Tournament expansion

[Zipmeister]

If I didn’t know better I’d swear this was an April Fool’s Joke, but as you can see from the link below this is on the up and up. After the conclusion of the NIT Championship (won by them battling Flyers of UD) the NCAA announced that the NCAA men’s bball tournament will be expanded to 128 teams next year and the NIT will be expanded to 48 teams. This bodes well for the Zips playing in the post season.

link

[Z.I.P.]

If I didn’t know better I’d swear this was an April Fool’s Joke, but as you can see from the link below this is on the up and up. After the conclusion of the NIT Championship (won by them battling Flyers of UD) the NCAA announced that the NCAA men’s bball tournament will be expanded to 128 teams next year and the NIT will be expanded to 48 teams. This bodes well for the Zips playing in the post season.

link

If this is still up here on April 2nd, I'll believe it. Well, maybe not.

[GoZips88]

(Son - log me out next time :-)

[skip-zip]

Certainly an opportunity for many "smaller" schools and conferences to show something. At this point, I can't see this as anything other than a positive for all of us that are in non-power conferences. Which also means that I am surprised that such a move would materialize considering that it doesn't appear to be something that benefits the big boys.

[zippyman23]

Certainly an opportunity for many "smaller" schools and conferences to show something. At this point, I can't see this as anything other than a positive for all of us that are in non-power conferences. Which also means that I am surprised that such a move would materialize considering that it doesn't appear to be something that benefits the big boys.

If they expand, it means a lot more money into the pockets of the power conferences. This is well thought out, and they know how much this benefits the BCS schools. Throw a little bone to some mid-majors, but at the end of the day, the BCS schools will receive a much greater benefit than mid-majors.

[skip-zip]

Certainly an opportunity for many "smaller" schools and conferences to show something. At this point, I can't see this as anything other than a positive for all of us that are in non-power conferences. Which also means that I am surprised that such a move would materialize considering that it doesn't appear to be something that benefits the big boys.

If they expand, it means a lot more money into the pockets of the power conferences. This is well thought out, and they know how much this benefits the BCS schools. Throw a little bone to some mid-majors, but at the end of the day, the BCS schools will receive a much greater benefit than mid-majors.

The power conferences would have even more teams in the tournament if it expands....I know that.

But, it does add many more opportunities for all the rest of us. Having only 2 appearances in the last 30 years isn't going to give us much of a chance to make up any ground. Now, with the field expanded, we'd have a chance to get in every year if we continue to be one of the 2-3 best teams in our league. And I'm sure there are supporters of dozens of other programs who will feel the same way.

[Dead Horse]

That settles it. Power conferences will get the extra bids. Since the Zips will be in the Big East, we will get in every year.

[g-mann17]

The article in the Beacon today states that the proposal the NCAA is sending to the board is a 96 team tournament. The top 32 teams will receive byes and the other 64 will play. The tournament will take the same length of time as the current one. It is likely the additionaly 32 teams would be teams that would have landed in the NIT.

That means the future for MAC post season play will likely fall as auto bids for Tournament Winner and Regular season champion. In the case of the regular season champion winning the tournament then it would likely be the second best record in the conference as the championship loser may not be #2 seed from the tournament.

So, now, the regular season matters. (if this passes and it probably will)

[Blue & Gold]

When I initially heard they were thinking about expanding the tourney, I was skeptical; thinking the NCAA was simply looking to include the 10th place Big Ten school, etc. But this setup sounds great. I'm all for any setup which makes the regular season meaningful. All the talk about "the only games which matter are the 3 @ the Q," was really starting to get to me. I wanna have adrenaline rushes during the regular season too!

[Let'sGoZips94]

I really like this. At first, I was thinking to myself "this is going to ruin conferences", but when you think about it, it actually helps conferences. It's going to make for a more exciting tourney. The winner will truly be the best team. There's going to be more upsets and exciting games. The best part is going to be when Can't State gets left out!

[GP1]

I'm all for any setup which makes the regular season meaningful. All the talk about "the only games which matter are the 3 @ the Q," was really starting to get to me. I wanna have adrenaline rushes during the regular season too!

Want to make the regular season meaningful? Eliminate conference tournaments and make the regular season champion the champion of the league with an automatic bid.

Leagues with two divisions? Divisional champions play best of 3 or 5 (you decide) during the week the tournaments were to be played.

One division league? First and second place play best of whatever for the championship.

No team with a sub .500 conference record can get into the NCAA.

Reduce the field to 48.

I don't know why the illusion in our society is that we need to make everything bigger to make it better. NCAA playoffs, NFL playoffs, the NCAA tournament, the governnment, MLB playoffs, the obscene length of movies, etc. It just doesn't make sense to me.

[GP1]

The winner will truly be the best team.

No it won't. The winner will be the team that went on the best run at the end of the year. MLB, NHL and NBA use best of series to crown champions. These types of playoff systems crown the best teams because they reward sustained excellence against another team before moving on the next round.

More often than not, the NCAA tournament is won by the team on the best run at the end of the year and not the best team throughout the season.

[g-mann17]

I don't know why...we need to make everything bigger to make it better....It just doesn't make sense to me.

I suspect that not much does. Maybe get your wife to explain it all to you.

[zippyman23]

The article in the Beacon today states that the proposal the NCAA is sending to the board is a 96 team tournament. The top 32 teams will receive byes and the other 64 will play. The tournament will take the same length of time as the current one. It is likely the additionaly 32 teams would be teams that would have landed in the NIT.

That means the future for MAC post season play will likely fall as auto bids for Tournament Winner and Regular season champion. In the case of the regular season champion winning the tournament then it would likely be the second best record in the conference as the championship loser may not be #2 seed from the tournament.

So, now, the regular season matters. (if this passes and it probably will)

Auto bids will remain the same. One per conference given to the winner of the conference tourney. The regular season champion still gets nothing, but has a chance for an at-large.

[g-mann17]

The article in the Beacon today states that the proposal the NCAA is sending to the board is a 96 team tournament. The top 32 teams will receive byes and the other 64 will play. The tournament will take the same length of time as the current one. It is likely the additionaly 32 teams would be teams that would have landed in the NIT.

That means the future for MAC post season play will likely fall as auto bids for Tournament Winner and Regular season champion. In the case of the regular season champion winning the tournament then it would likely be the second best record in the conference as the championship loser may not be #2 seed from the tournament.

So, now, the regular season matters. (if this passes and it probably will)

Auto bids will remain the same. One per conference given to the winner of the conference tourney. The regular season champion still gets nothing, but has a chance for an at-large.

Well first nothing is set in stone, second most of the coaches (including Coach K) supports the idea as stated.

[zippyman23]

The article in the Beacon today states that the proposal the NCAA is sending to the board is a 96 team tournament. The top 32 teams will receive byes and the other 64 will play. The tournament will take the same length of time as the current one. It is likely the additionaly 32 teams would be teams that would have landed in the NIT.

That means the future for MAC post season play will likely fall as auto bids for Tournament Winner and Regular season champion. In the case of the regular season champion winning the tournament then it would likely be the second best record in the conference as the championship loser may not be #2 seed from the tournament.

So, now, the regular season matters. (if this passes and it probably will)

Auto bids will remain the same. One per conference given to the winner of the conference tourney. The regular season champion still gets nothing, but has a chance for an at-large.

Well first nothing is set in stone, second most of the coaches (including Coach K) supports the idea as stated.

Coaches opinions have nothing to do with the proposal. The powers at be have not even considered and will not consider giving conferences two auto bids. Keep in mind that the conferences already have the option of awarding the automatic bid to the regular season champ so the NCAA really doesn't have any reason to switch.

It is important to note that the NCAA mandates for all sports tournaments that the number of at large teams be equal to or greater than the number automatic bids. If you give an auto bid to both the regular season and a tourney champion, that brings the total auto bids to 62 which won't work with a 96 team field. Conferences dictate who participates in their tourney's, so the regular season champ in that scenario would likely not even participate in conference tourney to ensure that the conference got two bids. It's just not going to happen.

[g-mann17]

The article in the Beacon today states that the proposal the NCAA is sending to the board is a 96 team tournament. The top 32 teams will receive byes and the other 64 will play. The tournament will take the same length of time as the current one. It is likely the additionaly 32 teams would be teams that would have landed in the NIT.

That means the future for MAC post season play will likely fall as auto bids for Tournament Winner and Regular season champion. In the case of the regular season champion winning the tournament then it would likely be the second best record in the conference as the championship loser may not be #2 seed from the tournament.

So, now, the regular season matters. (if this passes and it probably will)

Auto bids will remain the same. One per conference given to the winner of the conference tourney. The regular season champion still gets nothing, but has a chance for an at-large.

Well first nothing is set in stone, second most of the coaches (including Coach K) supports the idea as stated.

Coaches opinions have nothing to do with the proposal. The powers at be have not even considered and will not consider giving conferences two auto bids. Keep in mind that the conferences already have the option of awarding the automatic bid to the regular season champ so the NCAA really doesn't have any reason to switch.

It is important to note that the NCAA mandates for all sports tournaments that the number of at large teams be equal to or greater than the number automatic bids. If you give an auto bid to both the regular season and a tourney champion, that brings the total auto bids to 62 which won't work with a 96 team field. Conferences dictate who participates in their tourney's, so the regular season champ in that scenario would likely not even participate in conference tourney to ensure that the conference got two bids. It's just not going to happen.

Where's that rule?

The current system is 65 teams there are 33 conferences each receive at least one auto bid.

[zippyman23]

The article in the Beacon today states that the proposal the NCAA is sending to the board is a 96 team tournament. The top 32 teams will receive byes and the other 64 will play. The tournament will take the same length of time as the current one. It is likely the additionaly 32 teams would be teams that would have landed in the NIT.

That means the future for MAC post season play will likely fall as auto bids for Tournament Winner and Regular season champion. In the case of the regular season champion winning the tournament then it would likely be the second best record in the conference as the championship loser may not be #2 seed from the tournament.

So, now, the regular season matters. (if this passes and it probably will)

Auto bids will remain the same. One per conference given to the winner of the conference tourney. The regular season champion still gets nothing, but has a chance for an at-large.

Well first nothing is set in stone, second most of the coaches (including Coach K) supports the idea as stated.

Coaches opinions have nothing to do with the proposal. The powers at be have not even considered and will not consider giving conferences two auto bids. Keep in mind that the conferences already have the option of awarding the automatic bid to the regular season champ so the NCAA really doesn't have any reason to switch.

It is important to note that the NCAA mandates for all sports tournaments that the number of at large teams be equal to or greater than the number automatic bids. If you give an auto bid to both the regular season and a tourney champion, that brings the total auto bids to 62 which won't work with a 96 team field. Conferences dictate who participates in their tourney's, so the regular season champ in that scenario would likely not even participate in conference tourney to ensure that the conference got two bids. It's just not going to happen.

Where's that rule?

The current system is 65 teams there are 33 conferences each receive at least one auto bid.

It's in the NCAA bylaws. Also, currently there are 65 teams with 31 teams with auto bids (34 at-large).

[zippy5]

The article in the Beacon today states that the proposal the NCAA is sending to the board is a 96 team tournament. The top 32 teams will receive byes and the other 64 will play. The tournament will take the same length of time as the current one. It is likely the additionaly 32 teams would be teams that would have landed in the NIT.

That means the future for MAC post season play will likely fall as auto bids for Tournament Winner and Regular season champion. In the case of the regular season champion winning the tournament then it would likely be the second best record in the conference as the championship loser may not be #2 seed from the tournament.

So, now, the regular season matters. (if this passes and it probably will)

Auto bids will remain the same. One per conference given to the winner of the conference tourney. The regular season champion still gets nothing, but has a chance for an at-large.

Well first nothing is set in stone, second most of the coaches (including Coach K) supports the idea as stated.

Coaches opinions have nothing to do with the proposal. The powers at be have not even considered and will not consider giving conferences two auto bids. Keep in mind that the conferences already have the option of awarding the automatic bid to the regular season champ so the NCAA really doesn't have any reason to switch.

It is important to note that the NCAA mandates for all sports tournaments that the number of at large teams be equal to or greater than the number automatic bids. If you give an auto bid to both the regular season and a tourney champion, that brings the total auto bids to 62 which won't work with a 96 team field. Conferences dictate who participates in their tourney's, so the regular season champ in that scenario would likely not even participate in conference tourney to ensure that the conference got two bids. It's just not going to happen.

Where's that rule?

The current system is 65 teams there are 33 conferences each receive at least one auto bid.

My guess is that the loser of the play-in game doesn't technically make the "tournament." So then it's down to 64 teams and 32 auto bids.

edit: zippyman beat me to it, 34 auto bids anyway.

[RootforRoo44]

I'm all for any setup which makes the regular season meaningful. All the talk about "the only games which matter are the 3 @ the Q," was really starting to get to me. I wanna have adrenaline rushes during the regular season too!

Want to make the regular season meaningful? Eliminate conference tournaments and make the regular season champion the champion of the league with an automatic bid.

Leagues with two divisions? Divisional champions play best of 3 or 5 (you decide) during the week the tournaments were to be played.

One division league? First and second place play best of whatever for the championship.

No team with a sub .500 conference record can get into the NCAA.

Reduce the field to 48.

I don't know why the illusion in our society is that we need to make everything bigger to make it better. NCAA playoffs, NFL playoffs, the NCAA tournament, the governnment, MLB playoffs, the obscene length of movies, etc. It just doesn't make sense to me.

MLB playoffs are the only thing that i really think should be expanded. I'm all for 2 wild cards in each league and 3 game series to see who goes to the division series.

[Zipmeister]

I'm all for any setup which makes the regular season meaningful. All the talk about "the only games which matter are the 3 @ the Q," was really starting to get to me. I wanna have adrenaline rushes during the regular season too!

Want to make the regular season meaningful? Eliminate conference tournaments and make the regular season champion the champion of the league with an automatic bid.

Leagues with two divisions? Divisional champions play best of 3 or 5 (you decide) during the week the tournaments were to be played.

One division league? First and second place play best of whatever for the championship.

No team with a sub .500 conference record can get into the NCAA.

Reduce the field to 48.

I don't know why the illusion in our society is that we need to make everything bigger to make it better. NCAA playoffs, NFL playoffs, the NCAA tournament, the governnment, MLB playoffs, the obscene length of movies, etc. It just doesn't make sense to me.

MLB playoffs are the only thing that i really think should be expanded. I'm all for 2 wild cards in each league and 3 game series to see who goes to the division series.

MLB and NCAA Rifle are the only two that should be expanded.

By the way. This thread has now set a record for number of responses to an April Fool's joke. Congratulations to all.