A real bracket buster: 96-team NCAA tourney?

The NCAA doesn't do this unless there's a bigger check coming its way.

 

Because people have a lot of money riding on these office pools?

Like I said, the NCAA just shows its typical hypocrisy in claiming they care about the student-athlete when the opportunity to grab more money comes along.

 

My solution.

No. 1 Do away with conference tournaments. Make the regular season mean something again. Frees up another week.

No. 2 Put everybody decent enough to have won a couple of conference games (up to 256 teams that is) in for basically elimination rounds at 32 preselected sites around the country with each sub-sub region or whatever seeded 1-8 for three games at each site the first week (Wed-Sun games). At the end, you're down to 64, same as ever. Seed the winners just like always and there you go. Losers are out. Bound to be an upset here and there. Takes out the guesswork and prejudices of selection.

 

No. I hate college basketball as it is. Don't prolong it.

 

A single-eliminaton format creates flukey results. Adding to the field only makes it more difficult for the best teams to play in the later rounds. It's not everyone gets a trophy, but it's close. You went 27-5 and won your conference? OK, go beat these guys who are 18-12 or your season is over. If they have a lucky night and hit 12 threes with the crowd behind them, well, tough shit.

 

But that money the NCAA is grabbing is used to pay the bills for the sports that can't pay for themselves. So I'm not sure how they aren't helping student-athletes.

 

The only way I would support a 96 team tourney is if the regular season & tournament champion from each conference was given an automatic bid. And if a team won both, it was guaranteed one of the 32 first-round bye slots. Coaches love to talk about how it would give more opportunities for meaningful post-season play to a greater number of athletes. So put your money where your mouth is and give the additional opportunities to the SoCon AND the Big Ten.

If they went this route, it wouldn't diminish the regular season and may even enhance it. For the smaller conferences, the regular season title becomes meaningful beyond putting a banner in the gym. And the regular season conf champ has incentive to play balls out in the conf tourney to get that guaranteed bye.

And no re-seeding after the play-in round. Set up a big-ass bracket and go.

 

At least if they expand the tournament to 96 teams, they'll have done something almost as stupid as tying scholarship numbers to APR.

 

No other NCAA postseason tournament gives first-round byes only to conference champions. It'd also hurt the Ivy, which doesn't have a postseason tournament. And you're going to give the ninth (or 24th seed) seed a better matchup against a small conference/tournament champion that gets a bye and finishes eighth than most of the other top eight seeds, which will get stronger opponents in the second round.

 

Again, not broke, does not need fixing.

Leave it the fuck alone.

 

I agree, though I'd like to do away with conference tourneys. We'd have closer to the 64 top teams every year.
Regular season champs need to be recognized and without the conference tourneys, we'd get done quicker and let these kids get back into the classrooms.

 

The Big East will sellout Madison Square Garden for 8 separate sessions over the next five days. That is a shitton of money that conferences will not give up.