Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

72 teams?

Discussion in 'Nuttin' but Net' started by ArtVandelay, May 17, 2018.

  1. ArtVandelay

    ArtVandelay GC Hall of Fame

    5,474
    758
    248
    Dec 19, 2011
    South Florida
  2. Efawcett7

    Efawcett7 Eric Fawcett GC Columnist VIP Member

    There's a lot of ways to look at this but honestly, having more games in the NCAA Tournament appeals to the true fan in me haha
     
  3. GatorPlanet

    GatorPlanet GC Hall of Fame

    6,183
    448
    313
    Apr 15, 2007
    Maitland, FL
    I'm not opposed, but I hope this is the max.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  4. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    5,104
    695
    463
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    I was trying to find a negative but I'm with you. More March Madness please
     
  5. Efawcett7

    Efawcett7 Eric Fawcett GC Columnist VIP Member

    Any more would be getting a little too watered down, so I definitely agree with you
     
  6. Efawcett7

    Efawcett7 Eric Fawcett GC Columnist VIP Member

    Totally. Like I know to a lot of people there is an element of purity and what's traditional and they don't want to water it down and make it so that more mediocre teams get in but hey, 4 more games would be awesome for the fans. The play in games never get the attention they deserve but they are usually incredible games because they are evenly matched teams playing desperation basketball.
     
  7. akaGatorhoops

    akaGatorhoops GC Columnist VIP Member

    13,612
    1,729
    908
    Apr 10, 2007
    As much I love MM, this is diluting the regular season.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  8. INGATORSWETRUST

    INGATORSWETRUST GC Hall of Fame

    16,043
    544
    653
    Apr 8, 2007
    Florida
    Eliminates controversy and most deserving teams would then be in the tourney. NIT becomes irrelevant
     
  9. oragator1

    oragator1 Premium Member

    14,009
    1,325
    948
    Apr 3, 2007
    Now team 73 will scream for their bid. Nothing changes other than a few more power 5 teams making money for their leagues and coaches saving their jobs.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  10. KronoGator

    KronoGator GC Hall of Fame

    7,054
    247
    373
    Apr 10, 2007
    The more the merrier.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  11. gatorbogey

    gatorbogey Premium Member

    39,369
    2,589
    1,548
    Apr 3, 2007
    s. e. florida
    The play in games are intriguing. And typically one of the winners does advance.
     
  12. GatorPlanet

    GatorPlanet GC Hall of Fame

    6,183
    448
    313
    Apr 15, 2007
    Maitland, FL
    "Becomes?"
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. cincinnatigator

    cincinnatigator GC Hall of Fame

    2,882
    785
    393
    Mar 5, 2017
    I'm on the conservative side on this one. Don't dilute the brand. I'm looking at the big picture. This proposal is just a baby step toward more expansion, that's why I'm against adding any more. They went from 64 to 68. Now it's 68 to 72. Next it will be 72 to __, and so on. It's just a way to add more power conference teams, it's not like they'd be adding any Cinderella teams. These power conferences want to milk as much money out of this tournament as possible. The last thing on their minds is the quality of the tournament. Think Oreo cares about their quality anymore when they're making pina colada and kettle corn oreos? These high-up people are in the business of making money, think they're making proposals because adding more teams is fun?
     
  14. themistocles

    themistocles VIP Member

    13,983
    673
    593
    Apr 8, 2007
    Temple Terrace, FL
    Personally I feel that any team having a record above 50% through conference tournaments should be included in the playoffs. I will never forget when it was limited to a mere 16 teams just how many terrific teams were excluded from any chance of competing for the Title and gaining prestige from going through the first round.

    Admittedly, this has considerably weakened the NIT, which in the days of 16 teams was almost as good to win as the NCAA, but even today, that's still a success because by the final rounds, you're not competing against Cheesepuffs in your games (should I have said Creampuffs?).
     
  15. Efawcett7

    Efawcett7 Eric Fawcett GC Columnist VIP Member

    I know there is absolutely no way this would actually happen, but it would be so much fun if they expanded it from 68 to 72 but made it so that those 4 spots went exclusively to mid and low majors. As you mentioned, if they just added 4 teams it would almost always go to power conference teams.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. cincinnatigator

    cincinnatigator GC Hall of Fame

    2,882
    785
    393
    Mar 5, 2017
    I could get behind them adding 4 mid-low majors if they promise to stop adding more teams after that. I think it's ridiculous that teams like Vermont (who won 27 games and nearly beat Kentucky in Rupp) lose out on the tournament just because they lost in their tournament final (to a red hot UMBC team who then beat #1 Virginia). If you're regular season champs in your conference, you should be an automatic bid in the tournament.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  17. WESGATORS

    WESGATORS Moderator VIP Member

    22,854
    1,179
    1,098
    Apr 3, 2007
    I honestly don't care what they do any more. The tournament starts at 64, to me. The play-in games are no more or less interesting than the conference tournament championship games of 1-bid conferences. But I'm never going to fill out a bracket with more than 64 teams. Only change I'd make is to make all the play-in games only the at-large teams. Nothing worse than seeing a conference tournament champ celebrate making the tournament only to get relegated to a play-in game.

    Go GATORS!
    ,WESGATORS
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. WESGATORS

    WESGATORS Moderator VIP Member

    22,854
    1,179
    1,098
    Apr 3, 2007
    That's up to each conference. It would also defeat the purpose of the conference tournament. What would UMBC have been playing for in the conference tournament if there was no auto-bid at the end of it? Or are you saying invite regular season champ AND tournament champ...that's for when we expand to 128, I guess.

    Go GATORS!
    ,WESGATORS
     
  19. cincinnatigator

    cincinnatigator GC Hall of Fame

    2,882
    785
    393
    Mar 5, 2017
    It doesn't defeat the purpose of the conference tournament, you'd still have the champ of the tournament getting the invite. It just rewards the team who was regular season champs of each conference. UMBC wasn't the regular season champs of their conference, Albany was. And it wouldn't take that many extra spots to do this as most regular season conference champs get in the tournament anyway. The committee would never do this though, they're thinking about the big schools who missed out like USC.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. grant1

    grant1 GC Hall of Fame

    2,578
    152
    238
    Nov 10, 2009
    Don't add any and cut out the play-in games.
     
    • Like Like x 1