Do You Like The Idea of Expanding The Big East Tourney?

[TheDeuce]

I've decided I don't like the idea of a 16-team BEast Tournament. This will add at least another day to the tournament. If you have a team that has only won 1 or 2 conference games up to the tourney, what shot do they REALLY have at winning it? I think it should stay the way it is now. Explain why you're for or against the expansion.

[HT721]

This is the dilemma of a super conference with 16 teams, but I think it's only fair every team makes the conference tournament, if you don't want every team in it, don't have it and give the automatic bid to the regular season champ.

[Hip-Hop Box]

^Good enough reason...

[bugatti]

I have a lot more of a problem with the regular season scheduling than the Big East conference tourny scheduling.

[CoachBuckett]

I wouldn't like it if I was the 1 seed. But if I was the 16th seed I would be glad to have a shot.

[BoondockSaint]

I don't really care for the expansion. I like the pressure it adds during the season for a team to make it in and keep their hopes alive for the NCAA. I just like the little extra excitement I guess.

[swamprat]

I wouldn't like it if I was the 1 seed. But if I was the 16th seed I would be glad to have a shot.

USF (my guys) will probably finish no better than 15th, and I really do not want to expand the tourney.

 

Making that 12th seed is a goal a lower tier team can set and obtain. A stepping stone, if you will. That is actually a goal of the Bulls, but it's doubtful they'll make it. I think it hurts the school more getting beat down again buy the 1st or 2nd seed team. This time it will be on national TV. Don't see where that helps.

[gametime]

I think it hurts the school more getting beat down again buy the 1st or 2nd seed team. This time it will be on national TV. Don't see where that helps.

 

The top 4 seeds get byes the first two rounds...

[cshs81]

12 is enough.

[SSC]

The top 4 seeds get byes the first two rounds...

 

I don't like it then. If you're the 5 seed that really isn't fair.

 

12 is enough.

 

 

I agree.

[el gato]

The top 4 seeds get byes the first two rounds...

 

So only the bottom 8 seeds have to play the first round, the 5-8 seeds get a bye for the first round, and the top 4 seeds get a bye for the first two rounds? If so, that is a very odd way to seed a 16 team tournament, but I do like the way it rewards the higher seeds.

[gametime]

So only the bottom 8 seeds have to play the first round, the 5-8 seeds get a bye for the first round, and the top 4 seeds get a bye for the first two rounds? If so, that is a very odd way to seed a 16 team tournament, but I do like the way it rewards the higher seeds.

That's the setup...

[el gato]

That's the setup...

 

In that case, I think I actually like the idea. It still only takes 15 games to complete the tournament, it rewards the higher seeds, and you don't have to worry about a #1 vs. #16 blowout. :thumb:

[JBCousins]

I clicked on the wrong thing to vote...I DON'T like it. I don't think you should be able to win a major conference tournament by winning only TWO games. The old way was great. The regular season meant something and the top 4 get a nice reward with a bye. The bottom 4 of a 16 team conference are generally going to be pretty weak--drop the dead weight before the tourney starts.

[gametime]

I clicked on the wrong thing to vote...I DON'T like it. I don't think you should be able to win a major conference tournament by winning only TWO games. The old way was great. The regular season meant something and the top 4 get a nice reward with a bye. The bottom 4 of a 16 team conference are generally going to be pretty weak--drop the dead weight before the tourney starts.

You still have to win 3 games as the #1 seed...