Comments on: 96 Teams: NCAA Confirms “Continuous Dialogue”

By: Mercury

Mercury — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 22:02:48 +0000

People don’t like change. This isn’t that big of a change if you look at it as a merging of the NCAA and the NIT tournaments. 96 teams instead of 97. Big deal. And all the games count. And teams will still play hard to earn one of the 32 first round byes.
I’m all for it.

By: Senseless

Senseless — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:57:15 +0000

Why not just let all the community colleges in as well…that way everyone has a shot….

By: Little Guys

Little Guys — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 15:14:11 +0000

This is nothing but a money grab plain and simple. The mid-major teams have begun to supplant the bottom dwellers of the major confrences and their 19 - 14 records. The big confrences are getting pressure from their schools to get them into the tourney so they can get their money.
This is the equivalent of everyone gets a trophy like we now have in Little League and such. You are supposed to EARN your way in not get in because you play in the Big East, Big Ten, ACC or SEC. It all jsut becomes one less thing to watch like the NHL, NBA and MLB.

By: vggn

vggn — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 13:07:46 +0000

Trying to figure out the brackets would be a huge convoluted process (sort of like the playoffs explanations in the movie BASEKETBALL). The only reason they’re considering this is $$$$$$$$$, the NCAA sees more $$$$ in this that’s all!
If they go to 96 your still going to have teams that lose out on selection, only now it will be teams with sub .500 records!
Greedy Slobs if you ask me

By: Hedgeplague

Hedgeplague — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 12:18:30 +0000

I like it. the number of 1A teams is A LOT more than back when the tourney went to 64. Of the first 32 games 8 are typically walkovers. The teams that won their play-in game would be “prime time” worthy and I think you would actually see a 1 beat in the first round once in awhile.

It also gives lesser programs a chance to have a “win”. Many of these programs will NEVER beat a one seed, but a 24 vs a 9 game would be much more likely.

Tues Thurs Sat
Wed Fri Sun

to start the tourney wouldnt be bad.

Those who worry about the academics should recognize that for 95% of the time the bottom 64 teams will not get out of the first week, rendering their “lost time” insignificant. Once every blue moon you may get a flyer that goes to the final four, but hey, what will the kids remember, that lost week of physics or going to the national championship.

By: Bar None

Bar None — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 05:50:29 +0000

It’s hockey all over again. i.e. we’re just starting the “second hockey season”…..

By: Johnny Hildo

Johnny Hildo — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 05:08:59 +0000

If they’re going to d thisi, why not just let everyone in, get rid of the regular season, and make it one big single elimination tourney?

By: That Guy

That Guy — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 05:07:07 +0000

I used to watch a lot of college football, but every year I find myself watching less and less. This year I probably watched parts of 5 or 6 bowl games and a quarter of the “national championship” game. It’s a joke.

One of my favorite sporting events is the NCAA tourney. I take off the first Thursday and Friday so I can sit at the bar watching all day. If this money grubbing plan goes through I probably wont watch much of the tourney just like the bowls. Leave it to the NCAA to mess up one of the best things they have going.

By: Professor Biggum Saks

Professor Biggum Saks — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:56:43 +0000

This Stinks has it right. Currently, teams jockey and play hard in the regular season to get into the tournament, especially if the conference doesn’t have conference tourney to get into the “Big Dance.” The NCAA should go back to 64 teams and eliminate the stupid play-in game, which is ridiculous.

Frankly, I wish all conferences would get rid of the conference tourney and let the regular season conference record determine automatic bids like the Ivy League still does. That would trally make every conference game count and you wouldn’t get the 11 - 15 team that goes on a three game hot streak and gets the 16 seed (and subsequently slaughtered in the opening game).

Sixty-four teams is a good number that allows a fair number of bubble teams in without saturating the quality of the field. Why does everyone want to mess up what should be an easy formula for success?

By: This stinks

This stinks — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 03:50:15 +0000

The first two rounds rule and this would ruin it. The regular season would mean even LESS than it does now. I can see the tournament popularity decreasing with this move.