March 17, 200917 yr I say go the Bobby Knight way and just add an extra game for each team. Make the tournament include 128 teams and hold the first round games at the higher seeds home court. This would end all at large discussions and make for a much more interesting tournament....if what we have now isn't enough. So the way to do this would be to just add a week of games. And I wouldnt complain about seeing more March Madness games.
March 17, 200917 yr Author I say go the Bobby Knight way and just add an extra game for each team. Make the tournament include 128 teams and hold the first round games at the higher seeds home court. This would end all at large discussions and make for a much more interesting tournament....if what we have now isn't enough. So the way to do this would be to just add a week of games. And I wouldnt complain about seeing more March Madness games. Here is the only argument I can think of to go against this - the NIT would become obsolete using this method. Using my method, we could still have the NIT and it would have meaningful games. If the NCAA took all 128 teams, then the NIT would really be scraping the bottom of the barrell.
March 17, 200917 yr Author I like this idea as long as they aren't put as a #16 seed, just because I think think the #1's have earned that easier game and putting a difficult team in there could change the entire tournament. I like putting the final ones as a 10,11,13,13 seeds. Yeah, I wouldn't like the idea of putting decent teams in the 16-slot. I think it would have to be in the 10-13 range (where the bubble teams go now).
March 17, 200917 yr Author I really think the process is fine the way it is. Remember - this is my brainstorm on how to get Kentucky a shot anyways :thumb:
March 17, 200917 yr Thats an interesting plan. The problems I see with it is just the long delay for the NCAA teams and the 4 teams that do make it from the NIT are going to be wore out compared to the others. They will look like Syacruse when they were trying to play Louisville in the second half.
March 17, 200917 yr Author Thats an interesting plan. The problems I see with it is just the long delay for the NCAA teams and the 4 teams that do make it from the NIT are going to be wore out compared to the others. They will look like Syacruse when they were trying to play Louisville in the second half. Yeah, they would be worn out, but they would at least have an opportunity. I'm not sure there could ever a week-long delay, but its fun to discuss. I'm interested to see who the NIT final four will be and then it'll be fun to see where we could've plugged them into the NCAA under my plan.
March 17, 200917 yr Yeah, they would be worn out, but they would at least have an opportunity. I'm not sure there could ever a week-long delay, but its fun to discuss. I'm interested to see who the NIT final four will be and then it'll be fun to see where we could've plugged them into the NCAA under my plan. Yeah giving them an opportunity is good and also giving the NIT more meaning is good. Its an interesting plan.
March 17, 200917 yr Author Yeah giving them an opportunity is good and also giving the NIT more meaning is good. Its an interesting plan. Just a little food for thought (and discussion). There would really be some intense, meaningful NIT games if they were playing for one of those 4 slots.
March 17, 200917 yr Just a little food for thought (and discussion). There would really be some intense, meaningful NIT games if they were playing for one of those 4 slots. :thumb::thumb:
March 17, 200917 yr I like Bobby Knight's train of thought on the NCAA tourney. Just add 1 game, ... that means you let in 128 teams, no 'play in' game (which really isn't fair to either of those teams due to the faster turnaround to play the #1 overall seed). The higher seeds would host the first round games. Just take the best 128 teams and play on!
March 17, 200917 yr Remember - this is my brainstorm on how to get Kentucky a shot anyways :thumb: First, I enjoyed your blog, it was entertaining and original. But the one thing I've realized with College Basketball and Football, to keep fans from not complaining you will have to expand the tournament to include more bubble teams. But then, if you expand it then, you will have to keep expanding and expanding until eventually, it's one big mess. While I think we all would like to see Kentucky in the Dance, they had/have no shot of winning the National Title this year, and really losing 9 of your last 13 games doesn't warrant a berth. None the less, it was an interesting read.
March 17, 200917 yr Remember - this is my brainstorm on how to get Kentucky a shot anyways :thumb: Just let it go man... just let it go... :lol:
March 17, 200917 yr I do believe that I read that Kentucky won both titles before or maybe they lost the NIT and won the NCAA. Something along those lines. I think a team that pulls it together and wins the NIT would be playing pretty decent basketball and probably win a game or two in the NCAA's. Kentucky participated in the NIT and NCAA in the same year in 1949. The Cats were upset by Loyola and rebounded to win their 2nd consecutive NCAA title. It was later revealed that the UK players were paid to "shave points" and eventually threw the NIT game. The only winner of both in the same season was CCNY in 1950 who defeated Bradley in both tourney finals. It was later revealed that both CCNY and Bradley had players who were "in on the fix" that year. It was the Point Shaving Scandal that led to the NIT's demise as people stayed away from New York afterwards. One interesting note of fortune lies in Utah's lone NCAA title. They were losers to KY in the NIT and were returning back when word came that a tragic accident cost the lives of some Arkansas players who were heading to the NCAA tourney. The Utes were asked to play in the Razorbacks place and went on to win the NCAA title.
March 17, 200917 yr Author Kentucky participated in the NIT and NCAA in the same year in 1949. The Cats were upset by Loyola and rebounded to win their 2nd consecutive NCAA title. It was later revealed that the UK players were paid to "shave points" and eventually threw the NIT game. The only winner of both in the same season was CCNY in 1950 who defeated Bradley in both tourney finals. It was later revealed that both CCNY and Bradley had players who were "in on the fix" that year. It was the Point Shaving Scandal that led to the NIT's demise as people stayed away from New York afterwards. One interesting note of fortune lies in Utah's lone NCAA title. They were losers to KY in the NIT and were returning back when word came that a tragic accident cost the lives of some Arkansas players who were heading to the NCAA tourney. The Utes were asked to play in the Razorbacks place and went on to win the NCAA title. Thats some pretty cool information. Thanks for passing that along :thumb:
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.