVU 106, Memphis 112, Miss State 107, and USC 108. That's it.
Compare to February 23, 2022:
BYU 43
Florida 35
VCU 24
Oklahoma 19
Dayton 17
Belmont 11
UAB 10
Kansas State 4
Oregon 4
Virginia 4
Virginia Tech 2
St. Bonaventure 2
Washington State 2
Mississippi State 1
Clemson 1
Colorado 1
Saint Louis 1
Utah State 1
Part of this difference is that some submissions last year were rating systems shoved into a bracket format that was spitting out some kooky outliers. One such system listed Dayton as a 7 seed. There's less of that this year but it's not entirely gone.
They played a 47 possession game a few weeks ago, which is pretty hard to do.
There would be very little impact in condensing the conference schedules slightly so schedules finish a week earlier. Some conferences already finish up the prior week. But alternatively they could just force the conference tournaments to end Saturday and move the Selection time up to noon - then play the NIT games at 4 neutral site - Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday for the right to play Friday.
The biggest obstacle ironically could be getting the major conference coaches to agree to it because it would have to mean shrinking the main NCAA field back down to 64 teams (meaning 2 additional slots in the main bracket would be filled by low major autobids). Wouldn’t water down the overall field. If they do expand, this would be a good way to do it for sure.
Or the autobids could just guarantee you at least make the preliminary bracket.
They could but that would change the whole dynamic of the tournament. I don’t think it would be well received in the long run. Part of the tournament magic are those 15 vs 2 and 14 vs 3 type games where decent mid majors are getting their one shot vs. a big dog. Keep that in tact. You don’t want to water down the accomplishment of “making the field” as an at large qualifier which is exactly what happens if you put all the mid major bids in a big outbracket and start making Seton Hall St Louis type teams 15 seeds.
This can be avoided if you simply trade 2 guaranteed at large bids for at least 10 extra play in at large bids. Of course - the play in requirements go from needing to win one game to having to win 3. No watering down there.
There is no reason to justify adding more schools
I think the idea was that you don’t really “add”. Instead you do away with the first four and replace it by taking the NIT structure that’s already in existence and move the timing of it up so that the 4 regional “bracket winners” earn the last 4 at large spots in the field. There’s no watering down with this model - it actually becomes a few less guaranteed at large teams qualifying for the field (if you make the NIT you still have a punchers chance, yes, but it’s way different than going to Dayton is now. You’d have to win 3 straight to get in with this model).
Money is more powerful than whiny coaches. And to the degree their opinions matter, more power conference teams will be playing meaningful post-season games. I suspect that will be attractive. Tom Izzo won’t like it, but guys like Shrewsberry and Hoiberg will like the idea of getting invited to the dance and get their bonuses for doing so.
That was what some stupid woke board came up with..its hardly applicable for all sports
Well... the followers of those schools care. So not exactly "no one." But kudos to the job you continue to do with "Bacatology."
I think there would be more interest than you think. It’s not quite the same thing as nobody caring about the current NIT structure where the stakes are just proving your 69th best.
Pure college basketball fans would root for those 26-5 mid-major teams to knock out the 16-14 bloat to bring as much meaning to the regular season as possible because in the end that’s important to the sport.
From a conference respect perspective - fans of not only the teams playing but the representative conferences would take an interest.
There’d be something for more teams that messed up early to continue to play towards in the second half of the season without rendering what happened earlier completely meaningless.
In truth - they could probably just eliminate conference championship games on Sundays to accomplish one straight week of madness with an earlier announcement. Monday night NIT games at higher seeds. Tuesday and Wednesday would be neutral games at deliberately selected locations within driving distance of NCAA round 1. Dayton would always meet this criteria. MSG likely too.
I’d be happy for the format to remain unchanged - I’m just saying if they went with this type of model it wouldn’t end up being as awful as you are describing. I do agree that simply shifting to 72 or 96 teams in one large bracket would be bad for the sport and water down the meaning of making the field to the point where it’s not special. Bad move. But this particular suggestion doesn’t do that was really my point.
why would schools want to wait as many as 10-14 games before playing their first game because you want to have a 16 team tournament just widdle it down to 4
No waiting for anyone. Just ask the 2-3 conferences that play a Sunday championship game to play it one day earlier so selection time is moved up (which should be the arrangement anyway IMO). It’s called Madness for a reason, right? Field announced Sunday. First round NIT games at better seeds Monday night. Second round games Tuesday at neutral site. NCAA qualifier championship games played Wednesday (same neutral site). Winners set up to play Friday games in the NCAA tournament at a nearby venue.
Well the first round games at better seeds would certainly be well attended by home fans. It would really only be one extra set of games at a neutral site than what they do now in Dayton. I guess they could also do 2 rounds at better seed gyms and then it would be identical to what they have now for attendance purposes.
Doesn't all undefeated teams get a one seed regardless as long as there is not 5 or .ore of them?
North Texas loses at Charlotte, a Q2 loss. Almost definitely autobid or bust for North Texas.
