If this is your first visit, feel free to
check out the Frequently Asked Questions by clicking this
LINK.
You are welcome as a guest, but you will have to REGISTER
before you can post messages.
To register, click the link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions.
If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.
The NCAA will opt out of their contact with CBS this spring, then I expect them to announce an expansion of the NCAA tournament to 96 teams. Bottom line the NCAA(ESPN) does not care about integrity or tradition its about money.
The 96 teams simply gives more opportunity to have more BCS schools in the tourney.
I was driving yesterday and heard a local guy on Houston sports radio crying about how he wants to see upsets the first day but after that he wants nothing but BCS or in his words the name schools playing. He essentially said it is like having Boise State in the BCS, it just does not seem right.
So his logic is simple if the name is recognizable then it is important that I see them play in the latter stages of the NCAA tourney... this is a mentality of alot of National people. They do not follow the sport until maybe Feb then if they do they only will watch a few minutes of games from the BCS's and then conclude those are the best teams... because thats all they care to know about.
The uniformed is what is driving this 96 team tourney.. yes the NCAA is pushing it but it is because now the NCAA can get into the pockets of the Auburn or Oregon fan because now they have a real reason to follow. The expansion has nothing to do with Bradley or St Louis U its only about BCS.
The NCAA is so money hungry they have forgotten or ignored the fact that all D1 teams are involved in the NCAA but they really only want and care about the 70 or so school who are associated with the BCS. 96 teams and the exclusive rights to the tourney by ESPN... I say by August.
Well houston, I hope your prediction is wrong, but I'm afraid this is what may very well happen too.
Also, this talk show host is so misguided it's not even funny! First of all, it's not his tournament, so he has no say in who gets picked.
And second, aren't Butler, Memphis or Xavier familiar enough names for him?!
greed?? but doesn't all this legislation promise endless freebies without ever having to do anything to earn it??
That's the greed that's killing this nation...grab now and huge giveaways and pass the costs on to the next generation..
Thank you! And don't even get me started on the garbage that passes as health care that got passed last night!
The Sportscenter talking point of the morning....UNI is "the first MVC champion since the Stone Age to advance to the Sweet 16." Everyone was using it -- OK, they didn't say Stone Age, but some commentators used it twice in the same minute. They ignored the accomplishments this decade of the likes of BU, Wichita, and SIU because they hadn't won the conference title.
I liked how a CBS commentator said that UNI is looking to become the 1st team since Larry Bird and Indiana St. to reach the Sweet 16 in the Missouri Valley since 1979.
Where has he been this past decade???
SIU (2), BU, WSU made it to the Sweet 16 since 2001. Am I missing any? I know that SMS made it in 1999-2000, and Tulsa in the mid '90's I think.
He later corrected himself (probably after someone informed him) and said they are the 1st MVC regular season champ to make it to the Sweet 16.
But wasn't WSU the MVC champs of 2005-'06?
They also pointed out that this conference is continuing to grow.
Thankfully UNI has gotten to this point, or I would say that the conference has weakened since making runs a few years ago.
Very little respect for the Valley!
I liked how a CBS commentator said that UNI is looking to become the 1st team since Larry Bird and Indiana St. to reach the Sweet 16 in the Missouri Valley since 1979.
Where has he been this past decade???
SIU (2), BU, WSU made it to the Sweet 16 since 2001. Am I missing any? I know that SMS made it in 1999-2000, and Tulsa in the mid '90's I think.
He later corrected himself (probably after someone informed him) and said they are the 1st MVC regular season champ to make it to the Sweet 16.
But wasn't WSU the MVC champs of 2005-'06?
They also pointed out that this conference is continuing to grow.
Thankfully UNI has gotten to this point, or I would say that the conference has weakened since making runs a few years ago.
Very little respect for the Valley!
I thought I heard that first. I never heard them mention Bradley either since it was another Missouri Valley team that knocked out #4 seed Kansas in 2006 in the first round. As far as respect, there was no other valley team deserving of the NCAA this year.
I really don't hope they mess with the tournament format. If they expand to 96, the entire Big East conference will be in the tournament.
I still like the idea of 80 teams total. It may water down the tourney a bit, but not as much as 96 teams. I think that 11-12 teams are more deserving than 11-12 that make it due to Automatic bids. And then you have the 4 that are snubbed every year.
Seeds 1-11 would get a bye. Start the tourney on Tuesday for 32 teams to play for the final 16 spots to make the core field of 64.
The only problem might be the lack of rest to play 2 games in 3 days, and possibly 3 games in 5 days, but I think with the adrenaline and conditioning of today's players, it wouldn't matter that much. Just make sure that the final 32 teams play in the same building as they play for the next round (Thurs./Fri.)
It should be the 8 lowest at-large teams playing for 4 spots. That is the way I think it should be. 8 teams playing to determine who the four 12 seeds will be. Let the small schools be the 16 seed and not have to play-in for the right to be a 16 seed.
Or we let the 8 small conferences each have a representative in the play-in games. The 4 winners get one extra share for their conferences. That's $1.5 million. Arkansas-Pine Bluff earned the SWAC an extra $1.5 million by beating Winthrop this year.
I'd rather see the money for playing a 2nd game go to the little guys than the big guys. Putting the last at-large teams in the play-in games actually feeds the power confereces who get those bids an extra $6 million.
The extra play-in games could be a very well disguised cash grab by the big boys
It should be the 8 lowest at-large teams playing for 4 spots. That is the way I think it should be. 8 teams playing to determine who the four 12 seeds will be. Let the small schools be the 16 seed and not have to play-in for the right to be a 16 seed.
That would have got Virginia Tech in so they couldn't cry about how they deserved to be in the tournament more then many of the other teams.
NEWSFLASH to VT: Improve your schedule and quite playing teams w/ RPI of +300 and you may be able to get in the tournament.
If I had a say in who gets in I would set up a criteria of any BCS team that wants a chance to play in the Tounament must play at least 75% of their games against non BCS teams w/ RPI's below 150 and maybe even below 125-then you get 23 wins VT you would be able to make the tourn. but then again w/a schedule like that you might not get to 20 wins.
Leave the tournament just like it is but make these BCS teams responsible and not just in their leagues. They may be good but how many BE teams are left-I for one am loving every minute and yes I picked UNI w/o any reservations after watching them play this year.
Or we let the 8 small conferences each have a representative in the play-in games. The 4 winners get one extra share for their conferences. That's $1.5 million. Arkansas-Pine Bluff earned the SWAC an extra $1.5 million by beating Winthrop this year.
I'd rather see the money for playing a 2nd game go to the little guys than the big guys. Putting the last at-large teams in the play-in games actually feeds the power confereces who get those bids an extra $6 million.
The extra play-in games could be a very well disguised cash grab by the big boys
That's a good point TAS. I like the idea of the final 8 at-large teams playing in these play-in games, but your idea would work well too. The teams that win these games amongst the small conferences would provide slightly better competition for the #1 seeds. Then the 13 seeds would be where the final at-large bids would end up, thereby making more 13/4 and 12/5 type upsets possible. 68 teams would make the tournament more competitive (despite being very competitive this year) without watering down the tournament overall.
I say forget 96 teams, even if many would still be strong. Too many teams is not a good thing!
If UNI played the Illini 10 times, UNI would win 7 or 8 of them.
If UNI played anyone in the country 7 games in 7 days they would do no worse the .500 IMO. Not to many teams can keep playing 10 guys consistently without too much drop off. Illinois would be lucky to win one game IMO. UNI would match up against them perfectly, to kill them.
"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people...they are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."
??” Thomas Jefferson
sigpic
with Butler winning...maybe those talking heads who even went so far as to say they should SHRINK the NCAA Tournament to maybe just 12-16 teams
since nobody outside the Top 10 teams ever make it to the final Four - then I'd like to hear what those guys have to say now...
Butler, Michigan State, and Tennessee were ALL outside the Top 10! Jay Bilas was one of the guys proposing this.....
Even the runs by UNI, Cornell, St. Mary's - all teams who were unranked proves that talk silly.
Tweet
Comment