NCAA Basketball Tournament Expansion

[SubGod22]

The topic has resurfaced and we should know by this coming summer what the NCAA decides. There are some valid thoughts on both expansion and no expansion.

ESPN - Dan Hurley: Expanding tourney would devalue regular season

"For me, I think it's great the way it is," Hurley said at his pregame news conference at NRG Stadium on Sunday. "I feel like devaluing the regular season, I think, potentially hurts the regular season and what it means. I think the pressure to have to win games and being rewarded for winning big nonconference games and then taking care of enough business in the league ... I think it's a privilege to play in this tournament, not a right."

But it's not perfect. Hurley, who coached Rhode Island before accepting the UConn job in 2018, said the formula for selecting teams sometimes rewards teams with brand names over deserving mid-major schools.

"I do think, though, that there are probably mid-major programs, a lot of times, that are more deserving than like a 10th-place team in a power conference that has figured out how to just game the numbers, so I'll say that. I see that on Selection Sunday sometimes. And I cringe at that."

"I think there is so much parity in college basketball, we need to expand the NCAA tournament to another round," Larranaga told ESPN Radio last month. "It needs to be 96 teams invited. You look at what Fairleigh Dickinson did, you look at what FAU has done ... These are teams that maybe nobody heard about going into the tournament. Last year, it was Saint Peters.

"The NCAA, we have 360 Division I teams and only 68 make the dance. The whole mission is to give the student-athlete a great experience. Well, there is no greater experience for a college basketball player than to compete in March Madness and yet we only have 68 teams out of 363. That's 18%. Let's increase it. Let's go to 96."

I believe expansion is talked about because everyone knows there are non power teams every year that are more deserving than mid to bottom tier teams in power conferences, yet the power conferences get the nod. We know how the deck is stacked against non power teams that can't get power teams to play them, and yet some of those power teams don't play much anybody outside of the conference and then just ride the coattails of the top teams in that conference.

I'm honestly not sure where I stand on this. I really don't favor the idea of a longer tournament, but at the same time, I'd love to see those teams like UAB and North Texas this year get a shot.

Is 26% of teams playing in post season too much? I don't know. I think the NBA has over half the league in post season.

[MadDog]

I think the 7-10th place teams of the Power 5 would be the beneficiaries and get most of the new spots if the tournament is expanded.

[SubGod22]

I think the 7-10th place teams of the Power 5 would be the beneficiaries and get most of the new spots if the tournament is expanded.

I don't doubt that there will be more undeserving teams from power conferences, but if it means those 2 and/or 3 teams from non power conferences get a shot as well, it could be worth it. I haven't decided what side I would be on either way yet, but I do want to see more of those top non power conference teams get shots. If we aren't going to start putting them in over the #10 from the B1G then I'd probably support expansion. Honestly, there probably aren't that many power conference teams that don't get in that would get in with expansion. A few for sure, but I do think the bulk of those additional spots would go to putting an extra team or two in from the AAC, A10, MWC, MVC, WCC, CUSA, Belt and so forth.

I think in a perfect world the committee would start putting four or five more of those teams in over the bottom tier power schools. I don't see them doing that so as a compromise I would be open to adding 15-20 of those non power schools and giving them a fighting chance and exposure. I'd probably want to see an official number being considered and how it would be set up.

[shocker43]

I think I would be fine with expansion IF it's accompanied by other rules that require above 50% W/L.

[MadDog]

I think in a year like this the entire B12 would have been invited. If they would cap conference participation at 9 teams or 75% of the conference teams that would be good. And make the play-in games such that the P5 in play-ins play non P5’s instead of each other in an 11 seed game.

[Kung Wu]

SubGod22 see if you can edit this Topic and fix your typo.

[Kung Wu]

SubGod22 how were you able to edit the topic title?

flyingMoose should be able to edit his titles but my instructions didn't work so there must be some other way to do it, that you figured out?

[SubGod22]

SubGod22 how were you able to edit the topic title?

flyingMoose should be able to edit his titles but my instructions didn't work so there must be some other way to do it, that you figured out?

In the past I haven't been able to. I believe I've had you edit a few previously. But this time I wasn't expecting to be able to but since you asked I tried. All I did was hit the edit button and the title was available to do. I didn't do anything special, unless I have some sort of new ShockerNet powers

[ShockingButTrue]

It's a stupid topic and Larranaga is an idiot. Like the 25 win teams from 'lesser' conferences would really get an invite over the P5 teams who are only .500 in conference and under 20 wins. Suuuuure...

As it stands every team from every conference, regardless or record, has a shot at the Natty. Just keep winning.

[Kung Wu]

In the past I haven't been able to. I believe I've had you edit a few previously. But this time I wasn't expecting to be able to but since you asked I tried. All I did was hit the edit button and the title was available to do. I didn't do anything special, unless I have some sort of new ShockerNet powers

Right I just added this capability recently. What edit button? Is it a gear or under a submenu or something else?

[SubGod22]

Right I just added this capability recently. What edit button? Is it a gear or under a submenu or something else?

Same edit button I use for any other edit

[Kung Wu]

Same edit button I use for any other edit

He got it, thanks!

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

This will be a controversial opinion, and I know I'll take some heat (and that's fine), but I think the tournament should stay with 68 teams BUT Division 1 needs to lose about 10 conferences.

Yes, I know...UMBC, and FDU, and whoever have won a game or two recently, but historically speaking, 16 seeds are terrible and have an atrocious win/loss percentage against 1 seeds. 15 seeds aren't much better. If we expand, now we're going to have something like 22 seeds getting annihilated 99.99999% of the time by one seeds. And 21 seeds are going to be curb stomped by 2 seeds 99.999998% of the time. That's not exactly a compelling reason to expand the tournament.

Division 1 itself is way out of balance. There are 33 conferences, ten or so of which the members do not and never will have the resources to realistically or consistently compete with the others. Football has already addressed this by breaking into subdivisions. Basketball should do the same. Give FDU and UMBC a realistic shot of winning an actual national championship in a separate Div 1-AA basketball tournament.

[ShockTalk]

This will be a controversial opinion, and I know I'll take some heat (and that's fine), but I think the tournament should stay with 68 teams BUT Division 1 needs to lose about 10 conferences.

Yes, I know...UMBC, and FDU, and whoever have won a game or two recently, but historically speaking, 16 seeds are terrible and have an atrocious win/loss percentage against 1 seeds. 15 seeds aren't much better. If we expand, now we're going to have something like 22 seeds getting annihilated 99.99999% of the time by one seeds. And 21 seeds are going to be curb stomped by 2 seeds 99.999998% of the time. That's not exactly a compelling reason to expand the tournament.

Division 1 itself is way out of balance. There are 33 conferences, ten or so of which the members do not and never will have the resources to realistically or consistently compete with the others. Football has already addressed this by breaking into subdivisions. Basketball should do the same. Give FDU and UMBC a realistic shot of winning an actual national championship in a separate Div 1-AA basketball tournament.

My only problem with that is just how many more P5 teams with losing records in conference get in. I just don't understand how any team with a losing record, overall or in league, should get a third bite of the apple.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

My only problem with that is just how many more P5 teams with losing records in conference get in. I just don't understand how any team with a losing record, overall or in league, should get a third bite of the apple.

I can't argue against you there. The committee prioritizes quad wins, but that favors the P5 conferences because those teams have more opportunities at Q1 and Q2 wins. Ideally, the committee would instead prioritize statistical computer metrics to choose tournament teams and seedings. But they won't.