I thought the Gophers are not in the mix for the Tournament. They have no top wins. The problem is many others teams are ahead. Gophers would have to shock the nation in the Big Ten tournament.
NIT bubble team.
NIT bubble team.
I thought the Gophers are not in the mix for the Tournament. They have no top wins. The problem is many others teams are ahead. Gophers would have to shock the nation in the Big Ten tournament.
NIT bubble team.
You are ill informed.I can't fathom how a 23-12 (11-9) Big Ten team wouldn't make the tournament.. that's ridiculous. The non-conference happened 3-4 months ago.
We got a shot and that’s more than any of us could have hoped for at the beginning of the yearAt this point we aren't. We may be able to get an at-large if we win out until the BTT final. But even then, I'm not so sure.
When the NCAA expands to a 96 Team Field in the near future, a team like this years Gophers will be a lock to make the Dance.I thought the Gophers are not in the mix for the Tournament. They have no top wins. The problem is many others teams are ahead. Gophers would have to shock the nation in the Big Ten tournament.
NIT bubble team.
Please no. The morons in charge should know that not only will that make the regular season a joke, but it will kill half the casual interest in March Madness.When the NCAA expands to a 96 Team Field in the near future, a team like this years Gophers will be a lock to make the Dance.
I think it's a near certainty.Please no. The morons in charge should know that not only will that make the regular season a joke, but it will kill half the casual interest in March Madness.
The monons in charge care only about $$$ so if they think they can make money off an expanded tournament they will do it in a heartbeat.Please no. The morons in charge should know that not only will that make the regular season a joke, but it will kill half the casual interest in March Madness.
If they do, hopefully they reverse course after the ratings tank.I think it's a near certainty.
16 extra games watched by half as many people won't make more $$ in the long run.The monons in charge care only about $$$ so if they think they can make money off an expanded tournament they will do it in a heartbeat.
By my math an expansion of 68 to 96 would actually be 28 more games, not 16.16 extra games watched by half as many people won't make more $$ in the long run.
I completely agree, but has there ever been a Post-season/Playoff in any big time sport (NCAA or Pro) that has ever reversed course and reduced teams after expanding?If they do, hopefully they reverse course after the ratings tank.
Probably not. But I'm not aware of any major sports increasing their play-off field by 50% in one swoop in recent decades either. It would be a monumentally stupid decision. They floated it in like 2010 and got rightfully mocked for it and backed down. That should have stayed the end of it.I completely agree, but has there ever been a Post-season/Playoff in any big time sport (NCAA or Pro) that has ever reversed course and reduced teams after expanding?
Maybe TV/Streaming partners have indicated they have more of an appetite for it? Just guessing, but from listening to the Dan Patrick Show (and he is firmly against it as well), he seems resigned to the fact it will likely happen.Probably not. But I'm not aware of any major sports increasing their play-off field by 50% in one swoop in recent decades either. It would be a monumentally stupid decision. They floated it in like 2010 and got rightfully mocked for it and backed down. That should have stayed the end of it.
If it's all about $$, make the NCAA and NIT a package deal and make them bid for both together. If you want to expand something, make both the NCAA and NIT 64 teams.Maybe TV/Streaming partners have indicated they have more of an appetite for it? Just guessing, but from listening to the Dan Patrick Show (and he is firmly against it as well), he seems resigned to the fact it will likely happen.
Personally, I am not sure why they don't taper it more and only go to 72 with just a few more games in Dayton.
I think part of the expansion justification is that there are now 351 D1 programs. In 2010 it was barely over 300.
Maybe TV/Streaming partners have indicated they have more of an appetite for it? Just guessing, but from listening to the Dan Patrick Show (and he is firmly against it as well), he seems resigned to the fact it will likely happen.
Personally, I am not sure why they don't taper it more and only go to 72 with just a few more games in Dayton.
I think part of the expansion justification is that there are now 351 D1 programs. In 2010 it was barely over 300.
Maybe someone at the NCAA was reading my post today?!?If it's all about $$, make the NCAA and NIT a package deal and make them bid for both together. If you want to expand something, make both the NCAA and NIT 64 teams.
Maybe someone at the NCAA was reading my post today?!?
This article says an expansion to 72 or 76 teams is more likely.
Men’s NCAA Tournament expansion likely would not go beyond 76 teams: Source
"There is little to no appetite for 96 teams, or really even 80," said a college administrator who was briefed on the conversations.theathletic.com
Voila.
They don't, but I have to imagine that the competitive losses to Purdue and Illinois have to mean something, but not a difference-maker. If they can the last 2 in this season and at least 2 in the BTT, we'd definitely have a good shotI thought the Gophers are not in the mix for the Tournament. They have no top wins. The problem is many others teams are ahead. Gophers would have to shock the nation in the Big Ten tournament.
NIT bubble team.
64 would be better, but oh well.Less is more. 72-76 would be ideal.
How about zero expansion?Maybe someone at the NCAA was reading my post today?!?
This article says an expansion to 72 or 76 teams is more likely.
Men’s NCAA Tournament expansion likely would not go beyond 76 teams: Source
"There is little to no appetite for 96 teams, or really even 80," said a college administrator who was briefed on the conversations.theathletic.com
Voila.
Because they aren't part of the Bracket pools.The one thing I do like about the First Four is that it doesn't feel like the tournament yet. You need to win that game to actually get in the tournament. That's how I think of it.
64 would be even less and even more ideal.Less is more. 72-76 would be ideal.
I have stayed home from school/work to watch the first round every year since 1994... But I have never watched a single playin game.Because they aren't part of the Bracket pools.
I usually watch the At Large matchup each night or at least DVR then zip through it. Nothing better to do.I have stayed home from school/work to watch the first round every year since 1994... But I have never watched a single playin game.
I don't like how they make the automatic qualifiers play the play in games. They all need to part of the Thursday/ Friday mayhem.The one thing I do like about the First Four is that it doesn't feel like the tournament yet. You need to win that game to actually get in the tournament. That's how I think of it.
At least Fairleigh Dickinson proved that a Winner in the Auto-Qualifiers part of the First Four can do damage in the Round of 64 last year, with their upset of Purdue.I don't like how they make the automatic qualifiers play the play in games. They all need to part of the Thursday/ Friday mayhem.