NCAA 128 team March Madness ?

ROYC75 · 06-26-2006, 12:22 PM

http://www2.kusports.com/news/2006/j...ens_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

Quote:

• 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.

Eleazar · 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.

Hammock Parties · 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

Quote:

Originally Posted by chefsos

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man

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 fucking 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

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYC75

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.

Eleazar · 06-26-2006, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frazod

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

owned

06-26-2006, 12:22 PM
ROYC75 Time For Your Wake Up Call !!! Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Barn Yard Casino cash: $5733900	NCAA 128 team March Madness ? http://www2.kusports.com/news/2006/j...ens_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
Posts: 36,974

06-26-2006, 12:30 PM	#2
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $2032500	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.
Posts: 54,915

06-26-2006, 12:32 PM	#4
ImAWalkingCorpse The Night he came home Join Date: Dec 2005 Casino cash: $10005040	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. __________________
Posts: 991

06-26-2006, 12:32 PM	#5
Eleazar Beyond the Rapids Join Date: May 2003 Location: Langley, VA Casino cash: $-370000	Good lord, don't cheapen the regular season like the NBA does. Right now a tournament selection means something. Keep it that way.
Posts: 80,659

06-26-2006, 12:35 PM	#6
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4760478	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 __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 277,607

06-26-2006, 12:35 PM	#7
chefsos Fifty eight sixty two... Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Felton, DE Casino cash: $8507676	Yeah, I think even more 98-35 games in the early rounds are just what the doctor ordered.
Posts: 9,449

06-26-2006, 12:37 PM	#8
ChiTown Stroking to the SB Champs! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Flatlands of Kansas Casino cash: $3343962	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.......... __________________
Posts: 39,319

06-26-2006, 01:06 PM	#12
Ebolapox remember, remember Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: como Casino cash: $2139903	no fucking way
Posts: 26,427

06-26-2006, 01:06 PM	#13
Predarat Run Chiefs fans, run!! Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Nashville, TN Casino cash: $9973863	Hopefully someday they will find a way to incorporate jucos into the field as well.
Posts: 10,776