Should the NCAA Go To 96 Teams

[Tugg Speedman]

I've asked this before when we were regularly going to the tourney and the answer was no.

How about now ... should the tourney go to 96 teams?  They would add a Tuesday/Wednesday round of games before the Thursday/Friday round.

To add more than 96 teams would require another week and possibly the end of the conference tournaments.  I doubt that will happen.

Thoughts?

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

I dont know. Its a revenue based thing. I can see them doing it but the others would be autobids to the regular season conference champion.

[RushmoreAcademy]

I think it would be a mistake to go to 96.  Can't see that happening anytime soon, but who knows.

[Benny B]

I'd rather be sitting at home this year watching the tourney sans MU than traveling somewhere just to see MU get bounced in the round of 96.

[melissasmooth]

I'd rather be sitting at home this year watching the tourney sans MU than traveling somewhere just to see MU get bounced in the round of 96.

Yeah that does sound bad for any team any year

[chapman]

No.  68 instead of 65 was lame enough.

[CTWarrior]

I'm the wrong guy to ask.  I think 68 is too many and 64 is right.  Does it really enhance the tournament to have NC State, Xavier, Iowa and Tennessee?  How does adding 32 more teams that are worse than them help?  Nobody who has truly earned the right to play for the national title is left out with 64, so I guess I don't understand the need for 96 except for a blatant money grab.

[GooooMarquette]

No.

It should never have gone from 64 to 65 to 68 either.  Going to 96 would just add an entire round that nobody would care about.  Given that the NCAA is calling the shots, I suspect that expansion is inevitable.

[Aughnanure]

No. 64 is perfect and wish we would just go back.

Honestly, they need to scrub D1 basketball of about 10 conferences. No reason some of those leagues deserve auto bids.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

No. 64 is perfect and wish we would just go back.

Honestly, they need to scrub D1 basketball of about 10 conferences. No reason some of those leagues deserve auto bids.

This I agree with. Those auto-bids for the WAC and Northeast are pretty brutal.

[Eldon]

NO. NO. An emphatic NO! Absolutely not.

[Dawson Rental]

When Marquette made the tournament, I thought that expanding to 96 teams was a bad idea.  Now that a 96 team field is needed for Marquette to be in the tournament, I know that expanding to 96 teams is a bad idea.  I can't see how anyone who watched MU this year would think otherwise.

[TJ]

When Marquette made the tournament, I thought that expanding to 96 teams was a bad idea.  Now that a 96 team field is needed for Marquette to be in the tournament, I know that expanding to 96 teams is a bad idea.  I can't see how anyone who watched MU this year would think otherwise.

Don't worry, MU still would not have made the tournament if it had 96 teams.  NCAA = 68; NIT = 32 -- that's already 100 teams in tournaments that MU is not part of.

Personally, I like the idea of 96 teams or even 128 teams.  Do the extra teams really have a good shot?  Probably not.  But they do have a shot and that's all they ask for.  And they would mostly all get eliminated after 1 game so if you have that big a problem with it then just start watching at the round of 64 and the tournament will be basically unchanged for you.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

No but I like the auto-bids. Making the NCAA means the world to these tiny schools. Give them a chance to play in a meaningful game. Stephen F. Austin went like 26-2 and this season. Do you think they would have ever gotten an at large bid? These schools are doomed because of the confrences they play in.

[Eldon]

No but I like the auto-bids. Making the NCAA means the world to these tiny schools. Give them a chance to play in a meaningful game. Stephen F. Austin went like 26-2 and this season. Do you think they would have ever gotten an at large bid? These schools are doomed because of the confrences they play in.

+1000

Who wants the exact same 64 teams every year?  The fact that some of these crappy DI schools who have an autobid to the tourney is at least somewhat of a reason that solid recruits may choose them over some bottom feeder power school.

From a fan's perspective, parity in sports is always a good thing.  Always.

[keefe]

No. 64 is perfect and wish we would just go back.

Honestly, they need to scrub D1 basketball of about 10 conferences. No reason some of those leagues deserve auto bids.

Isn't that what the BCS schools say about colleges that don't play football? Careful what you wish for...

[Aughnanure]

Isn't that what the BCS schools say about colleges that don't play football? Careful what you wish for...

Comeon. There's 32 freakin' divisions! You could cut 10 out and still have 250+ schools. Just not 363. This would actually do a lot of placate the football conferences, as the TV money wouldn't have to be split with the sisters of the poor. I don't think they look at us and A-10, the AAC, etc as the problem. They know we have value to the tournament and college basketball. Also, they know that if they ever break-off to do their own thing they will never get the tournament back (every team gets in? haha). They will have killed it.

Division 1 has long been due for trim. It's gotten way overbloated in both football and basketball the past 20 years. We can still make it more compact and better while still keeping the integrity.

[Dawson Rental]

Comeon. There's 32 freakin' divisions! You could cut 10 out and still have 250+ schools. Just not 363. This would actually do a lot of placate the football conferences, as the TV money wouldn't have to be split with the sisters of the poor. I don't think they look at us and A-10, the AAC, etc as the problem. They know we have value to the tournament and college basketball. Also, they know that if they ever break-off to do their own thing they will never get the tournament back (every team gets in? haha). They will have killed it.

Division 1 has long been due for trim. It's gotten way overbloated in both football and basketball the past 20 years. We can still make it more compact and better while still keeping the integrity.

I agree with Aughnanure, except I think he meant 32 freakin' conferences, not divisions.  Until the NCAA caught on, a lot of teams moved up to Division I with other similarly situated teams, so that they could form a conference and get an automatic bid.  Move up to Division I with seven of your brethren and suddenly all your league games are now Division I games instead of Division II games, although the opponents stay the same.  And with an auto bid, your school now has 1/8 of a chance to cash in on NCAA tourney money each year, or if you're more egalitarian, everyone gets 1/8 of an NCAA share each year which was a lot more than any of those schools saw from the Division II playoffs. 

Weeding out conferences wouldn't be difficult to do and do fairly.   A year or so ago, I looked at what would happen if you took away the auto bid from just the conferences that had no teams in the top 150 RPI for three years straight and it ended up eliminating more than 10 conferences.  When these teams get in they are largely offered up as first round fodder which while delivering up an occasional first round shocker really results in most of the top three seeds getting a pass in their first game.

[CTWarrior]

When these teams get in they are largely offered up as first round fodder which while delivering up an occasional first round shocker really results in most of the top three seeds getting a pass in their first game.

Those "shockers" are why the early rounds are so popular.  Also, the first three seeds should get the advantage of a relatively easy first round game, they've earned it.  If you take at the 10 worst auto qualifiers and replace them with 10 at-large teams that are worse than Xavier this season, have you really helped the tournament become more interesting?  Do you really want a world where there is no reasonable way for any new schools to work their way into the upper echelon of college hoops because they are shut out by the power conferences? 

Bottom line, the tournament is most popular now for the early round upsets in the beginning and the battles between the top teams at the end.  Getting rid of the bottom conferences make both of those things less likely to happen.

[frozena pizza]

I would be okay with going to 96 but eliminating the NIT (so I guess we would still be out).  Play a round of 64, with the 32 winners moving on to play top 32 teams which would have a bye.  Not much would change and you would get better first round matchups.

[damuts222]

I would be okay with going to 96 but eliminating the NIT (so I guess we would still be out).  Play a round of 64, with the 32 winners moving on to play top 32 teams which would have a bye.  Not much would change and you would get better first round matchups.

More games does not equal more better.  This would water down the regular season, the tournament, etc.  The major conference teams would have no reason at ALL to schedule anyone decent as it would not be worth it.

[GooooMarquette]

Those "shockers" are why the early rounds are so popular.  Also, the first three seeds should get the advantage of a relatively easy first round game, they've earned it.  If you take at the 10 worst auto qualifiers and replace them with 10 at-large teams that are worse than Xavier this season, have you really helped the tournament become more interesting?  Do you really want a world where there is no reasonable way for any new schools to work their way into the upper echelon of college hoops because they are shut out by the power conferences? 

Bottom line, the tournament is most popular now for the early round upsets in the beginning and the battles between the top teams at the end.  Getting rid of the bottom conferences make both of those things less likely to happen.

I agree that the small conferences should still get an automatic bid instead of getting more mediocre major conference teams in.  

However, I don't like that the conference tournament champion gets the bid from these conferences.  Mount St. Mary's is 16-16, has a conference record of 12-7 and an RPI of 194...but they get the bid over Robert Morris (21-13, 16-3, 126).  Or Albany (18-14, 12-7, 175) gets the bid over Vermont (20-10, 16-2, 102).  And of course Milwaukee gets in over GB...even though their RPI is nearly 100 places worse.

I don't know what percentage of the first round "shockers" come from these teams that were mediocre all season and then went on a three-game winning streak last week...but I'll bet it isn't many....

[wardle2wade]

Weakens the product... also a lot of logistical issues with moving to 96 teams.

[dgies9156]

NONONONONONONONO!!!!!!

Why put any more garbage in the tournament than already exists? We'd see a lot more Mid-Majors and Low-Majors and I'm not sure it would make a difference to us this year.

We would still last about 40 minutes!

[CTWarrior]

However, I don't like that the conference tournament champion gets the bid from these conferences.  Mount St. Mary's is 16-16, has a conference record of 12-7 and an RPI of 194...but they get the bid over Robert Morris (21-13, 16-3, 126).  Or Albany (18-14, 12-7, 175) gets the bid over Vermont (20-10, 16-2, 102).  And of course Milwaukee gets in over GB...even though their RPI is nearly 100 places worse.

I don't know what percentage of the first round "shockers" come from these teams that were mediocre all season and then went on a three-game winning streak last week...but I'll bet it isn't many....

I think you are right but the shockers coming from teams that are both regular season and tournament champs, but I am not interested enough to try an figure it out.  The NCAA doesn't dictate that the conference tourney winner has to go to the NCAA tournament.  The individual conferences have the right to select from the regular season champ or a tournament champ, but you'd be hard-pressed to get anyone to attend a SWAC tournament, for example, that doesn't award the winner with an auto-birth.

The conference tournaments add to the romantic notion that every team, no matter how poor their season, has a chance and can keep playing once the conference tournaments starts as long as they keep winning, and that's OK with me.