2011 96 team field Bracketology

[ToupeeFearsTheBeard]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/bracket?id=5071629

Please just keep this a 64 team tourney..  at no Nebraska, CU and OU

[yosh]

in what fantasy world would ISU make the tourny next year?  Even if expanded to 128, there's no way.  They are going to be terrible.

[michigancat]

when you see the actual brackets, all the people whining about the change look ridiculous.  The final 64 teams will be so much better.

[kso_FAN]

when you see the actual brackets, all the people whining about the change look ridiculous.  The final 64 teams will be so much better.

This.  In 5 years this expansion will be looked at as a great change for the tornament.  JMHO.

[Pett]

Terrible, just terrible....

Changes all that is right in men's college basketball. Rewarding mediocrity...

[michigancat]

Terrible, just terrible....

Changes all that is right in men's college basketball. Rewarding mediocrity...

inorite! there are no mediocre or bad teams in a 64 team tournament!

[kstater]

How can he put UAB in the Cats' regional?  That's like the hardest 18 seed out there.

[WildCatzPhreak]

Terrible, just terrible....

Changes all that is right in men's college basketball. Rewarding mediocrity...

inorite! there are no mediocre or bad teams in a 64 team tournament!

You're right.  We should bring it back to 32 or even 16 teams.

[Sugar Dick]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/bracket?id=5071629

Please just keep this a 64 team tourney..  at no Nebraska, CU and OU

Hate it.  Cinderella schools from no-name conferences are what make the tourney great (if you don't count gambling), not early "quality" matchups b/w some sh*tty BCS school and Kentucky.  Why does anyone care if Kentucky, or the likes, blows out Holy Cross or NC State? 

Adding 32 teams to a tournament, that otherwise wouldn't make it, does not improve the quality.  It's common sense.  Anyone that doesn't understand this is either Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) or a democrat.

[1albatross]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/bracket?id=5071629

Please just keep this a 64 team tourney..  at no Nebraska, CU and OU

Hate it.  Cinderella schools from no-name conferences are what make the tourney great (if you don't count gambling), not early "quality" matchups b/w some sh*tty BCS school and Kentucky.  Why does anyone care if Kentucky, or the likes, blows out Holy Cross or NC State? 

Adding 32 teams to a tournament, that otherwise wouldn't make it, does not improve the quality.  It's common sense.  Anyone that doesn't understand this is either Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) or a democrat.

The difference is...

[Sugar Dick]

when you see the actual brackets, all the people whining about the change look ridiculous.  The final 64 teams will be so much better.

So the new first round isn't part of the tournament? 

Better argument would be regarding the number of auto bids, not ignoring the crapty round of 33-96. 

[kso_FAN]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/bracket?id=5071629

Please just keep this a 64 team tourney..   at no Nebraska, CU and OU

Hate it.  Cinderella schools from no-name conferences are what make the tourney great (if you don't count gambling), not early "quality" matchups b/w some sh*tty BCS school and Kentucky.  Why does anyone care if Kentucky, or the likes, blows out Holy Cross or NC State?  

Adding 32 teams to a tournament, that otherwise wouldn't make it, does not improve the quality.  It's common sense.  Anyone that doesn't understand this is either Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) or a democrat.

It all depends on the criteria for making it.  

There seems to be some confusion between "watering down the field" and "watering down the requirments to make the field".  Expanding the field in no way waters down the tournament, it just creates more games.  And as Rusty said, if anything, by the time you get to 64 teams, the field will actually be tougher than any 64 team field has ever been b/c you'll get rid of all those low-major teams that are terrible.  And you'll create more interest for more teams in the long run b/c more teams will get an opportunity.

Now, it is fair to say it does waterdown the regular season a bit, because now you can get in with a below .500 league record from big conferences.  And it changes the nature of the conference tournaments (and we really won't know the ramifications of this for awhile) and what "bubble teams" need to do to get in, mainly in that it shifts bubble teams in the Big 12 from the #6-7 teams to perhaps the #8-9 (or even lower) teams.  But there will still be intrigue for teams.  For example, if you are #3-5ish in the league, you're going to want to play your way into being one of the top 32 teams b/c you won't want to play that extra game in the dance and will want those extra 2 days off.

Expansion certainly won't make the tournament into some sort of terrible event.  Granted, some fans may not get quite as excited for those first 2 days, when seeds 9 through 24 play in the 4 regions, but once it gets to 64 teams everyone will be watching like always.  And within the first few years the change is made, its very likely a #1 seed will go down in their first round game, and more higher seeds may go down in general b/c they won't be playing those low-major league champs anymore.

I guess its all about how you look at it, and at this point it seems silly to complain b/c this is no longer an "if" question, its a "when" question.  IMHO, if its going to happen, lets get it going next year so we can all get adjusted to the change.

[Brock Landers]

when you see the actual brackets, all the people whining about the change look ridiculous.  The final 64 teams will be so much better.

How about just keeping it at 64 teams and doing a better job at getting a better quality of 64 teams to begin with?   

[michigancat]

Adding 32 teams to a tournament, that otherwise wouldn't make it, does not improve the quality.  It's common sense.  Anyone that doesn't understand this is either Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) or a democrat.

Of course it does...those 32 teams are better than 12-16 low-major automatic bids.  They just don't get in because their conference isn't easy enough.  A team like NC State as a 16 seed has a much better chance of beating a 1 seed than Arkansas Pine Bluff.  (see:  NC State beating Duke this year)

when you see the actual brackets, all the people whining about the change look ridiculous.  The final 64 teams will be so much better.

How about just keeping it at 64 teams and doing a better job at getting a better quality of 64 teams to begin with?   

I would have no problem keeping the tournament at 64, but cutting the number of Division 1 teams in half.  That would also improve the field, but it isn't being discussed by anyone but Huggins.

[kso_FAN]

I would have no problem keeping the tournament at 64, but cutting the number of Division 1 teams in half.  That would also improve the field, but it isn't being discussed by anyone but Huggins.

This wouldn't make more money, so its not an option.  And it would be a great solution, but it is not going to happen.  Too many teams like Pine-Bluff are still able to fund their entire athletic department b/c they play a ton of D1 guarantees and then split the league's NCAA money.  

Kietz loves this point too, FWIW.

[kitten_mittons]

I was against this until I started to think about it.  Now the bubble teams (who are usually worthy of a 11-14 seed) will get in instead of them having to watch 10-20 teams that they would blow out themselves play against the better tourney teams.  Seriously, would you have rather watched K-State vs. N Texas, or a game like a K-State vs. New Mexico or ole miss or something.  Will make the games more interesting.

[kso_FAN]

I was against this until I started to think about it.  Now the bubble teams (who are usually worthy of a 11-14 seed) will get in instead of them having to watch 10-20 teams that they would blow out themselves play against the better tourney teams.  Seriously, would you have rather watched K-State vs. N Texas, or a game like a K-State vs. New Mexico or ole miss or something.  Will make the games more interesting.

You won't hear anymore of this "watered down" talk once 1s (and even 2s through 4s) start falling b/c they are playing better teams in the 1st round.  Those teams will be clamoring for the old system b/c top seeds no longer will get auto wins against bad low-major champs.

[michigancat]

I was against this until I started to think about it.  Now the bubble teams (who are usually worthy of a 11-14 seed) will get in instead of them having to watch 10-20 teams that they would blow out themselves play against the better tourney teams.  Seriously, would you have rather watched K-State vs. N Texas, or a game like a K-State vs. New Mexico or ole miss or something.  Will make the games more interesting.

You won't hear anymore of this "watered down" talk once 1s (and even 2s through 4s) start falling b/c they are playing better teams in the 1st round.  Those teams will be clamoring for the old system b/c top seeds no longer will get auto wins against bad low-major champs.

This is exactly why people were against it on the phog.  They don't like that it's harder to win a championship.

[Sugar Dick]

Adding 32 teams to a tournament, that otherwise wouldn't make it, does not improve the quality.  It's common sense.  Anyone that doesn't understand this is either Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) or a democrat.

Of course it does...those 32 teams are better than 12-16 low-major automatic bids.  They just don't get in because their conference isn't easy enough.  A team like NC State as a 16 seed has a much better chance of beating a 1 seed than Arkansas Pine Bluff.  (see:  NC State beating Duke this year)

You mean "of course it doesn't".  Are you really trying to say the tournament will be higher quality by adding thirty-two "12-16 seeds"?

If you want to watch 16 mediocre games on a Tuesday night, watch the f*cking NIT.  The point of the tournament is to determine a National Champion, not create as many competitive 1st/2nd round games as possible.  Adding 32 teams does nothing but distort the point of the tournament, it's dumb and unfortunately a foregone conclusion.

The NCAA is completely tone deaf to its fan base, and the people it purports to serve.  

[kso_FAN]

Adding 32 teams to a tournament, that otherwise wouldn't make it, does not improve the quality.  It's common sense.  Anyone that doesn't understand this is either Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) or a democrat.

Of course it does...those 32 teams are better than 12-16 low-major automatic bids.  They just don't get in because their conference isn't easy enough.  A team like NC State as a 16 seed has a much better chance of beating a 1 seed than Arkansas Pine Bluff.  (see:  NC State beating Duke this year)

You mean "of course it doesn't".  Are you really trying to say the tournament will be higher quality by adding thirty-two "12-16 seeds"?

If you want to watch 16 mediocre games on a Tuesday night, watch the f*cking NIT.  The point of the tournament is to determine a National Champion, not create as many competitive 1st/2nd round games as possible.  Adding 32 teams does nothing but distort the point of the tournament, it's dumb and unfortunately a foregone conclusion.

The NCAA is completely tone deaf to its fan base, and the people it purports to serve.  

How will it not determine a national champion anymore?

[Sugar Dick]

I guess its all about how you look at it, and at this point it seems silly to complain b/c this is no longer an "if" question, its a "when" question.  IMHO, if its going to happen, lets get it going next year so we can all get adjusted to the change.

You could have saved yourself a lot of time by just typing this.  No need to rationalize a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) decision by the NCAA if you're just gonna roll with it.

BTW, we need an emoticon of a smiley bent over, with another smiley f*cking it from behind

[michigancat]

Adding 32 teams to a tournament, that otherwise wouldn't make it, does not improve the quality.  It's common sense.  Anyone that doesn't understand this is either Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) or a democrat.

Of course it does...those 32 teams are better than 12-16 low-major automatic bids.  They just don't get in because their conference isn't easy enough.  A team like NC State as a 16 seed has a much better chance of beating a 1 seed than Arkansas Pine Bluff.  (see:  NC State beating Duke this year)

You mean "of course it doesn't".  Are you really trying to say the tournament will be higher quality by adding thirty-two "12-16 seeds"?

Yeah, because they're better than the current 12-16 seeds.

If you want to watch 16 mediocre games on a Tuesday night, watch the f*cking NIT.  The point of the tournament is to determine a National Champion, not create as many competitive 1st/2nd round games as possible.  Adding 32 teams does nothing but distort the point of the tournament, it's dumb and unfortunately a foregone conclusion.

So you're all for a 16 or 32 team tournament?  Because let's not try to pretend there aren't 32 mediocre to bad teams in the current 64 team tournament.

[Sugar Dick]

Adding 32 teams to a tournament, that otherwise wouldn't make it, does not improve the quality.  It's common sense.  Anyone that doesn't understand this is either Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) or a democrat.

Of course it does...those 32 teams are better than 12-16 low-major automatic bids.  They just don't get in because their conference isn't easy enough.  A team like NC State as a 16 seed has a much better chance of beating a 1 seed than Arkansas Pine Bluff.  (see:  NC State beating Duke this year)

You mean "of course it doesn't".  Are you really trying to say the tournament will be higher quality by adding thirty-two "12-16 seeds"?

If you want to watch 16 mediocre games on a Tuesday night, watch the f*cking NIT.  The point of the tournament is to determine a National Champion, not create as many competitive 1st/2nd round games as possible.  Adding 32 teams does nothing but distort the point of the tournament, it's dumb and unfortunately a foregone conclusion.

The NCAA is completely tone deaf to its fan base, and the people it purports to serve.  

How will it not determine a national champion anymore?

Clever, but what's your argument for leaving out teams 97 through infinity?  Why not let DII, DIII, and JuCo's partake?  Adding 32 teams adds nothing but 16 bs games to an already long and grueling tournament.

How does adding 32 teams help determine a National Champion wise ass?

[kso_FAN]

So you're all for a 16 or 32 team tournament?  Because let's not try to pretend there aren't 32 mediocre to bad teams in the current 64 team tournament.

You could argue pretty successfully that the BCS does a much better job of actually matching up the "two best teams" for the NC on a regular basis than the 64 team field does on a year by year basis.  Going into the tournament no one would've matched Duke vs Butler as the 2 best teams in the field.  

Really, if you want a true national champion caliber field, 8 teams is probably about as far as you can go.  Maybe 16.  

[kso_FAN]

Clever, but what's your argument for leaving out teams 97 through infinity?  Why not let DII, DIII, and JuCo's partake?  Adding 32 teams adds nothing but 16 bs games to an already long and grueling tournament.

How does adding 32 teams help determine a National Champion wise ass?

Please don't poster intimidate me.  It won't work.