How the NCAA Tourney should evolve next

I

iowabillmichael

Member
First, there were 16 teams--you had to actually win your regular season conference championship to get in. Imagine that. Then the NCAA went to 32 teams, then 48, then 64, now 68. So here's what should happen next -- next year, in fact:

[FONT=&amp]There’s an easy way to eliminate the post-season angst in college basketball:
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]1 –Abolish all conference tournaments. Return some luster to winning the regular season title.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]2 –Start the NCAA tourney one week earlier.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]3 –Top 256 teams are in. (Let’s hear #257 cry they were deserving… About 100 teams don't make it.) Top 256 determined by adding all the computer rankings, except the RPI, which is abolished. Done.

4 - After the first round, you're down to 64, essentially the same number of teams we have now.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]5 –NIT field is filled from the teams knocked out in round 1.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Thiswould be so much more fair and would give some good teams who have a bad game a second chance in theNIT. No good reason not to do it, and the best reason to do it would be to putan end to the biased, brainless, boneheaded Selection Committee. If we’re goingto have an NCAA tournament, let’s play it on the court instead of in the tiny minds of selection committee members using idiotic measures like the RPI.
[/FONT]
 
Dumbest idea ever. Why not just have the whole country be in one big conference and play single-elimination to determine a winner.

Oh wait...that's what this would be.

Stop crying about not making the NCAA's and go win the NIT. Next year you can try again.
 
Welcome to the board, bill. I think I might enjoy your thoughtful insight in future posts. I agree that the conference tournament system is a mess and the regular season needs to regain some importance; I proposed reversing the process by giving a conference's auto bid to the regular season champ and an NIT auto bid to the tournament champ. I don't know about 256 teams in the tournament: selection would be harder than it is now, as the teams lower than 200 in the rankings all look pretty identical in their badness.

I could go for an abolished RPI, though.
 
images
 
Why don't we just have a series of tournaments and the team with the most points off of all tournaments (1pt for each game 2 pts for semis 3 for finals and 4 for win) wins the NC. You know, Kinda like NASCAR? Or Golf?

Hint (Sarcasm)

BTW: 256/2 = 64?
 
Last edited:
This pretty much covers every angle. You should contact the NCAA right away! EUREKA! Eeeeuuuuuurrrrreeeekkkkaaaaaa!!! Were you sitting under an apple tree when you came up with this amazing calculation?
 
CAARHawk said:
Why don't we just have a series of tournaments and the team with the most points off of all tournaments (1pt for each game 2 pts for semis 3 for finals and 4 for win) wins the NC. You know, Kinda like NASCAR? Or Golf?

Hint (Sarcasm)

BTW: 256/2 = 64?
Click to expand...

carrhawk, I think the OP meant there would be two rounds starting with 256 just like the two rounds we start with now during the first week.

start with 256 teams on thurs and friday and after round one you are down to 128.

Then have second round on the weekend and you are right back to now, 64 teams.

I dont mind the conf tourneys that much except it really is a money grab. I think they need some better more objective measures.

And 256 teams would just blow charles barkley's mind.
 
Dumb. Lets just eliminate the regular season while we're at it and play a quadruple elimination tournament that everyone gets invited to and call it good.
 
I disagree with the OP, but you guys are over the top. Wasn't there some consideration of expanding to 128 not too long ago? It's not that idiotic.
 
3 –Top 256 teams are in. (Let’s hear #257 cry they were deserving… About 100 teams don't make it.) Top 256 determined by adding all the computer rankings, except the RPI, which is abolished. Done.

So you think wisky and Pitt should have been a 2 and 3 seed this year?
 
A system needs to be devised so as to allow a team like Iowa, who is clearly better than half of the teams in the current NCAA field, to have a spot in the tourney. I would expand the field to 96 teams and have all 96 be seeded according to the computer rankings (or by the selection committee) while abolishing the RPI. The bottom 64 would play each other in the first round on Sat-Sunday to get the field down to 64 with the next games starting on Thursday of the following week and following the current format. I would also have it that the conference champions and conference tourney champs would all make the tourney automatically as well. That way a dominating conference champ from a lesser conference would still make it if they happen to lose in their conference tourney.
 
Tratzman said:
A system needs to be devised so as to allow a team like Iowa, who is clearly better than half of the teams in the current NCAA field, to have a spot in the tourney. I would expand the field to 96 teams and have all 96 be seeded according to the computer rankings (or by the selection committee) while abolishing the RPI. The bottom 64 would play each other in the first round on Sat-Sunday to get the field down to 64 with the next games starting on Thursday of the following week and following the current format. I would also have it that the conference champions and conference tourney champs would all make the tourney automatically as well. That way a dominating conference champ from a lesser conference would still make it if they happen to lose in their conference tourney.
Click to expand...
that system is called the: "regular season"
 
Enough ****** teams make the tournament as it is. Iowa got screwed, they are most certainly good enough to be in the tournament. But they didn't do enough to prove it. It sucks, but it is what it is. No need to change the tournament because of it.
 
I am annoyed by the idea that teams that finish 7th or 8th in their conference can leap frog a team that finishes 6th. More emphasis should be placed on conference records, instead of OOC.
 
The lowest seeded team to ever win the championship was an 8. Meaning that every championship team since expansion has come from the top 32 teams. There's a strong argument right there that even 68 teams are too many. If the tournament expands again it is solely a money decision and, at that point, becomes almost a joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top