The NCAA Tournament Will Have 128 Teams?

[ritehook]

There's talk among the Talking Heads on sports tv and radio that this will happen in few years.

And thus again pure greed raises its homely head to fu-k up a great sports show.

[DrunkenLullaby]

Great. Looking forward to that NJIT vs Kennesaw St play-in game to see who's #128.

[hoopster42]

theyve been saying this for yrs, i dont see it happening, just overreaction once again to a few "deserving" teams being left out

[ritehook]

theyve been saying this for yrs, i dont see it happening, just overreaction once again to a few "deserving" teams being left out

You may be right, but in any contest between common sense and greed, the smart money is on Greed.

Another proposal if for 96 teams, with the favored 32 given a first round bye.

Just leave it alone . . .

[Illusion]

theyve been saying this for yrs, i dont see it happening, just overreaction once again to a few "deserving" teams being left out

No doubt. Look at the pros and the eastern conference in the NBA. That alone should detour any expansion of the field.

[5 star bomb]

i would like to see expansion. Are you telling me it wouldnt make it even more exciting? I know it might take a little way from the regular season but the tournament would be insane.

[HedgeHog]

I always thought 64 was the perfect number and then came the 65th team (why just one more team?). I'm not a big fan of diluting the field to 128 as just about every .500 club will make it (like all the 6-5 college bowl match-ups). Even 96 would be too many (what would the NIT have left to choose from?).

Since we have already gone past my favorite #64, how about 68 teams--allowing three more decent bubble teams to make it. The worst 8 teams would play on Tuesday, with the four winners to meet their doom against the four #1 seeds. This format might eventually produce the first ever #16 win.

68 teams--but no more!!!

[twtb19]

i would like to see expansion. Are you telling me it wouldnt make it even more exciting? I know it might take a little way from the regular season but the tournament would be insane.

This was brought up the other day on ESPN and here are the points on why I don't like it.

-No 16 seed has ever beaten a 1 seed. Why should we add seeds 17-32

-I know teams like ASU & VTech that can play with the big boys got left off, but they had their chance in the conference tourney...look at this as an extended Big Dance because you can play until you lose. This works for most D1 teams with only a handful not having conference tourneys and a few stragglers not making their conference tourney, but they wouldn't be in anyway.

-Arizona this year finished 7-9 in conference and got in, how many below .500 teams would we have to watch.

-I think it would take away from the championship week excitement. Do you think VTech would have put UNC through the tough game they did if they knew they were in the tourney? Why do I need to watch the conference tourneys all over again, because that is where this would head with too many teams.

[turnip]

I always thought 64 was the perfect number and then came the 65th team (why just one more team?). I'm not a big fan of diluting the field to 128 as just about every .500 club will make it (like all the 6-5 college bowl match-ups). Even 96 would be too many (what would the NIT have left to choose from?).

Since we have already gone past my favorite #64, how about 68 teams--allowing three more decent bubble teams to make it. The worst 8 teams would play on Tuesday, with the four winners to meet their doom against the four #1 seeds. This format might eventually produce the first ever #16 win.

68 teams--but no more!!!

It was expanded to 65 because there was one more conference added, and thus one more conference champion. And they didn't want to take away an at large bid.

I agree with you for the most part. The at-larges should stay at 34, it is the perfect number to allow for some cinderellas, but still make it special. With 128 teams it would not be nearly as special since everyone with a halfway decent team makes it. You'd be adding the entire NIT plus 31 more teams...yuck.

[slacker00]

They've have to axe the conference tournaments. I'd much rather watch games like we had this past weekend than watch a bunch of weak sauce teams that should've been NIT fodder.

Before we start talking 128, lets try 66 teams, then 67, etc.

[Willie Bee]

re: The NCAA Tournament Will Have 128 Teams?

And some school that is 9-21 will still pitch a hissy fit because they didn't get in and some other 9-21 team did This is one of the reasons I'm against a football playoff; agree to make it a 4-8 team playoff and within a year someone will be crying because they were No. 9 on the list and saying it's just not fair.