OLD VandyMania.com (ARCHIVE)

We can see some obvious issues with the current tournament selection system. Why not simply allow more teams into the field? Does Grand Canyon really deserve to be in the tournament while Vanderbilt and Clemson do not?

Why just 68 teams with the two play in games? Is there something so very special about having 64 teams play on the first full day of games? Why not just add one more round and start with 128? If that is too much then how about 96? Every good team gets a shot. Problem solved.

No, it shouldn't be expanded. Part of its charm is the opportunity it presents for Cinderella stories like Loyola, St. Peters, George Mason, VCU, etc.

If it was expanded, it would only water down the process and add another layer for the Cinderella type teams to get past, as they would wear down to a team with superior numbers 1-13 who really weren't all that good, but were Power 5..

One would end up with just as many more undeserving teams as there are now. It's the selection process that needs fixing. Until that happens, we are having the same conversation.

Somehow we'd still be "next four out".

What I have no interest in an expanded tournament that STILL manages to screw over good mid/low major teams while the committee suddenly starts talking themselves into why a team that finished 6-12 or 5-13 in a major conference deserves a bid.

My long standing opinion is that I am OK with expanding the tournament as long as (at least) one of the following two rules goes into effect

A) Teams must finish at least .500 in their conference to be eligible for an at large bid.
B) Automatic bids are now awarded for BOTH regular season and conference tournament champions.


That way, we'd stop seeing watered down teams get in, but might see some really good teams from small conerences get a chance to play a bit more.

I'm not a fan of expanded playoffs in football or basketball. No matter how big you make it, there will still be a bubble and still be teams who can claim to have been snubbed.
Especially football. Yay, let's have an even more prolonged process to find out who gets stomped by Georgia or Alabama.
It's too much for anyone with any pretense of being a student.

mathguy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 1:03 pm A) Teams must finish at least .500 in their conference to be eligible for an at large bid.
B) Automatic bids are now awarded for BOTH regular season and conference tournament champions.

I agree with #1. #2: The conference decides. The reason for a conference tourney is to determine the auto bid. Plus, make $$$$.

Someone start the should the NCAA Tournament be retracted thread.

You can say that interest in all sports is a function of gambling, but it's more true with this tournament than any other sporting event.

Go Vandy! wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 2:35 pm

mathguy wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 1:03 pm A) Teams must finish at least .500 in their conference to be eligible for an at large bid.
B) Automatic bids are now awarded for BOTH regular season and conference tournament champions.

I agree with #1. #2: The conference decides. The reason for a conference tourney is to determine the auto bid. Plus, make $$$$.

Fair. My main thing is that if we would expand the tournament, I want ways of giving bids to 14-4 small conference teams instead of 6-12 big conference teams.

As long as we do that, I'm flexible on the details.

YES, YES AND YES, it should be expanded!!!!!

The answer is not expanding the tournament but rather in eliminating all these automatic bids ! Take the top 64 teams and not just every Tom dick and Harry that wins an inferior conference championship or gets lucky and wins a conference championship tournament.

CoachH wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 6:17 pm The answer is not expanding the tournament but rather in eliminating all these automatic bids ! Take the top 64 teams and not just every Tom dick and Harry that wins an inferior conference championship or gets lucky and wins a conference championship tournament.

There’s always a small school that makes a magical run. They need their opportunity as well. The field is the appropriate amount of teams. We just need to be on the right side of the criteria, whatever it is. I think we were pretty deserving. Maybe the selection committee should be expanded.

no

CoachH wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 6:17 pm The answer is not expanding the tournament but rather in eliminating all these automatic bids ! Take the top 64 teams and not just every Tom dick and Harry that wins an inferior conference championship or gets lucky and wins a conference championship tournament.

are you talking about furman and princeton?

docdore wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 10:26 pm

CoachH wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 6:17 pm The answer is not expanding the tournament but rather in eliminating all these automatic bids ! Take the top 64 teams and not just every Tom dick and Harry that wins an inferior conference championship or gets lucky and wins a conference championship tournament.

are you talking about furman and princeton?

Add FDU to that.

FWIW, according to Wikipedia, the tourney has been expanded at least 12 times, from 8 teams from 1939 to 1950 to the current 68 in 2011. Wiki also says that in 2010, the NCAA considered expanding to 96 teams but didn't.

CoachH wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 6:17 pm The answer is not expanding the tournament but rather in eliminating all these automatic bids ! Take the top 64 teams and not just every Tom dick and Harry that wins an inferior conference championship or gets lucky and wins a conference championship tournament.

Sounds like a way to have a really boring tournament. I'd rather ut a cap on the number of teams from a single conference than tell 2/3 of the DI conferences that there is basically nothing they can do to win a national title.

Then we have college football ... which I don't watch.

mathguy wrote: ↑Sat Mar 18, 2023 10:26 am

CoachH wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 6:17 pm The answer is not expanding the tournament but rather in eliminating all these automatic bids ! Take the top 64 teams and not just every Tom dick and Harry that wins an inferior conference championship or gets lucky and wins a conference championship tournament.

Sounds like a way to have a really boring tournament. I'd rather ut a cap on the number of teams from a single conference than tell 2/3 of the DI conferences that there is basically nothing they can do to win a national title.

Then we have college football ... which I don't watch.

What would that mean for Farleigh Dickinson who knocked off Purdue or Furman who knocked off UVA?

Also, as mad as many of us were about VU being excluded, the committee still could use the NET to justify VU’s omission under that format.

EDIT: Almost forgot Princeton over Arizona! BTW, and more directly related to VU, Princeton and Yale shared the regular season Ivy title, but Yale was sent to the NIT by losing to Princeton in the conference title game. Yale was no slouch and that was a solid win for VU. Hope they can keep the momentum going shortly against Michigan!