PDA

View Full Version : NCAA 128 team March Madness ?


ROYC75
06-26-2006, 12:22 PM
http://www2.kusports.com/news/2006/jun/26/coaches_seeking_expansion/?mens_basketball



Coaches seeking expansion
Bigger NCAA Tourney field to be discussed by hoops committee

J-W Staff and Wire Reports

Posted Monday, June 26, 2006

Indianapolis — In a perfect world, college basketball coaches would nearly double the size of the 65-team NCAA men’s tournament field. Realistically, they’d accept a smaller victory.

Motivated in part by George Mason’s remarkable Final Four run last season, coaches will urge the NCAA to expand its most lucrative championship event during the men’s and women’s basketball committee meetings in Orlando, Fla., this week.

“They’d love to see the tournament double to 128,” said Jim Haney, executive director of the National Association of Basketball Coaches. “It’s based on several things. First, there are a lot of good teams worthy of making the NCAA field, and second, the size of 64 or 65 has been in place for a number of years.”

Potential models range from minor adjustments to major changes.

When Haney met with NCAA officials last month, he proposed the 128-team field in part because postseason bids may help coaches keep their jobs.

At this year’s Final Four, Syracuse’s Jim Boeheim said he supported expansion on a smaller scale. Boeheim suggested adding three to seven teams, a move he said would allow as many as four opening-round games in Dayton, Ohio, instead of the one now played between the two lowest-seeded teams in the field.

Some believe such a schedule would create a more realistic tournament environment since first-round sites also play four games on the first day.

Kansas University’s Bill Self, a member of the NABC Board of Directors, told the Journal-World he favored exploring the idea of an expanded field.

“I would say it certainly deserves discussion,” Self said. “Our game has been modified over time, and it’s always turned out to be for the better, whether expanding the tournament (from 53 teams to 64 in 1985; and 64 to 65 in 2001), widening the lane because of Wilt (Chamberlain), adding the three-point line. It all evolved and kept our game moving forward

“I’m not saying I’m all for it. I think it’s worthy of discussion with parity — more good teams — than 20 years ago. It (parity) is only going to increase.”

Changes don’t appear imminent.

In March, NCAA president Myles Brand said he didn’t see much support to expand the field, and vice president for men’s basketball Greg Shaheen reiterated that point Friday.

“Many, many people believe the size of the championship is just right,” Shaheen said. “A lot of people think there’s enough recognition of teams that did well and there’s a logical and timely conclusion to the season.”

Shaheen said this week’s discussions, which end Thursday, will mark the first time expansion has been on the agenda in several years. The reason?

After a four-year legal battle with the National Invitation Tournament, the NCAA agreed to buy the tournament for $56.5 million last August.

Expansion also faces additional hurdles.

If the NCAA opted for a 128-team field, the number of first-round sites would double, and an extra week of play would likely be added. Plus, Shaheen said the NCAA would have to debate how best to provide maximum television coverage.

Shaheen said changes would also have to be made in conjunction with the women’s tournament.

“There is no one model that is obvious here, and that’s something we need to contemplate,” he said. “The other issue is how the women’s tournament would be similarly impacted here and they need to coincide.”

The coaches, however, contend there are many reasons to expand. Among their arguments:

• The number of Division I teams has increased significantly since the last major expansion more than two decades ago. The field went from 48 to 64 teams in 1985, then added a 65th team to the field in 2001 when the number of automatic bids went from 30 to 31.

• George Mason, which was one of the last at-large teams to make the field this year, proved parity in college basketball is real. The combination of prominent programs losing underclassmen at faster rates and scholarship reductions have helped mid-major schools become more competitive. The coaches believe they deserved to be rewarded accordingly.

• Now that the NCAA controls both postseason tournaments, coaches think it’s time to include some of the bubble teams that annually complain when they are left out.

Could it happen?

“I don’t think the idea of doubling the field is going to happen right now because there are too many complications to do that,” Haney said. “But I think the committee will seriously consider what the number will be. ... I think if it happens, it will have to happen soon because of the logistical issues.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

128 games is insane ....... teams like MU,NU, CU, KSU would make the tourney often........... without having a quality team

tk13
06-26-2006, 12:30 PM
You'd still have bubble teams, there will always be bubble teams. No matter if you have 64 teams or 300. Somebody will be ticked and think they should've made it.

It would make the first couple days of the tournament total insanity though. "Hi I'm Greg Gumbel in New York, we've got 16 games going on right now, let's take you out to the Dodge City regional..."

I'd like that it allowed a few more "mid-major" teams in, it'd allow for more upsets and early round excitement. But then again, it'd probably also start allowing teams with 5-11 records in major conferences to get in.

chefsos
06-26-2006, 12:30 PM
• Now that the NCAA controls both postseason tournaments, coaches think it’s time to include some of the bubble teams that annually complain when they are left out.
I'm no expert on this stuff by any means, but this line of thought has always baffled me. If you expand the field, all you do is move the bubble, and someone's still gonna complain.

EDIT: Damnit. Too slow.

ImAWalkingCorpse
06-26-2006, 12:32 PM
As much as I want my San Jose State Spartans in the tourney, to me bumping the teams up to 128 would cheapen it for me. But I also understand the reason for bringing it up. On the plus side it would be utter insanity for a month after the football season was over.

Cochise
06-26-2006, 12:32 PM
Good lord, don't cheapen the regular season like the NBA does. Right now a tournament selection means something. Keep it that way.

Jayhawkerman2001
06-26-2006, 12:35 PM
In my opinion that would be the dumbest thing ever. NCAA would be more like the NBA if they did that, because they wouldnt have to work as hard as they do now to get into the tournament. Teams live and die by making the tournament, if it went to 128 or so teams, then itd be just warm up games in the regular season for everybody. The NCAA tournament in basketball is probably the best in all of college right now, dont change it

chefsos
06-26-2006, 12:35 PM
Yeah, I think even more 98-35 games in the early rounds are just what the doctor ordered.

ChiTown
06-26-2006, 12:37 PM
This is a joke.

Why water down the best college post-season gig in the world? The College Bowl Season sucks ass now because over 50% of the D1 teams get into a Bowl. CBB would be crazy to go down that path..........

sedated
06-26-2006, 12:43 PM
I'd like to see 4 "play-in" games instead of the current 1.

call it my OCD, but I cannot stand an asymmetrical bracket.

but not much beyond that. teams are gonna bitch, no matter what.

Rain Man
06-26-2006, 12:49 PM
Yeah, I think even more 98-35 games in the early rounds are just what the doctor ordered.

I think that's the biggest barrier. When the #1 seeds are playing the #32 seeds, things could get ugly. But if there's money to be made, I'd bet on it happening.

Perhaps a better compromise would be a 96-team tournament where the top 32 teams get a first-round bye.

ROYC75
06-26-2006, 12:54 PM
I think that's the biggest barrier. When the #1 seeds are playing the #32 seeds, things could get ugly. But if there's money to be made, I'd bet on it happening.

Perhaps a better compromise would be a 96-team tournament where the top 32 teams get a first-round bye.


I think it will increase..... but not no insane 128 teams.

Like many here have chimed, there will always be a bubble team (s).

Ebolapox
06-26-2006, 01:06 PM
no f*cking way

Predarat
06-26-2006, 01:06 PM
Hopefully someday they will find a way to incorporate jucos into the field as well.

Frazod
06-26-2006, 01:19 PM
128 games is insane ....... teams like MU,NU, CU, KSU would make the tourney often........... without having a quality team

The Gayhawks might actually make it out of the first round, too.

Cochise
06-26-2006, 01:23 PM
The Gayhawks might actually make it out of the first round, too.

owned

Ebolapox
06-26-2006, 01:24 PM
heh--instead of being ousted by bradley and bucknell, they could be ousted by baylor or bumphuk university

DJay23
06-26-2006, 01:33 PM
The Gayhawks might actually make it out of the first round, too.
And Mizzou might actually make it in.

JBucc
06-26-2006, 01:41 PM
no

Sam Hall
06-26-2006, 02:03 PM
Quinn Snyder thinks this is a few years too late.

CHENZ A!
06-26-2006, 02:06 PM
Well, **** this idea!

Jayhawkerman2001
06-26-2006, 04:36 PM
The Gayhawks might actually make it out of the first round, too.

Ahhh, Mr. Originality shows his little head again. How long did it take ya to come up with that nifty little line?

Jayhawkerman2001
06-26-2006, 04:38 PM
And Mizzou might actually make it in.

Dont count on it.

Ari Chi3fs
06-26-2006, 05:44 PM
Mizzou still wouldnt get invited to the NIT, who are we kidding?

cdcox
06-26-2006, 05:52 PM
In before the first funny Mizzou joke.

Mr. Kotter
06-26-2006, 05:52 PM
This is a stupid idea...period.


:shake:

Us Jayhawk fans would really be embarrassed with Self and the Jayhawks choking in the first round of this new tournament!

If losing to Butler and Bradley weren't bad enough, imagine the humiliation of losing to Messiah College (http://www.messiah.edu/offices/disability/disabilities/vision.html) or Gaulledet (http://www.gallaudet.edu/)!

:banghead:

banyon
06-26-2006, 06:00 PM
what a bunch of chickens*** coaches.

They all want this so that they can say to their critics "see? I made the NCAA tourney last year even though I went 6-10 in the conference.

Please don't f*** up the best sporting event out there.

Thig Lyfe
06-26-2006, 06:03 PM
whhhhaaaa??!?

That would be a terribly stupid move.

Frazod
06-26-2006, 07:03 PM
Ahhh, Mr. Originality shows his little head again. How long did it take ya to come up with that nifty little line?

Not nearly as long as it takes you to clean the sand out of your snatch.

Ultra Peanut
06-26-2006, 07:04 PM
I don't like this.

WilliamTheIrish
06-26-2006, 09:42 PM
The coaches may be the ones carrying the water on this idea, but you can bet this is a the brain child of the NCAA.

Last year, in an interview with Miles Brand that I saw, (Outside The Lines on ESPN maybe?)) Brand spoke over and over about how the NCAA must 'maximize their potential revenue." (paraphrasing)
The entire interview went in that direction. I recall hearing Brand casually mention expanding the field in that interview.

The tournament is already open to enough teams. Conference tourney's allow every team a second chance.

Of all the college championships, Men's D-I basketball is the easiest to qualify. Hell, you only have to win 19 games when playing in a major conference. Occasionally that's not enough, but for the most part it holds true. No need to make it any easier.

hawkchief
06-26-2006, 09:51 PM
Since when did King Carl become part of the NCAA? If your team sucks, you don't just lower the bar so they can get in. That's BS. There is a reason the quality teams play hard all year to get into the tournament. Why essentially eliminate that carrot? Complete crap. Don't denigrate what has long been seen as an accomplishment just so some clown like Quin Snyder or Wayne Morgan can keep their job.

Logical
06-26-2006, 09:51 PM
Horrible, horrible idea. The tournament would no longer be meaningful as a goal. It would also make the season less valuable than an NBA season.

ROYC75
06-26-2006, 10:16 PM
And Mizzou might actually make it in.


But even at that they would be a bubble team........

ROYC75
06-26-2006, 10:19 PM
I do believe it will take away from the tourney........ but like they mentioned, the parity is spreading around.

ChiefaRoo
06-26-2006, 10:24 PM
Good lord, don't cheapen the regular season like the NBA does. Right now a tournament selection means something. Keep it that way.


Well said. I'd say it's just about right the way it is. Adding a few more would be fine but doubling it would ruin the reg. season

Guru
06-26-2006, 10:48 PM
You have to be friggin kidding me. 128? They won't let us touch the football post season and make it a tournament because it doesn't make any sense to them. Yet, they want to double the size of the BB tournament?

64 is just fine.

greg63
06-26-2006, 11:11 PM
You have to be friggin kidding me. 128? They won't let us touch the football post season and make it a tournament because it doesn't make any sense to them. Yet, they want to double the size of the BB tournament?

64 is just fine.


But that keeps things simple; it wouldn't be nearly complicated enough.

Guru
06-26-2006, 11:48 PM
But that keeps things simple; it wouldn't be nearly complicated enough.


Yeah, we can fix it by watering it down. You know, this would actually make the 16 seeds feel like they have a chance. :shake: :)

greg63
06-26-2006, 11:58 PM
Yeah, we can fix it by watering it down. You know, this would actually make the 16 seeds feel like they have a chance. :shake: :)


ROFLROFLROFL