I like the play-in game idea for all 12 seed participants.

 

I agree...take the so called last four in and last four out and let them play to determine who gets in. Don't punish the small schools who did what they needed to do to get their automatic bid to the big dance. Also I think the ratings would be better to have some of those teams play as more than likely it would be teams from the so-called power conferences playing each other for their NCAA lives.

 

Either way I hope this is the idea they go with instead of the ridiculous let every kid get a trophy idea of the 96 teams in the tournament.

I guess this does increase the chances of a 1 seed losing.

So maybe the Dayton Flyers will not be the final NIT champions.

PLEASE let this happen instead of 96. Please.

I think the 12 seeds playing in the "play in round" would be great basketball, but how can you justify not making the "worst" 8 teams playing an extra game?

TBS & TNT will also have coverage of the games, meaning that there should be 3 games on live TV in HD.

 

I'm pumped about this move. I think it's a great move all around. Much better than the 96 team format, and it'll also please some of the naysayers of the 65 team format.

I like the new TV deal except for one, teeny tiny thing: truTV, which will have games in addition to CBS, TBS, and TNT. We don't have that in HD on Insight, and watching games in Standard Def is no good at all. truTV does have an HD feed that is available on DirecTV, Dish, and certain cable providers, so maybe Insight will be flooded with requests to get it, though that didn't get CBS College Sports added last year. I'm not wild about the fact that beginning in 2016 the Final Four will begin alternating between CBS and TBS. TBS has always underwhelmed me in their sports coverage, and I'm a big believer on events like the Super Bowl and Final Four being on network television. Still, it will be nice for every single game to be live, which was the major goal of the NCAA in going this route.

I think the 12 seeds playing in the "play in round" would be great basketball, but how can you justify not making the "worst" 8 teams playing an extra game?

 

IF you chose to go this route, you would justify it by saying that the play in games represented the last 8 at large teams selected. My guess is this is the route they will go. It makes for much better than TV rather than eight (8) automatic qualifer teams playing for 16 seeds and we all know that whatever the question is in sports, the answer is usually money.

This past year's tournament would have been improved how much by letting Illinois or UC or Virginia Tech or Mississippi State in?

This past year's tournament would have been improved how much by letting Illinois or UC or Virginia Tech or Mississippi State in?

 

It's more about how much of a better decision this was than to go to 96.

It's more about how much of a better decision this was than to go to 96.

 

I agree, if changes are going to be made, let this be the one. I don't want to even think about 96 teams.

This past year's tournament would have been improved how much by letting Illinois or UC or Virginia Tech or Mississippi State in?

 

How could anyone answer that question?

 

Murray St. beat Vandy. Ohio beat Georgetown. Upsets always happen.

 

Cincinnati was really even a bubble team. Va Tech & Mississippi St. both had legitimate arguments. Illinois was close, too.

How could anyone answer that question?

 

Murray St. beat Vandy. Ohio beat Georgetown. Upsets always happen.

 

Cincinnati was really even a bubble team. Va Tech & Mississippi St. both had legitimate arguments. Illinois was close, too.

 

I don't think the 3 more teams will involve the smaller guys, teams you mentioned in the upsets, into the tournament.

 

Rather it will allow 3 more of the lower major conference teams into the tournament like a Virginia Tech, Miss State, Illinois. And them upsetting Vandy or Georgetown will not be anything like a Murray St or Ohio doing it.

 

The 65th spot play in game was nothing but getting a major conference team into the tournament and 66, 67 and 68 is no different.

I like the idea of having it as a two-day event or all-day Tuesday event in Dayton. Could make UD Arena a fun place to be with all those small-conference teams fighting for their spot.

 

Will be very fun to watch....and it will help generate even more interest from sectors they might not now.

This is a million times better than the idea of one-third of D-I getting in. If the selection committee is as balanced as I've been told, it won't be all BCS retreads who couldn't get it done in the regular season.

I think the play in games should be the last 8 teams in not the conference tournament winners.