IU Scott Posted May 17, 2018 Report Share Posted May 17, 2018 http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/23531225/acc-propose-expanding-ncaa-tournament-four-teams-72 Looks like the ACC coaches want to expand the tournament to 72 teams and have another group of play in games. Just another terrible because all these coaches are worried about is themselves and not the game. All this does is give mediocre major conference teams a better chance to get into the tournament. Just put it back to 64 teams and eliminate the play in games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5fouls Posted May 17, 2018 Report Share Posted May 17, 2018 I would not mind it if it brought in 4-6 more mid-majors. But, no. I am not intetsted in seeing 9th or 10th place teams from power 5 leagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rico Posted May 17, 2018 Report Share Posted May 17, 2018 1 minute ago, 5fouls said: I would not mind it if it brought in 4-6 more mid-majors. But, no. I am not intetsted in seeing 9th or 10th place teams from power 5 leagues. I concur with that thinking. Lots of good teams from lessor conferences get left out every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 17, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 17, 2018 6 minutes ago, 5fouls said: I would not mind it if it brought in 4-6 more mid-majors. But, no. I am not intetsted in seeing 9th or 10th place teams from power 5 leagues. I would like to see that now with 68 teams but I don't think the ACC coaches are worried about the mid major programs. I think if a team can't get over .500 in the conference they should not be eligible for the tournament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rico Posted May 17, 2018 Report Share Posted May 17, 2018 6 minutes ago, IU Scott said: I would like to see that now with 68 teams but I don't think the ACC coaches are worried about the mid major programs. I think if a team can't get over .500 in the conference they should not be eligible for the tournament. I agree but keep in mind the "unbalanced" schedules. They can skew it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrflynn03 Posted May 17, 2018 Report Share Posted May 17, 2018 They could expand the NIT instead and put a team like Oklahoma who shouldnt have been in this year in it and a better deserving mid major in their spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 17, 2018 Report Share Posted May 17, 2018 ACC angling to be the first conference on record to get all its members in the tournament. I am more in favor of reducing back to 64 versus adding any more teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SconsinHoosier Posted May 17, 2018 Report Share Posted May 17, 2018 Keep it at 68 and have the last 8 at-large teams play each other on Tuesday/Wednesday of tourney week. The winners get the last 4 at-large spots in the NCAA, the losers are the #1 seeds in the NIT with a first-round bye. I'd watch those "play-in" games. I think all automatic qualifiers should have the opportunity to play the first weekend of the NCAAs and their fans should get to experience it. As conference champions, they've earned it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milehiiu Posted May 18, 2018 Report Share Posted May 18, 2018 1 hour ago, SconsinHoosier said: Keep it at 68 and have the last 8 at-large teams play each other on Tuesday/Wednesday of tourney week. The winners get the last 4 at-large spots in the NCAA, the losers are the #1 seeds in the NIT with a first-round bye. I'd watch those "play-in" games. I think all automatic qualifiers should have the opportunity to play the first weekend of the NCAAs and their fans should get to experience it. As conference champions, they've earned it. Welcome to the wonderful world of posting on Hoosier Sports Nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArchieBall13 Posted May 18, 2018 Report Share Posted May 18, 2018 1 hour ago, SconsinHoosier said: Keep it at 68 and have the last 8 at-large teams play each other on Tuesday/Wednesday of tourney week. The winners get the last 4 at-large spots in the NCAA, the losers are the #1 seeds in the NIT with a first-round bye. I'd watch those "play-in" games. I think all automatic qualifiers should have the opportunity to play the first weekend of the NCAAs and their fans should get to experience it. As conference champions, they've earned it. I actually like that idea a lot. Good post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 18, 2018 Report Share Posted May 18, 2018 https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/acc-coaches-recommend-to-expand-the-ncaa-tournament-to-72-teams-for-their-own-selfish-reasons/ Don't often agree with Parrish, but he's spot on with this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 18, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 18, 2018 4 hours ago, Jerry Lundergaard said: https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/acc-coaches-recommend-to-expand-the-ncaa-tournament-to-72-teams-for-their-own-selfish-reasons/ Don't often agree with Parrish, but he's spot on with this one. He is spot on with this article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FKIM01 Posted May 18, 2018 Report Share Posted May 18, 2018 You can say that again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 18, 2018 Report Share Posted May 18, 2018 Is there an echo in here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CauseThatsMyDJ Posted May 31, 2018 Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FKIM01 Posted May 31, 2018 Report Share Posted May 31, 2018 I hate even partially agreeing with that turd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmygoiu Posted June 1, 2018 Report Share Posted June 1, 2018 I wouldn't mind expansion to 80 teams, with the rule that at least 6 of those 12 spots go to mid majors. why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted June 1, 2018 Author Report Share Posted June 1, 2018 15 hours ago, jimmygoiu said: I wouldn't mind expansion to 80 teams, with the rule that at least 6 of those 12 spots go to mid majors. why not? Just go back to 64 teams and take away the play in games. Having the 16 seeds play in the play in games really eliminates to 16 seeds so really two of the 16 seeds would have use to be a 15 seed. To me this is why 16 seeds have been playing the one seeds a little better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoHoosier Posted June 1, 2018 Report Share Posted June 1, 2018 Wish I could find the thread I broke down the math. The % of teams making the field today is nearing the level it was before the tournament expanded to 64. There are so many more D1 schools today than there were 30 some years ago. Quality schools are left out. If the field were expanded for both men and women's last year, does the women's team make the field? Either way, not the point I am trying to make. I do not like seeing that RPI mid-major team with a few losses lose their tournament championship game not get the tourney invite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpiderMonkey Posted June 1, 2018 Report Share Posted June 1, 2018 On 5/17/2018 at 5:18 PM, SconsinHoosier said: Keep it at 68 and have the last 8 at-large teams play each other on Tuesday/Wednesday of tourney week. The winners get the last 4 at-large spots in the NCAA, the losers are the #1 seeds in the NIT with a first-round bye. I'd watch those "play-in" games. I think all automatic qualifiers should have the opportunity to play the first weekend of the NCAAs and their fans should get to experience it. As conference champions, they've earned it. I think is a pretty great idea and your reasoning is spot on about the conference champions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.