Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Why the NCAA Tournament should have expanded to 96 teams

1) Dissolve the NIT. The NIT is a useless tournament that is a money drain, so merging this with the NCAA tournament to make it 96 makes more financial sense. Let the pay for play tournaments fill that void.

2) A 96 team tournament would lead to fewer upsets of top teams. In a 96 team field the top 4 seeds in each bracket would get a 1st round bye. People talk about loving the upset, but don't tune in if the upset goes too far (unless money is on the line). Problem mostly solved here.

3) More smaller conference schools get to play. A team that wins their regular season title, but loses in their conference tournament would get a chance to play in the NCAAs.

Ideally, I'd like the NCAAT to prohibit teams with non winning conference records from participating. Since that won't happen that's why I'm fine with 96 teams. Don't give me that, "This is a tougher conference" crap as I believe you should have a winning record in conference to get an at large bid.

Expanding to 96 in theory gives 28 more teams a chance to win it all... but in reality 75% of the field don't have a chance to do so. The so called "watering down" theory doesn't apply when we already have teams in the tourney with sub .500 conference records.

Enjoy :)

No comments: