March Madness to 90 Teams?
- Thread starter Zak57
- Start date
Just like the playoff makes way more $$ but kills the bowls, this will make way more $$ and kill the tradition of brackets. Until less people watch because they killed it and then next go around it’s not as much way more money. But who thinks that far ahead
I don't think there are many tournament champions coming from the 5 seed or lower. i.e. you have to have good regular season to have a shot in the tournament.
Or UCLA barely getting in, making the play in game and getting to the Final Four!! Works both ways. Lots of NIT teams NCAA worthy.
SCOTUS made the correct decision on NIL.
Everyone including college players should own their own image, likeness and intellectual property, value dictated by a free open market based solely on your marketability.
None of that has anything to do with collectives raising money to pay high school seniors to play at the college you support….imo
Everyone including college players should own their own image, likeness and intellectual property, value dictated by a free open market based solely on your marketability.
None of that has anything to do with collectives raising money to pay high school seniors to play at the college you support….imo
Last edited:
Who cares? If you are capable of winning a championship then show it in the regular season to at least some degree. Not every team that could theoretically fluke their way into the final four needs to be in the tournament.
lol
It's all money.
Every league is expanding playoffs.
We can complain, but I'll still be glued to the NBA playoffs watching the play-in games with a 10 seed in the East (out of 15 teams) trying to advance.
I will say, I usually skip the tournament play-in games in Dayton. Unless Rutgers is playing obviously.
Every league is expanding playoffs.
We can complain, but I'll still be glued to the NBA playoffs watching the play-in games with a 10 seed in the East (out of 15 teams) trying to advance.
I will say, I usually skip the tournament play-in games in Dayton. Unless Rutgers is playing obviously.
Unc got to the final as an 8 seed .
Teams have gone from Dayton to final 4
I do like that everyone is concerned with the integrity of the tournament all of a sudden.
When I repeatedly pointed out how broken the tournament was (#12 Rutgers in the 1st round??) from an athletic integrity perspective the response was "It's about entertainment!!! Nobody would watch if it was only #16 seeds in the 1st round."
When I repeatedly pointed out how broken the tournament was (#12 Rutgers in the 1st round??) from an athletic integrity perspective the response was "It's about entertainment!!! Nobody would watch if it was only #16 seeds in the 1st round."
How exactly would you standardize NIL ? The courts decided It’s essentially a free market. They didn’t punt.
If NCAA tourney goes to 90 teams , have the first two rounds at home court of highest seed via 4 team pods and thus upsets are minimal. Sort of like what womens tourney does I believe.
By not being more proactive, the NCAA has deferred to the states and schools to regulate themselves leading to regional rules with zero national oversight for their original intended guidelines.
Except some of us saw that was not the case and knew they were super dangerous. Bad narratives. Have seen Washington and Oregon go on similar impressive runs. While 96 will probably never win… I wouldn’t go against 79 -85 making a run. Some of NIT winners use it as a steeping stone… Wichita State ring any bells? Lots of “flukes” out there. Rather this idea then the NIT! North Carolina was an 8 seed last year. How many deserving teams left out? The best game of the tourney last year was our play in game!!! Two teams among last in.
It wasn’t the seed. It’s the design of 12 seeds playing while lower seeds get a bye.
I don’t like the idea because it will really cheapen the conference tournaments. Which are cheapened anyway.
That’s a really fun week with bubble watch.
That’s a really fun week with bubble watch.
If its purely about money (i.e more games/ higher broadcast revenue).....keep the # team field as is and add a losers bracket.
- Play-ins - bottom teams to get into the tourney.
- Winners and Losers bracket champions meet for championship (note that "Loser" bracket champ has to beat "Winner" bracket champ twice)
How ? Example ?
Nah. The NCAA has no authority over NIL any more than it does with state sales tax and climate change. They could not prevent it or standardize it. Same with Title IX. Some issues go far beyond what universities and and the NCAA can regulate.
Who should get byes?
Lower seeded teams?
A 14 seed over a 12 seed?
Can't wait to see 90 team bracket and hoops they jump through to justify the crazy bye setup.
Dangerous isn’t the same as good. Just because a team could theoretically beat a tournament team doesn’t mean they need to also be in the tournament. We have a regular season; if you want the opportunity to prove how dangerous you are then earn it by not being complete trash during it.
Your own personal reasons and bias are important, that’s what sports is all about.
You don’t need to like it simply because “it is”
You can complain and make your feelings known…that’s the way it should be.
I happen to agree with you, the achievement and prestige of qualifying for the NCAA tournament should not be compromised, don’t mess with achieving.
Regular season play and tournaments are important to players, you can not simulate desperation and urgency….your doing a disservice to the development of players and young men.
I completely disagree. Completely.
Being anyone with half a brain could see where this was headed, let's say when the original O'Bannon lawsuit was filed NCAA leaders tried to head it off. Let's say the NCAA went to the schools and proposed a significantly increased stipend for revenue generating sports. Let's say $75k/year per student athlete in football and basketball plus tuition, room and board, etc.. That's $6.375MM/year in football and $975k in basketball for athletic stipends.
Why didn't the NCAA try to rally support for federal legislation to incorporate these stipends while restricting schools ability to move as freely from conference to conference? Do you think you do not get enough Congressmen and women on board to support that idea? If the NCAA proposed a system like that do you think they couldn't have slowed/stopped the O'Bannon lawsuit? Do you think schools still balk and just take their chances at SCOTUS? Student-athletes wouldn't be interested?
Now, there are a dozen hoops to jump thru with that idea and a bunch of problems with it. I understand. But the idea the NCAA didn't have any other strategic options rather than to get drilled at SCOTUS (9-0 with a Conservative Court!!!) and find themselves in the era of college sports free agency (every year!) is wrong in my opinion.
And I do think this is more akin to professional sports (somehow) maintaining anti-trust exemptions for all these years rather than comparing it to a state sales tax. The NCAA had (imo) a way to get a "fair" system passed legislatively on a federal level rather than taking their chances in court. And they should have, at a minimum, tried.
Last edited:
Expand the field
Sam Owens/Courier & Press [NOTE: This was posted about three hours before the NCAA Division I transformation committee published its recommendation to create larger championship fields.] When e…
johngasaway.com
If you ARE going to expand to ~25% then 96 seems the logical number.
Don't add any more autobids and don't give autobids any special dispensation. Get rid of these stupid play-in games onto the 11 line.
Give the top 32 seeds a bye and do a play-in into the bottom 32 seeds. I would also support a re-seed after the first round but it isn't necessary.
Don't add any more autobids and don't give autobids any special dispensation. Get rid of these stupid play-in games onto the 11 line.
Give the top 32 seeds a bye and do a play-in into the bottom 32 seeds. I would also support a re-seed after the first round but it isn't necessary.
Yes. I don’t like it . Getting into the tournament is still special , even blue blood programs hoot and holler when their school is called.
But i will still watch and still be into it .
All of that is naive and simplistic. The NCAA is not a separate body. The NCAA does what their constituent universities desire. And same goes for politicians. And since it’s clearly in many universities’ best interest to move if given the chance, neither will regulate to prevent it.
Do you think RU should not have been permitted to join the big10 ?
And same goes for NIL. Increasing stipends paid by universities would not have mattered at all to the NIL legalities. Apples Oranges. NIL is a revenue stream outside the university boundaries. Sure, schools could pay athletes an agreed upon amount. But NIL would still occur in addition.
I’d require at least .500 in conference. Eliminates “complete trash” argument like a play in UCLA making the Final Four or an 8 seed making the finals. It happens. I feel for the smaller conference season champions who lose in their conference tourney. That’s the opposite of trash. I’d reward them.
The first eight or so minutes of this CBS podcast is worth the listen... Cliff notes version is that a lot of "powerful" people don't want the tournament expanded. And these guys from CBS don't see it happening at all. If it does, maybe to the low 70s years down the road.
I actually really enjoy these guys, it's an entertaining college bball podcast.
Side note: they touch on our win at Purdue around the 10:45 mark.
I actually really enjoy these guys, it's an entertaining college bball podcast.
Side note: they touch on our win at Purdue around the 10:45 mark.
This is very dumb imo. Hell, sometimes teams can be under .500 in conference and be in the top 50, much less the top 128 which is what you are proposing.
There is nothing fair about leaving out "good" teams from strong conferences that are easily in the top 128. Last year the entire B12 should easily have been selected for a 128 team tournament (a 7-11 B12 team made the sweet 16) including 4-14 West Virginia, which was 11-2 against a not super strong but not super weak OOC schedule) and 14-17 (6-12) Kansas State.
You seemingly just refuse to acknowledge the obvious talent and quality disparities between conferences. No one needs more autobids from shit conferences; if you want to let a conference give an AQ to there regular season champ INSTEAD of the tournament champ then have at it imo. The regular season champ will be a better team on average. Or do away with autobids entirely and have the teams selected with the restriction that you need at least one from every conference. But what we absolutely do NOT need is like two SWAC or two MEAC teams in the tournament. What purpose does that possibly serve?
I am not surprised to see this from you given that you are the guy who perennially argues that every 22-9 team from some mid-major conference is #actually really good.
And trust me, I will have no problem arguing that the regular season champion of the Northeast Conference is complete trash, far more complete trash than literally any team that has ever gotten at at-large bid.
Not sure I understand. I will make my point simpler. The reason NIL is in college athletics today is because SCOTUS ruled (9-0!) that NCAA policy violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. I am sure you are aware that the NFL, MLB, NBA, etc. all have federal exemptions from that same Sherman Antitrust Act, correct?
Are you suggesting that there is no way NCAA leadership could have found a path for college athletics to receive the same exemption enjoyed by professional sports leagues? If that is your point I very much disagree.
This is generally correct. But the member schools power imbalance make this point much, much more nefarious.
I‘ve said for years that there is no ”NCAA”. At least not in the perception of almost the entire public, especially interestingly enough - college sports fans. Independent governing body? Hardly. NCAA = the schools. It should be period, full stop. But it doesn’t end there. What is nature of this “association”? Maybe at one point it was thought to be safety or collegiality or rules or marketing or schedules. And there are some of those things still. But those are not really the main story here. Nope. This is about power. Which means it’s really about money, the road to power. Which means it’s really about wins, the road to money. And the top dogs - those power schools that comprise 90% of the wins/top25/money of the past 50 years, call the shots for the rest of the dreck just happy to get the scraps.
When/If it causes the gravy train to end, and it disrupts the historical and current power dynamic, only then they might consider a serious solution to the NIL “problem”. Until then, you will get lip service. And why not? Why ruin a good thing? What possible motivation could there be to do that? These schools want LESS power? LESS wins? LESS money? Lol. No, if these things happen, these guys will do what they have ALWAYS done. Just…change the rules. This is all made up stuff anyway. You don’t like the answer…just change the question. And they will.
I mean, just look at this thread and topic. Someone posted a tweet saying the SEC comm is pushing for something
Iike this. Not sure if that is true, but it sure is quacking like a duck…
I agree with you, they could have tried that. If you see my post above, IMO, the reason they didn’t - the math (wins and $) was better without it. IMO the “NCAA” (those power schools that make most the money and win most of the games) absolutely do NOT want that. The last thing they want is to be like a pro league with their fancy-pants even playing field. Nope, things are just fine they way they are, thank you very much. And if that means NIL destroys the “NCAA” (it won’t IMO), so be it. They will create an “NCAA” part2 within weeks, the pee-ons will go along like they always have, and these schools will still attract 80-100k on game day.
Yes, so we are back to my assertion that it is incorrect and naive to think the NCAA would act contrary to its members’ interests. And again, NIL is a separate thing. NIL was inevitable regardless and it benefits the powers more than it hurts. Texas generates more cash in the system than Northen Illinois (NIL, get it ?) so makes the rules (along with all the other bigs).
I agree with you fully here:
These schools (like most orgs and most people) will almost ALWAYS act in their best and self interests. It is the most predictive behavior.
And no doubt NIL benefits the powers more - their boosters have always had the most and spent the most.
And, as in all other aspects of life, money rules the world. And the big boys have/make almost all of the money, so…it’s their world, boss….
