What if the NCAA Tourney was expanded?

[BUBalum05]

Every year its a topic, and I don't think the tournament needs to be doubled just yet. Instead, what if the tournament went from 65 to 96?

With 31 automatic bids, the remaining 34 just don't seem like there's enough to go around with 300+ teams going for those spots leaving out too many deserving teams. Not exactly sure, but I bet 15 teams that get the automatic berths aren't in the top 96 in RPI, so that would probably make the cut off at about 80 which still puts alot of quality teams in the play-in games to the top 32 seeds. I think these play-in games could be held locally to promote rivalries and keep cost down for the teams travelling. Also, it solves the problem of which games would be televised because it could be covered locally then too.

It would make teams like UNI a bubble team along with Iowa, let them play-in to face a #6. That could also put BU up against the Illini who would both get bids and let them play into a #8 team. This also would let the middle of the mid-majors face an equal challenge against a BCS school to show how much parity there is in the sport.

Curious what everyone else thinks about the NCAA keeping the status quo or opening it up like they did back in '85...

[pfunk880]

I say leave things as they are. There are always a handful of teams that get left out each year, but not 31 more. It would weaken the field.

[Da Coach]

Some think that the NCAA's purchase of the NIT was a first step for the contingency of expanding the NCAA field. I think it will happen within the next few years, not because of any sentiment of fairness, but because it will make for more TV matchups on a wider varity of networks and bring in even more money.
For example, if the NCAA stays with CBS, they now own several other cable networks, and also now own the CSTV internet video site.
Like NBC does with the Olympics, they would be able to expand their coverage for greater revenue and make some of the most desireable games "pay per view". That is where the real big money is if and when it's feasable to broadcast them that way.

[BI_Brave_alum]

I say leave things as they are. There are always a handful of teams that get left out each year, but not 31 more. It would weaken the field.

i agree, b/c you know what there will still be teams complaining about not getting in..

[amckillip]

I am a fan of the 68 team field, with 8 teams playing for the four 16 seeds. I thinking doubling the field is a very bad idea. The NCAA is about good basketball not blowouts. I think 128 teams would water it down. At that point your taking almost half the teams!!!!

[BI_Brave_alum]

I am a fan of the 68 team field, with 8 teams playing for the four 16 seeds. I thinking doubling the field is a very bad idea. The NCAA is about good basketball not blowouts. I think 128 teams would water it down. At that point your taking almost half the teams!!!!

Right, we dont want to turn into the NHL and their postseason

[IlliBraves]

I finally am seeing why so many coaches want to expand the field. Do I think the field should be expaned to 128, NO!! That rewards teams who are undeserving of bids. However, the mid-majors, despite the progress are still often screwed, especially if they're out of a 1-bid league or a hotly contested league. Ex(Appalachian State, Bradley).

[MacabreMob]

Here is a copy of a letter I sent to the NCAA a couple years ago....

I am writing in regards to the NCAA Men's basketball post-season tournaments. I have come up with a unique tournament that would incorporate both the NCAA and NIT. I had come up with this idea a few years ago and got a negative response from Bill Hancock stating that "the NCAA membership has not shown any interest in expanding the tournament field, or in combining with the NIT." With the recent developments between the NCAA and NIT, I think we are on the threshold to make great changes for the post season.
I will try to make this as brief as possible....
Let's start with what is the current post-season. 31 automatic NCAA, 34 at-large NCAA, and 40 at-large NIT which is a total of 105. I suggest an expansion to a total of 128. Give bids and seeds to 96 NCAA teams. That would mean 65 at-large berths given out. The top 32 teams (1-8 seeds) get byes. The next 64 will have to 'play-in'. Also select another 32 that get byes for the NIT.
So you have your top 32 with byes. The next 64 play with the winners going on to play the top 32 in the NCAA. The losers then go to meet the last 32 selected in the NIT.
Where to play the games: Play them at the same sites for the Thurs-Sun games. This way the facilities are used every day for games. Ticket holders won't have a 'down' day to find a place to watch other games in the tournament, they can keep going to games. More concessions. More hotel. More teams involved - more (different) groups that want to go.
When to play the games: I say play them starting Tuesday and Wednesday. There is already a Tuesday 'play-in' game. What's wrong with 16? Tuesday winners play in the NCAA Thursday (and Saturday); Tuesday losers play Friday in the NIT. Wednesday winners play NCAA on Friday; losers play on Thursday in the NIT. Back to back days for Wednesday losers is the only downfall, but teams play in tournaments on back-to-back days a lot. So Tuesday and Wednesday there are 16 games each in the mid-64, Thursday has 16 NCAA and 16 NIT games, Friday 16 NCAA and 16 NIT, Saturday 8 in each, and Sunday 8 in each. Week two, resume NIT on Tuesday and Wednesday with 4 games each, and the NCAA on Thursday and Friday with 4 games each. Saturday and Sunday can be double-headers with 2 NIT games in the afternoon and 2 NCAA games in the evening. Week 3 could have the Final 4 games for both tournaments on Saturday and then both Championships on Monday.
An example from last year's tournaments would be Wichita State and Western Kentucky playing to decide who meets Duke in the NCAA and UMass in the NIT. A much better match-up to watch in the Duke game than versus Delaware State. Conversely, Delaware State would be in a play-in game against Iowa State with the winner playing Minnesota in the NCAA and the other gets Kent in the NIT.
What you wind up with:
1) a better, if not best, 64 in the NCAA
2) a chance for teams in the mid-64 a chance to keep playing instead of 'one-and-done'
3) a larger audience for both tournaments
4) better match-ups
I would be very interested in describing and explaining what I have outlined. I have also thought about many arguments against my idea(s) and I have answers for them. Please take the time to consider my suggestions. Feel free to contact me with comments and questions.

I got a form-letter type response saying they have no plans to change the post-season format, but went on to say how they will not compensate anyone for any ideas or suggestions.

[pfunk880]

Just to add to my earlier comment, look at the bowl games in college football. Roughly half of the Div. 1-A teams go to bowl games, and let's face it, most of the games before New Year's aren't worth watching.

Keeping the NCAA field at the size it is ensures that it's a reward for teams that earn their spots. Expansion would just clear the way for more mediocre teams (Michigan, Purdue, Florida State, DePaul, etc.) to make it.

Do teams get snubbed under the current system? Without a doubt. For example, the winner of the NIT is definitely not the 66th best team because they could probably beat most of the small-conference teams that get auto-bids. But the NCAA tourney is about giving teams a chance no matter what conference they play in. So I think we're better off having a handful of teams with gripes instead of risking a watered-down field with expansion.

[jasonpeoria911]

Another thing to look at with expansion is the number of games each team has to win in a row. 6 games in a row as it is right now in the Tourney is fairly tough for any team. Plus most of the games are back to backs. If you add another 2 or 3 must wins, very few teams would be able to do that. Plus if the tourney is expanded, then the problems arise with broadcast rights as the NBA playoffs are getting underway and the MLB is starting.

Jason