Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

NCAA Tournament Expands to 76 teams

cykadelic2 said:
Turner/CBS actually don't want to pay that much more for the extra games and expansion to 76 was in some jeopardy to cover the NCAA's additional expenses of another venue for the additional games.

Based on what I read, the NCAA is now going to allow beer/alcohol sponsorships for the tournament to cover those additional expenses.
Click to expand...
I'm not a fan of growing the tournament. And I typically don't watch the play-in games. But I don't understand why the NCAA insists on "Dayton" type structure. It's not fan friendly for those teams.

Why not just add games at the regional sites and have those teams play either a T/Th/S or W/Fr/Su schedules.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aeroclone, NENick and cyclones500
Wish they could sell the play-in tournament separate to the real tournament. Amazon, Disney+, YouTube, Peacock, or Apple TV would eat this up as a stand-alone bundle.

Or... maybe the new Skydance/Paramount/WBD deal needs live content on HBO Max
 
isucy86 said:
I'm not a fan of growing the tournament. And I typically don't watch the play-in games. But I don't understand why the NCAA insists on "Dayton" type structure. It's not fan friendly for those teams.

Why not just add games at the regional sites and have those teams play either a T/Th/S or W/Fr/Su schedules.
Click to expand...
It would cost a fortune to book those buildings for two extra days plus with the vast majority of those buildings being NBA/NHL venues it pushes the scheduling pain up the chain.
 
1UNI2ISU said:
It would cost a fortune to book those buildings for two extra days plus with the vast majority of those buildings being NBA/NHL venues it pushes the scheduling pain up the chain.
Click to expand...
True in the practical sense, although in principle @isucy86 idea makes more sense.

I guess an argument for maintaining Dayon + adding additional more-westerly site (perhaps rotational season to season?) is it's "travel punishment" for teams that aren't good enough to be in the top 64.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 1UNI2ISU
isucy86 said:
I'm not a fan of growing the tournament. And I typically don't watch the play-in games. But I don't understand why the NCAA insists on "Dayton" type structure. It's not fan friendly for those teams.

Why not just add games at the regional sites and have those teams play either a T/Th/S or W/Fr/Su schedules.
Click to expand...
Dayton has had great attendance over the years for those games. I am guessing Vegas ends up as the 2nd venue at one of the smaller arenas in town (e.g. where the WCC plays their conference tourney) and would also perhaps have good attendance as well.

Those TUES/WED games at regional sites would be poorly attended.
 
cykadelic2 said:
Dayton has had great attendance over the years for those games. I am guessing Vegas ends up as the 2nd venue at one of the smaller arenas in town (e.g. where the WCC plays their conference tourney) and would also perhaps have good attendance as well.

Those TUES/WED games at regional sites would be poorly attended.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It's going to be Vegas and it'll either be Michelob Ultra Arena or The Orleans. I wish they'd go to Albuquerque, they'd embrace it big time and The Pit would be a great venue.

The NCAA is so predictable on this stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cy83ag and NWICY
1UNI2ISU said:
It would cost a fortune to book those buildings for two extra days plus with the vast majority of those buildings being NBA/NHL venues it pushes the scheduling pain up the chain.
Click to expand...

Think it would also be about the access to the building for the other teams - practice and media time take a lot of the availability for the eight teams at that location. You could probably work around it but you would need to make sure that the seedings matched so there were no more than 2 play-in teams at each site, which could affect the real bracket.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: NENick
cytor said:
The move to 76 teams was by design.... they wanted the entire B1G and SEC to get in. It's all about the $.
Click to expand...
At this point, the $EC and B1G are like the days of having to cater to Texa$ and OU in the B12. Much like those days, it is getting more and more frustrating having to deal with those two entities. They’re ruining the sport all to satisfy their own greed.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: NWICY
1TwistedCyclone said:
San Diego St and New Mexico, one or the other, probably deserved to be in the tournament this season. Otherwise that is quite the pile of underacheiving and mediocre teams. Indiana flamed out harder than anyone down the strech.
Click to expand...
I agree. I watched some of their games and those two were pretty good. I’m not a fan of an auburn team that was barely over .500 getting in. And I’d say that if it was ISU. If you are letting more mid majors in, I’d be ok with it. Mid tier P5s, I don’t think deserve it.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: NWICY, cyguy9320 and 1TwistedCyclone
Along with increase in bids, bubble debate will become more of a footnote.

Argument about some last-in/first-out will continue, but the stakes are even lower. Teams that are in 10-seed range will be a lock probably two weeks before end of regular season.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1UNI2ISU
The expand-to-76 as it's structured is going to make it "easy" to grow to 80, when NCAA determines how wildly successful the move is.

Two additional teams in the 12 play-in slots.

Two additional pushed down to the 15 seed line.

That'll be:
* 8 teams (4 games) opening round on 11 line. (As it is with 76)
* 8 teams (4 games) opening round on 12 line.
* 8 teams (4 games) opening round on 15 line.
* 8 teams (4 games) opening round on 16 line. (As it is with 76)

I guess that's neat-o from a balance standpoint, but doesn't erase how extremely unnecessary all of this is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom