• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

68 Team Tourney instead of 64, 65 or 96

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
matttank;1686731; said:
First off, I am in agreement with all who hate the idea of expanding to 96 (which is to say, everyone). It obviously waters down the tournament and is completely unnecessary as it relates to accomplishing the real goal of the tourney: crowning a worthy and deserving national champion. Heck, the 65 team field is already too large (seeing as an 8 seed is the highest seed to win, 32 teams would work), but since they give automatic bids to all 31 conferences-including those that have no chance of producing a NC year to year-they had to go to 65 to provide a balanced tournament capable of including all championship caliber teams.
Click to expand...

Not everyone hates it. I'm in favor of it because it means more basketball to watch. Sure, it waters down the tourney, but it's already ridiculously watered down, so screw it.

I'd be in favor of a 256 team field if it means more win-or-go-home basketball.
 
Upvote 0
jwinslow;1686735; said:
The big dance already includes hundreds via league tourneys. The elimination game just comes sooner for the unworthy squads.
Click to expand...

And? Add more teams to the real tournament on top of the league tourneys and I still get to watch more basketball, so......still a win for me. :)
 
Upvote 0
TheRob8801;1686924; said:
How so?
Click to expand...

Well, the highest seed to ever win it (or even make the final game) is an 8-seed. And that's happened once in 25 years, so I'd say it's a statistical anomaly. At least half the teams, based on historical records, have no chance to win the thing. Not to say it couldn't or won't happen, but the one time it does? That's the exception to the rule.

Does anyone really want to argue that Minnesota deserved (I fully acknowledge the subjectivity of that term) a shot at playing for the national championship this season?

And please don't take this as me complaining about the number of teams. I don't mind that a large number of teams in the field have almost no shot at the championship. I enjoy all the games, the upsets, the cinderalla teams (my word, how I hate that term! :lol:)
 
Upvote 0
As a fan, I wouldn't want to see any fewer teams...but I also wouldn't want to see any more...

Just out of curiosity. Do you see a 32 team bracket, like the NIT currently sports, a better representative group of teams that legitimately have a shot at the title?

Or would it be fewer teams? How would you do it if you weren't interested in watching basketball but focused on creating the best possible tournament?
 
Upvote 0
Bucky Katt;1686971; said:
Well, the highest seed to ever win it (or even make the final game) is an 8-seed. And that's happened once in 25 years, so I'd say it's a statistical anomaly. At least half the teams, based on historical records, have no chance to win the thing. Not to say it couldn't or won't happen, but the one time it does? That's the exception to the rule.

Does anyone really want to argue that Minnesota deserved (I fully acknowledge the subjectivity of that term) a shot at playing for the national championship this season?

And please don't take this as me complaining about the number of teams. I don't mind that a large number of teams in the field have almost no shot at the championship. I enjoy all the games, the upsets, the cinderalla teams (my word, how I hate that term! :lol:)
Click to expand...

Statistical pwnage.
 
Upvote 0
College basketball has a 64-team (65) tournament. College football has a two-team tournament. Neither one needs to expand.

OH10;1685516; said:
And yet its still better than having the media and coaches select two teams to play for the national championship.
Click to expand...

Who do you think selects the field for basketball's championship event? It's ADs and conference commissioners! How is that any better than coaches, media or computers? At least in college football they have the decency to do all of their politicking and dealmaking in the media over the course of an entire season instead of sequestering ten random power brokers in a hotel conference room for a week.
 
Upvote 0
TheRob8801;1686982; said:
As a fan, I wouldn't want to see any fewer teams...but I also wouldn't want to see any more...

Just out of curiosity. Do you see a 32 team bracket, like the NIT currently sports, a better representative group of teams that legitimately have a shot at the title?

Or would it be fewer teams? How would you do it if you weren't interested in watching basketball but focused on creating the best possible tournament?
Click to expand...

I think 16 would be sufficient to encompass the teams that had played the best over the course of the season and would be "deserving" of a chance. Of course, that's just my opinion of who is deserving, and everyone will have a different opinion. (I would hate selection sunday for this tournament. The whining from fans and coaches of teams 17-25 would drive me nuts, although they'd have a LOT more to gripe about than teams 66-70 in the current format. :lol:)

32 would be a bit watery if the tournament was just about gathering the best of the best to play for a title, but if the stated goal was to include any team that had a legitimate chance at winning the thing, that would be a much better number than 16.

(Both of those would be predicated on getting rid of the silly conference tournament auto-bids, of course)

The cream rises to the top whether it's a 10 gallon jug or a 50 gallon jug. Adding 31 more teams doesn't make the tournament better or more fair....most of them will be gone in the first 4 days...but, IMO, it doesn't hurt the tourney, either. So go for it.
 
Upvote 0
So in either scenario you'd just take the top 16 or 32 teams in the polls?

For legitimacy's sake, there'd have to a poll that most consider the most accurate assessment of a team as a whole.

Would that be something like the AP or something like the KenPom ratings?

IIRC, the KenPom ratings had Butler just outside of the top 16 before the tourney started. I'm not sure where they were in the AP.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top