NCAA Tournament Proposal - 90 Teams

[BrookhavenCuse]

NCAA Division 1 Transformation Committee announced proposal to increase the number of teams in the tournament to 90.

Unfortunately the Orange would probably still be on the bubble SMH!

Go Cuse!

 

[Eric15]

Makes no sense whatsoever. I would rather just go back to 64 and eliminate Dayton then expand to 90. Do some people seriously watch the NCAA Tournament and think to themselves "you know what this beautiful sporting event is missing? More 17-14 teams that went 8-10 in conference play."

 

[NYCCuse826]

The quality of college basketball is already in the gutter. Adding more teams doesn't provide any incentive to improve the overall product. If you can't get in the 64+4, you were never deserving.

 

[Cuse'91]

What does worthiness to be in the Tournament have anything to do with creating more post season content to sell to media providers?

 

[Cusefan0307]

I know people are going to complain, but we have gone from about 200 plus Division 1 basketball schools in the 70's to 363 now. So it kind of makes sense.

 

[Cusefan0307]

The quality of college basketball is already in the gutter. Adding more teams doesn't provide any incentive to improve the overall product. If you can't get in the 64+4, you were never deserving.

The best teams are worse off, but the mid majors are probably better than ever. The portal and draft has spread out the talent more. Obviously the heyday of the 80's and 90's will never return for the power 5 because the top talent doesn't stick around.

 

[Cuse99&01]

The NCAA tourney is the best time of year in sports for me. From a fans perspective adding more teams would dilute the field and take away from some of the excitement of the tournament.

 

[Eric15]

I know people are going to complain, but we have gone from about 200 plus Division 1 basketball schools in the 70's to 363 now. So it kind of makes sense.

In the 1975 season, there were 234 D1 teams and 32 teams made the tournament. 13.7% of teams made the tourney in 1975. Today, there are 363 teams and 68 make the tournament (18.7%). Going to 90 would push that to almost a quarter of teams.

I'm not sure I understand the 70s reference unless I'm misunderstanding your point.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

I know people are going to complain, but we have gone from about 200 plus Division 1 basketball schools in the 70's to 363 now. So it kind of makes sense.

So if they want to have like 32 teams at the Dayton level where the 16 winners would play the top 4 seeds in each bracket, that would be 64 + 32 = 96 teams. I would be in favor of that scenario. The more March Madness the better.

I would not be in favor of giving top seeds a bye where they only have to play five games. Sure, they should be rewarded, but people want to see chances for upsets.

Edit: My math is wrong. It would be 48 + 32 =80 teams

 

[NineOneSeven]

Have more play in games if you want, but don't jump to 90.

 

[Cusefan0307]

In the 1975 season, there were 234 D1 teams and 32 teams made the tournament. 13.7% of teams made the tourney in 1975. Today, there are 363 teams and 68 make the tournament (18.7%). Going to 90 would push that to almost a quarter of teams.

I'm not sure I understand the 70s reference unless I'm misunderstanding your point.

How many d-1 teams were there in 1984?

 

[Eric15]

No sport in America is more forgiving than college basketball. Louisville is what, 2-12 right now? In any other sport they would be dead in the water. All they have to do is win a mediocre ACC Tourney that will feature no truly elite teams and boom they're in the tourney.

Conference tournaments are essentially play-in games.

 

[Eric15]

How many d-1 teams were there in 1984?

275 total teams. 53 teams made the tourney. 19.2%

Almost the same exact proportion as today's (18.7%).

 

[Cusefan0307]

So if they want to have like 32 teams at the Dayton level where the 16 winners would play the top 4 seeds in each bracket, that would be 64 + 32 = 96 teams. I would be in favor of that scenario. The more March Madness the better.

I would not be in favor of giving top seeds a bye where they only have to play five games. Sure, they should be rewarded, but people want to see chances for upsets.

Edit: My math is wrong. It would be 48 + 32 =80 teams

I mean it's all a money grab at this point. People are going to complain, but everyone will watch.

 

[Cusefan0307]

275 total teams. 53 teams made the tourney. 19.2%

Almost the same exact proportion as today's (18.7%).

84-85 specifically I should have said. That's when the tournament went to 64.

 

[Eric15]

84-85 specifically I should have said. That's when the tournament went to 64.

282 teams / 64 = 22.6%. So about halfway between the current proportion and the proposed 90.

 

[Cuse181]

Makes no sense whatsoever. I would rather just go back to 64 and eliminate Dayton then expand to 90. Do some people seriously watch the NCAA Tournament and think to themselves "you know what this beautiful sporting event is missing? More 17-14 teams that went 8-10 in conference play."

More games = more $$$$

 

[Cuse181]

No sport in America is more forgiving than college basketball. Louisville is what, 2-12 right now? In any other sport they would be dead in the water. All they have to do is win a mediocre ACC Tourney that will feature no truly elite teams and boom they're in the tourney.

Conference tournaments are essentially play-in games.

That’s what makes the tournament fun for those who nothing at stake (a fair amount of the viewers), if it didn’t result in a tournament bid I don’t think it would be worth near as much to broadcasters as it is now

 

[Ragman2000]

Makes no sense whatsoever. I would rather just go back to 64 and eliminate Dayton then expand to 90. Do some people seriously watch the NCAA Tournament and think to themselves "you know what this beautiful sporting event is missing? More 17-14 teams that went 8-10 in conference play."

 

[Cheriehoop]

More games = more $$$$

Yup and more gambling.

 

[Col. Bleep]

No sport in America is more forgiving than college basketball. Louisville is what, 2-12 right now? In any other sport they would be dead in the water. All they have to do is win a mediocre ACC Tourney that will feature no truly elite teams and boom they're in the tourney.

Conference tournaments are essentially play-in games.

I don't think it's a bad thing.
Conference tournaments reward teams tha get hot and gell at the end of the season.
Like the 2006 Orange.
Or -hate to say it - UConn in 2011 when they probably had to win the BE to get a bid.
They did (although the Orange should have beaten them if not for missed dunks and layups) and won the NCAA tournament.

 

[orange79]

March Madness expansion recommended by NCAA committee - Sports Illustrated

The current format is 68 teams.

www.si.com

 

[Eric15]

Or -hate to say it - UConn in 2011 when they probably had to win the BE to get a bid.

UConn was a 3 seed in the 2011 tourney. They won 5 games in 5 days but were probably safely in after their first win or two.

 

[Jake]

Gross

 

[NYCCuse826]

The best teams are worse off, but the mid majors are probably better than ever. The portal and draft has spread out the talent more. Obviously the heyday of the 80's and 90's will never return for the power 5 because the top talent doesn't stick around.

This isn't a best team or mid major take. Grassroots basketball is in the gutter and college basketball has suffered as a result.