March 12, 200719 yr I think playing in for 15 and 16 is best but I'll take 3 more teams... So your suggesting going to 72 teams? That's probably better. I'd guess what I said about the bottom 4 conferences is probably true about the bottom 8 as well.
March 12, 200719 yr I would like to see them put a couple big boys in the playoff, it's not fair to put two conference winners in a game to qualify for the real tournament.
March 12, 200719 yr Did anyone else feel like the SEC in general got a cold shoulder this year? Maybe they need to bump up some wins in the big dance...
March 12, 200719 yr So your suggesting going to 72 teams? That's probably better. I'd guess what I said about the bottom 4 conferences is probably true about the bottom 8 as well. 14 teams would be added in my ideal situation. 7 games and 14 teams plus the two already in the play in game. I wouldn't rule out giving good teams from mid minor conferences that didn't win their tournament a shot in these 15 and 16 seed play in games. Pay these teams and conferences 1st round money and generate more as a result...
March 12, 200719 yr Did anyone else feel like the SEC in general got a cold shoulder this year? Maybe they need to bump up some wins in the big dance... You're kidding right? I'd say the SEC got a very solid shake at worst this year...
March 12, 200719 yr Did anyone else feel like the SEC in general got a cold shoulder this year? Maybe they need to bump up some wins in the big dance... Not really, they took the top 4 teams in the East, which were probably the top 4 teams in the conference. Arkansas got a gift, really no one from the West deserved a bid.
March 12, 200719 yr Not really, they took the top 4 teams in the East, which were probably the top 4 teams in the conference. Arkansas got a gift, really no one from the West deserved a bid. :thumb: :thumb:
March 12, 200719 yr I would like to see them put a couple big boys in the playoff, it's not fair to put two conference winners in a game to qualify for the real tournament. I don't agree, I think that NCAA D1 has way too many teams and that 9 times out of 10 a #4,#5 or even #6 team from a power conference would beat the lesser conference champion. I hate how everything is supposed to be fair these days. The reality is that teams such as Niagra, North Texas, FAMU, etc, will never be in the same league as UNC, Florida, etc. A #16 has never won and #15 rarely does. Even then I can't recall a #15 ever winning two. Those teams aren't really ever in the national title hunt anyway. George Mason is about as big a Cinderella team to make the final four as there has been, and even then the Colonial is ranked #13 in conference RPI. There are almost 20 conferences ranked below that, those teams don't have a chance.
March 12, 200719 yr By the way. You were right strike-3. It would be 72 teams. Not sure I'm sold on going to the 14 line and what that would require in moving the conference title games back to Saturday...
March 12, 200719 yr By the way. You were right strike-3. It would be 72 teams. Not sure I'm sold on going to the 14 line and what that would require in moving the conference title games back to Saturday... Good, you had me lost trying to figure out what you meant.
March 12, 200719 yr I was surprised to see Syracuse get left out. I can buy it though. Syracuse didn't leave the state of New York until Jan. 7th. 3 losses to teams with RPI's of 100+. Played Wichita State at home, lost, lost to Okie State, neural site, lost, lost to Drexel at home. Played no one non-conference on the road. Selection committee sent a signal to them to play someone somewhere other than NY in the non-con portion. Kansas State, had some nice wins...but an unbalanced schedule and a few other non-conference losses plus a 50+ RPI did them in. I was surprised Stanford made it. They may be this year's Air Force. I think they may have had some injury issues earlier in the year. I think Florida State is the one with a legit gripe. Arkansas is questionable, but they had a decent RPI plus some decent non-conference wins such as SIU. Plus they played some road and neutral site games outside the conference.
March 12, 200719 yr Here's my question: Why not just expand to 4 play in games with all #1 seeds getting the winners. That was we can squeeze in 3 more at large teams, say Syracuse, Drexel and KSU/FSU.
March 12, 200719 yr Here's my question: Why not just expand to 4 play in games with all #1 seeds getting the winners. That was we can squeeze in 3 more at large teams, say Syracuse, Drexel and KSU/FSU. Good idea.:thumb:
March 12, 200719 yr IF I was the selection committee... OUT: Arkansas Stanford Illinois IN: Drexel Syracuse KState I agree %100, in that order.:irked:
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.