WWW.PANTHERNATION.COM
GO PANTHERS!
welcome

Welcome to the best UNI Panther forum on the net!

Become a PN Supporting Member! Get exclusive access to the Panther Den forum and more. Click here for info.

30-minute show exclusively highlighting UNI Athletics. Click here for info.

  • You need to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
  • To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the help page by clicking this link.
  • If you have any questions please use the Contact Us form.
This website is not affiliated with the University of Northern Iowa or the UNI Panther Athletic Program.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Time to Expand the Tournament

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Time to Expand the Tournament

    As I drift back and forth between Panther Nation and The Blue Jay Cafe, the most noticable difference is the concern that Creighton has about them on the bubble as compared to our determining where we will be playing.

    Most of their threads are to do with comparisons of SOS, RPI and wins over top 100's. They are lamenting the fact that Creighton can't get home and home dates with major conference teams.

    Here's a suggestion from Bob Knight that he offered on ESPN's Game Day this past Saturday. Knight said "It is time to expand to 128 teams." It came during an ending segment and you could tell it caught some of the others by surprise. They didn't have time to respond to the 128 team field.

    My take on his idea is with today's economy this may be the time to double the teams--one extra round of games with double the number of teams should increase the revenue for the tournament dramatically. The big schools would get everyone with a winning record in and the mid major conferences would become at least 2 bid leagues. The big schools could afford to play teams that they would not normally in places they would not normally play. Makes too much sense to me. School time lost? Half the field goes home after the first night. It would be the end of the NIT.

    I'm sure it has been discussed before, but coming from Bob Knight it may have the spokesperson it has needed. Remember the 65 best teams do not presently get into the tournament. Thirty autos get in and then based on a subjective decision by a committee the 30 plus at larges are invited.

  • #2
    Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

    I strongly strongly strongly disagree. How many total NCAA teams are there? 300 some? So nearly one-third of all the college basketball teams in the country are going to be guaranteed postseason regardless? And college basketball postseason isn't like college football. We're not talking meaningless bowl games. We're talking a legitimate shot at a national title.

    Do you realize how many UNDESERVING teams will be chosen to go to a tournament with a field of 128 teams? We're talking another 64 teams. What's the point of a regular season if one-third of the country is going to make the postseason anyways? Usually there are a good handful of teams left out that people could make a case for. Not a whole other tournament's worth of teams! I think it would cheapen the tournament's value.

    Instead, I think the tournament selection committee just needs to do a better job of including mid-major programs that deserve to be in the field of play. I don't think mid-majors need to be rewarded just for the sake of being rewarded. But when they've earned it, give it to 'em! Stop rewarding mediocre BCS schools that finish in the top 7 of their conference and reward teams like Creighton and St. Mary's for having a great overall season.

    I hear a LOT more talk about this this year than I have in year's past, especially coming from guys like Gottlieb at ESPN. I hope the selection committee doesn't brush too quickly over teams like Creighton and St. Mary's, because they've done about as well as they possibly could, and it's a shame to say they don't deserve a spot over the 9-10 place team from the Big East or the 8-9 place team from the Big Ten.

    A field of 128 teams, in my opinion, would be a HORRIBLE idea. Sorry, not trying to rain on your parade. Just my opinion.
    Last edited by jman2004; 03-10-2009, 10:28 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

      Terrible idea.
      UNI isn't exactly splitting atoms in terms of academics. -run&blade

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

        Originally posted by northwest iowa panther View Post
        As I drift back and forth between Panther Nation and The Blue Jay Cafe, the most noticable difference is the concern that Creighton has about them on the bubble as compared to our determining where we will be playing.

        Most of their threads are to do with comparisons of SOS, RPI and wins over top 100's. They are lamenting the fact that Creighton can't get home and home dates with major conference teams.

        Here's a suggestion from Bob Knight that he offered on ESPN's Game Day this past Saturday. Knight said "It is time to expand to 128 teams." It came during an ending segment and you could tell it caught some of the others by surprise. They didn't have time to respond to the 128 team field.

        My take on his idea is with today's economy this may be the time to double the teams--one extra round of games with double the number of teams should increase the revenue for the tournament dramatically. The big schools would get everyone with a winning record in and the mid major conferences would become at least 2 bid leagues. The big schools could afford to play teams that they would not normally in places they would not normally play. Makes too much sense to me. School time lost? Half the field goes home after the first night. It would be the end of the NIT.

        I'm sure it has been discussed before, but coming from Bob Knight it may have the spokesperson it has needed. Remember the 65 best teams do not presently get into the tournament. Thirty autos get in and then based on a subjective decision by a committee the 30 plus at larges are invited.
        I'm not certain that it would encourage teams from the BCS conferences to play teams like Creighton in Omaha. Those are still tough games that can hurt their NCAA Tournament seedings.

        The best chance mid-majors have to play BCS conference teams are through the exempt tournaments. Maybe relaxing the number of games a team is allowed to play in exempt tournaments from 29 regular season, or 27 regular season plus up to 4 games in a multi-team event to 27 + 5 or 6, could generate an additional one or two more neutral court games for mid-majors against BCS conference schools.

        I agree with what has been outlined by a couple others against a 128 team tournament. The idea that a Big Ten team can go 16-14 lets say with a 4-12 conference record and make the NCAA Tournament isn't the direction to go.

        Maybe Bobby's proposing this to help Pat Knight have a better chance to make the NCAA Tournament
        Last edited by DWadle1983; 03-10-2009, 10:49 AM.
        "Lot of people talked about Ohio State or Georgetown or Michigan State or whoever, [or] Maryland in our bracket. When the brackets came out, the first team I looked at was Northern Iowa," Kansas Coach Bill Self.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

          Originally posted by jman2004 View Post
          What's the point of a regular season if one-third of the country is going to make the postseason anyways?
          Isn't the regular season kind of pointless anyway, with conference tournaments and all?


          Originally posted by jman2004 View Post
          Stop rewarding mediocre BCS schools that finish in the top 7 of their conference and reward teams like Creighton and St. Mary's for having a great overall season.
          And what if those mediocre BCS schools had beaten those "great mid-majors" during the regular season?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

            I think it would ultimately cheapen it. If they ever expanded, i think you'd see 96 well before 128 but even that is too many, IMO.

            That said... I'm sick of all this talk about teams like PSU, etc over a Creighton. RPI clearly only matters when we're talking BCS schools.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

              Expanding the tournament would lead the to the equivalent of the Meineke Car Care Bowl. There is already the NIT (32 teams) and the other tournament, whatever its name (16 teams). That's 113 teams playing after conference play is done out of 347, or approximately 1/3 of all teams in DIV 1.

              By contrast there are currently 126 FCS football teams (per wikipedia) and 16 get invited, soon expanding to 20.
              Last edited by Trapped in California; 03-10-2009, 11:06 AM. Reason: FCS facts

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

                Originally posted by JayJ79 View Post
                Isn't the regular season kind of pointless anyway, with conference tournaments and all?
                For many mid-major schools, sure. But for schools in the 6 BCS conferences and even the next handful of strong conferences after them, certainly not.

                Originally posted by JayJ79 View Post
                And what if those mediocre BCS schools had beaten those "great mid-majors" during the regular season?
                Again, it depends on how you look at the end of the year tournament. I look at it as a chance for the selection committee to reward teams that have had great seasons.

                For example, Nebraska beat Creighton. However Nebraska went on to play below average basketball in the Big 12 whereas Creighton played a great season in The Valley. I hope by your quote above you're not implying that Nebraska would have an argument over Creighton?

                Providence for example. Providence has had a very up and down season. They've hung with a very difficult Big East conference and can make an argument for the tournament. But Providence has done NOTHING on the road. They haven't beaten anyone of substance on the road. And for every good win you can find on their resume, they have an equally as bad loss to go with it. Probably even more bad than good. How does a team like that DESERVE a spot in the tournament over a team like Creighton, who has played consistently good basketball for most of the length of the season?

                I realize I got off topic. But you pulled my quotes out of a larger post of mine that I made in reference to the idea of a 128 team tournament. Are you against a 128 team field or are you for one? I guess after my rambling, I really don't understand why you pulled these quotes out (pulling me off topic) or what exactly you're looking for . . .

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

                  The Onion brings you all of the latest news, stories, photos, videos and more from America's finest news source.
                  UNI isn't exactly splitting atoms in terms of academics. -run&blade

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

                    We're not talking meaningless bowl games. We're talking a legitimate shot at a national title.
                    I disagree. What's the lowest seed to win a title..9? 10 or 11, if that.

                    For half the field, the tournament birth is the point, and there is no legitimate shot at a title.

                    That being said, I strongly advocate against expansion. Play well enough to remove doubt and you aren't in Creighton's place. With the conference tournament system, everyone (save the Ivy League) has a chance to play their way in.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

                      Originally posted by Newsbreaker View Post
                      I disagree. What's the lowest seed to win a title..9? 10 or 11, if that.

                      For half the field, the tournament birth is the point, and there is no legitimate shot at a title.
                      I don't disagree with that AT ALL.

                      But the fact is, the participants in the Insight.com Bowl game have no shot at a National Title, whereas the 127 and 128 seeds in an expanded men's basketball tournament at least have a chance.

                      That's all I was implying.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

                        Originally posted by jman2004 View Post
                        I don't disagree with that AT ALL.

                        But the fact is, the participants in the Insight.com Bowl game have no shot at a National Title, whereas the 127 and 128 seeds in an expanded men's basketball tournament at least have a chance.

                        That's all I was implying.
                        A chance, yes. But really, do they deserve it?
                        UNI isn't exactly splitting atoms in terms of academics. -run&blade

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

                          Originally posted by TH1974 View Post
                          A chance, yes. But really, do they deserve it?
                          That's the sad fact most of college basketball has to come to terms with.

                          Compared side-by-side, is the 5th place Big Ten team better than Creighton? Probably not, if we're looking only at paper.

                          Is the 5th place Big Ten team more capable of winning a National Championship than Creighton? Yes.

                          I've said for a while, if leagues like the MVC want to get actual, sustained respect (and the bids that go along with it) then we need to have someone win a national championship (or at least play for one - and don't point to Indiana State, that's a generation and a half ago...that account went dry years ago). Until then, we're all just teams playing a few extra games on national TV as a reward, while other parts of the field compete for hardware.

                          I still think Creighton is out. I don't see them getting a higher seed than UNI, and they shouldn't. That being said, the at-large bids are generally 11 and higher. We would be blessed to get an 11, and by deserving a lower seed than us, Creighton would fall below an 11-13 (assuming that's our seed) and smack into "autobid land."

                          Sorry Creighton...win more games next time. You're not going to get home/home series with BCS schools, so book a flight and go play somebody.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

                            Originally posted by TH1974 View Post
                            A chance, yes. But really, do they deserve it?
                            NO they don't, if you're talking about 127 and 128 seeds. That's what I initially said though. I hate the idea of a 128 team tournament. Hate it. I think 64 is a pretty nice number.

                            If you're asking whether or not some of the mid-major tournament winners, the 15 and 16 seeds in the current format, "deserve" it, then most definitely YES. They "deserve" it just as much as the 6-7 place team in the Big 12 does.

                            I guess I don't know what you're getting at . . . I wasn't really talking about who deserves what. That wasn't the point of anything I was trying to say.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Time to Expand the Tournament

                              You don't need to expand the tournament. Every year, people complain about who didn't get into the tourny, and that team loses its first game in the NIT.
                              UNI FIGHT

                              Originally posted by 9YRPLAN
                              iowa sucks, fran sucks, their schedule sucks, iowa fans suck

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X