Time For a 96 Team NCAA Tourney...

[billyjack]

The NCAA Tourney needs to expand to 96 teams.

This entire process is stupid and annoying and makes no sense. And i thought this even in years that PC was safely off the bubble.

With a 96-team Tourney... before anyone says "that would make the regular season meaningless"... no, cuz teams would still jockey for better seeds, and would make a top 4 seed very valuable-- those teams would get a bye.

And it would eliminate the stupid random Dayton play-in games. And it would eliminate the asinine 16 vs 16 games.

When the field expanded beyond 25 or 48, the fans supporting the "if you dont win your conference, then you dont deserve to play for a national title" bit the dust.

When the field expanded to 64 in 1985, there were like 100 fewer Div-1 teams

With 96, you allow all these bubble teams to actually play things out. 72 vs 73... 71 vs 74... 70 vs 75... let Wake Forest get blown out by St John's... let New Mexico get flatttened by Butler... or, finish as #49 thru #52, and you face Prairie View and Rio Grande Valley.

Or, want to be more creative-- open round, the better seed teams get to host opponents on their own court.

This annual bullsh-t process is so freakin stupid.

[TrueBlueJay]

A big, huge, emphatic NO THANK YOU.

[Husky_U]

Hard pass. But if it must expand, just play the NIT first, where the four regional winners get the last 4 bids to the big dance. Problem solved.

[kayako]

Hard pass. But if it must expand, just play the NIT first, where the four regional winners get the last 4 bids to the big dance. Problem solved.

April Madness?

[Omaha1]

The ncaa tourney starts this week with conference tourneys. Everyone has a chance as far as I’m concerned.

[MUPanther]

96, heck no.

[DeltaV]

Nope nope nope.

64 is enough, the play in games make some people happy but I think even they could go away. Maybe you could convince me to go to 72, and make the 8/9 7/10 tossups their own mini bracket (I get a little unnerved having a pair of 11 seeds play, because then they get momentum going in to play what is supposed to be a favored 6 seed). But 96? No.

This isn't a participation trophy. Win your way in or watch from home. Three weekends is enough, any more than that and it gets too long, plus the first 'round' will be too confusing.

[stever20]

Nope nope nope.

64 is enough, the play in games make some people happy but I think even they could go away. Maybe you could convince me to go to 72, and make the 8/9 7/10 tossups their own mini bracket (I get a little unnerved having a pair of 11 seeds play, because then they get momentum going in to play what is supposed to be a favored 6 seed). But 96? No.

This isn't a participation trophy. Win your way in or watch from home. Three weekends is enough, any more than that and it gets too long, plus the first 'round' will be too confusing.

I'm not in favor of punishing the 7-10's. Not fair they have to win an extra game while teams worse than them don't.

Frankly it probably should be the worst 4 now or 8 teams if we go to 72 to go to the First Four.

[ecasadoSBU]

NBA PLAYOFFS = 16/30 = 53%
NHL PLAYOFFS = 16/32 = 50%
MLB PLAYOFFS = 12/30 = 40%
NFL PLAYOFFS = 14/32 = 44%

NCAA MARCH MADNESS = 68/351 = 19.37%
NCAA FBS CFP: 12/128 = 9.5%
NCAA FCS PLAYOFFS: 24/133: 18%

[xusandy]

Unless every team gets in, there will always be a bubble, and always be fans wanting to expand the field further. The only things I find "unfair" at present is that is that teams who improve greatly during the season, and who really are a top 50 team or better by the end of the season, often don't get bids because of their pre-conference records way back in December. Two possible ways to fix it: (1) weight early season games less than late season games (I have no clue what an appropriate formula would be, but one obvious effect would be to expand the number of bubble teams), or (2)) turn the NIT into a play-in event, where the top 40 or 50 or even 60 teams don't play in it.