One theory why higher seeds may be losing to lower seeds

[tornado]

because they no longer think they really need to go out and actually beat the other team...
they now simply rely on the expectation that the Selection Committee has done the work for them by eliminating all the good mid-majors and by giving them cushy seeding all the way thru to the Final Four...

It's kinda like how perennial handouts take away anyone's real desire to work for a living and succeed..

Dan Muller has it right in this shot at Gregg Marshall

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22797523/illinois-state-redbirds-coach-defends-missouri-valley-taking-shot-gregg-marshall

[tornado]

one other thought-
as long as they include 68 teams and have a "play in round" on Tuesday and Wednesday...
why not this........

Pick 96 teams...
the top 32 get a bye and don't play 'til Thurs or Fri
but the next 64 teams (#33 thru #96) meet at 8 different Pre-Regional sites and play-in with #33 vs #96, #34 vs. #95 etc...

then the winners of those games match up with #1-32 starting Thursday just like it already is.

It would create 32 play-in games instead of 4 play-in games, give plenty of other teams a chance to play, would place a lot of those Regional games all around the country for many more people to see - just pick various campus sites to make those games accessible. NCAA would also make a bunch more money and so might a lot of the schools. Hopefully they could then include the best mid-majors and not just the 8th & 9th teams in the big conferences.

[Da Coach]

one other thought-
as long as they include 68 teams and have a "play in round" on Tuesday and Wednesday...
why not this........

Pick 96 teams...
the top 32 get a bye and don't play 'til Thurs or Fri
but the next 64 teams (#33 thru #96) meet at 8 different Pre-Regional sites and play-in with #33 vs #96, #34 vs. #95 etc...

then the winners of those games match up with #1-32 starting Thursday just like it already is.

It would create 32 play-in games instead of 4 play-in games, give plenty of other teams a chance to play, would place a lot of those Regional games all around the country for many more people to see - just pick various campus sites to make those games accessible. NCAA would also make a bunch more money and so might a lot of the schools. Hopefully they could then include the best mid-majors and not just the 8th & 9th teams in the big conferences.

That is a great idea....the only problem is that the NCAA proposed doing exactly that 8 years ago and have never implemented it-

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/tournament/2010/news/story?id=5047800

INDIANAPOLIS -- The NCAA appears to be on the verge of expanding the men's basketball tournament to 96 teams.
Insisting that nothing has been decided, NCAA vice president Greg Shaheen nonetheless outlined a detailed plan Thursday that included the logistics and timing of a 96-team tournament....
It would be played during the same time frame as the current three-week tournament and include first-round byes for 32 teams.

[pfcmsh]

Great Idea

That is a great idea....the only problem is that the NCAA proposed doing exactly that 8 years ago and have never implemented it-

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/tournament/2010/news/story?id=5047800

INDIANAPOLIS -- The NCAA appears to be on the verge of expanding the men's basketball tournament to 96 teams.
Insisting that nothing has been decided, NCAA vice president Greg Shaheen nonetheless outlined a detailed plan Thursday that included the logistics and timing of a 96-team tournament....
It would be played during the same time frame as the current three-week tournament and include first-round byes for 32 teams.

I agree that this is a good idea. I wonder why the NCAA never went forward with the plan 8 years ago? Is it a good idea to proceed now? I read somewhere that the NCAA is the most corrupt sports organization in the entire world. Will changes be made? Maybe more compliance observers are needed. Any way you look it this, it is a good idea IMO.

[tornado]

8 years ago the teams up at the #90-96 range weren't good and didn't deserve entry into the NCAA Tourney
Times have changed and now they are- that's why I think it is a relevant idea that deserves to be considered now.

[pfcmsh]

Good Info

Thanks for the nice bit of information!

[Da Coach]

Here is what happened with that proposal by the NCAA in 2010 to expand to 96 teams.....
Recall that the NCAA acquired the NIT in 2005, and after running both tournaments for 5 years, the chief of the NCAA Tournament in 2010, Greg Shaheen (official title was Executive Vice President for Championships and Alliances), issued his proposal to expand the NCAA Tournament to 96 teams early in 2010. In effect, he envisioned taking the 32 teams that would be in the NIT and adding them to the teams in the NCAA. It was supposed to allow more teams in the tournament and generate more revenue.
But his proposal was immediately criticized quite strongly by national sportswriters and others in the media, and by others in college basketball as too drastic a change, too many teams in the NCAA, and that it would do too much damage to the NIT and lead to its demise. So he backed off the 96-team proposal, and a couple weeks later released a modified proposal on April 22, 2010, to expand only to 68 teams and create what would become the "First Four".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/22/AR2010042203916.html