Time for a National Basketball Open Tournament for NCAA D1

[jdubb66]

I post this every year because Haskins was a proponent of opening the tournament to all D1 teams. Rank every team from 1 through 356 or whatever and play the first round games after the Tgiving holiday tournaments. If you have to hand out byes, give them to last years winner, top 2 or top 4. Then play a second round in January and another in February. Then your down to the final 64 or whatever. That way, there is no arbitrary system, everything is decided on the court. its the only fair way to decide a national champion and its totally doable and would create a revenue steam that would feed all the schools. Sponsors would lineup for a chance to be a part of it.

The power 5 has been slowly bleeding the G5 dry for many years now. We had a team from CUSA that has advanced past the first round the last 2 years and was the conference champion left out of the tournament this past year. The same tournament our conference champion advanced past the first round in. That should tell any casual observer that our conference has a pretty strong upper tier.

RPI and SS are of absolutely no value to the G5. They are just an excuse the P5 use to keep the G5 out of the tournament. It makes no sense for the G5 to play the game the P5 wants them too since the game is set up for them to lose. The money grab will continue until we have a fair system to evaluate teams to get into the tournament or they open to tournament to everyone.

 

[utep2step]

I post this every year because Haskins was a proponent of opening the tournament to all D1 teams. Rank every team from 1 through 356 or whatever and play the first round games after the Tgiving holiday tournaments. If you have to hand out byes, give them to last years winner, top 2 or top 4. Then play a second round in January and another in February. Then your down to the final 64 or whatever. That way, there is no arbitrary system, everything is decided on the court. its the only fair way to decide a national champion and its totally doable and would create a revenue steam that would feed all the schools. Sponsors would lineup for a chance to be a part of it.

The power 5 has been slowly bleeding the G5 dry for many years now. We had a team from CUSA that has advanced past the first round the last 2 years and was the conference champion left out of the tournament this past year. The same tournament our conference champion advanced past the first round in. That should tell any casual observer that our conference has a pretty strong upper tier.

RPI and SS are of absolutely no value to the G5. They are just an excuse the P5 use to keep the G5 out of the tournament. It makes no sense for the G5 to play the game the P5 wants them too since the game is set up for them to lose. The money grab will continue until we have a fair system to evaluate teams to get into the tournament or they open to tournament to everyone.

While I am a Haskins faithful believer, I don't agree with that. In organized sports all over the world, there is regular season and post season. Post season is a reward for dedication and positive outcomes of the regular season.

 

[kickballpro]

I get the theory but not the execution. The cream will rise to the top regardless of whether you ‘earned it’ or not. So I don’t care how many teams make it. But the unfairness in the system is based on name and conference recognition. If there were to be wholesale changes I think a promotion/relegation system is better.

 

[utep2step]

I get the theory but not the execution. The cream will rise to the top regardless of whether you ‘earned it’ or not. So I don’t care how many teams make it. But the unfairness in the system is based on name and conference recognition. If there were to be wholesale changes I think a promotion/relegation system is better.

Money doesn't make anything fair. Expand the NCAA is not a bad idea. Reward the conference champ to the dance. That's the cream. But is the NCAA going to do that? No.

 

[jdubb66]

While I am a Haskins faithful believer, I don't agree with that. In organized sports all over the world, there is regular season and post season. Post season is a reward for dedication and positive outcomes of the regular season.

The World Cup is the largest, most profitable, some might say the most prestigious sporting event in the world. Guess what, it's open to all countries regardless of size. There is no arbitrary system of including or excluding entries. Everything is decided on the pitch.

I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to open competition. It's what sports is all about. Don't eliminate teams based on arbitrary opinions of so called exerts. Leave it up to the players to decide.

 

[Haskins Fan]

I would like to see the tournament and conference champion be
included in the tournament. They should eliminate everyone who
has only won 19 or less games during the season. I understand
that there are some strong conferences but if they can't win 20
games in their conference what makes you think they will win the
tourney.
Some of the P5 teams play with low RPI teams, it doesn't really
affect them because their conference is beefed up. The G5
will always end up losing.
Another way the NCAA could make things even is to invite the 3
best teams of each conference. Then fill in the rest of the spots with
the best teams left out, no matter what conference they are in.
We know that won't happened.
Just my thoughts.

 

[jdubb66]

I would like to see the tournament and conference champion be
included in the tournament. They should eliminate everyone who
has only won 19 or less games during the season. I understand
that there are some strong conferences but if they can't win 20
games in their conference what makes you think they will win the
tourney.
Some of the P5 teams play with low RPI teams, it doesn't really
affect them because their conference is beefed up. The G5
will always end up losing.
Another way the NCAA could make things even is to invite the 3
best teams of each conference. Then fill in the rest of the spots with
the best teams left out, no matter what conference they are in.
We know that won't happened.
Just my thoughts.

I think this is more to my point. It ain't going to happen as long as the G5 remain silent and mousey. There was talk a couple of years back of the G5 leaving the NCAA and establishing their own football schedule starting in the winter and continueing on through spring. Our rules, our leagues, our champions. If the P5 continues the money grab at the expense of the G5, it would be best for the G5 to forge their own path...but that won't happen either.

 

[kickballpro]

The World Cup is the largest, most profitable, some might say the most prestigious sporting event in the world. Guess what, it's open to all countries regardless of size. There is no arbitrary system of including or excluding entries. Everything is decided on the pitch.

I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to open competition. It's what sports is all about. Don't eliminate teams based on arbitrary opinions of so called exerts. Leave it up to the players to decide.

Actually I would argue the systems are similar. In the NCAA basketball system, every D1 team has a chance at the title in theory. Loyola this season is the example. But if you’re a one bid league then it’s harder. In the World Cup its similar in that Jamaica can win it all. But the CONCACAF region doesnt get the same amount of bids as Europe or South America because the sport is better there. The Oceania region only gets .5 bid to the World Cup, their champ has to have a ‘play in’ game.

 

[jdubb66]

Actually I would argue the systems are similar.

Well, World Cup qualification isn't done by a selection committee based on arbitrary ratings like RPI. No World Cup team waits by a television set wondering if they are on the good graces of a panel of experts. Each team knows where they stand every step of the way. If you finish in the top however many spots ur in, if not you're out.

 

[axingfools1]

The World Cup is the largest, most profitable, some might say the most prestigious sporting event in the world. Guess what, it's open to all countries regardless of size. There is no arbitrary system of including or excluding entries. Everything is decided on the pitch.

I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to open competition. It's what sports is all about. Don't eliminate teams based on arbitrary opinions of so called exerts. Leave it up to the players to decide.

Good thought. How about having the regular season champ get the auto bid to the NCAA as opposed to the tournament champ (it would be similar to the hexagonal. Like winning the gold cup has no bearing on the world cup).

Conference tourny champs could then get a good look at being an at-large bid, but also have an auto bid to the NIT. A team that had a mediocre season and then gets hot for 3-4 games could secure the auto bid for the NIT and MAYBE be chosen to the NCAA.

The subjective part would be up to the commitee and there would be less basis for argument. Right now it is reversed.

 

[El Paso 1]

Good thought. How about having the regular season champ get the auto bid to the NCAA as opposed to the tournament champ (it would be similar to the hexagonal. Like winning the gold cup has no bearing on the world cup).

Conference tourny champs could then get a good look at being an at-large bid, but also have an auto bid to the NIT. A team that had a mediocre season and then gets hot for 3-4 games could secure the auto bid for the NIT and MAYBE be chosen to the NCAA.

The subjective part would be up to the commitee and there would be less basis for argument. Right now it is reversed.

That would be a terrible idea because then teams like Marshall wouldn't have gotten into the Tournament. Also, the conference tournament would be VERY boring with no prize at the end.

 

[El Paso 1]

Another way the NCAA could make things even is to invite the 3
best teams of each conference. Then fill in the rest of the spots with
the best teams left out, no matter what conference they are in.
We know that won't happened.
Just my thoughts.

There are 32 conferences. That's not possible.

 

[Minerforlife]

There is no appetite for an expanded tourney. If there was money to made it would have been expanded yesterday. Most people dont start paying attention to college basketball until February. The problem is the games are meaningless. The top half to three quarters of power conference schools are going the tourney. The drama is the 8 or ninth school trying to get a big from the ACC, Big 12, or big 10 will get in. On the other hand middle tennesee and WKU could win 28 games play great games against each other but they are meaningless until they get the conference tourney, because only one of them is getting in. It's all meaningless until for different reasons. College basketball doesn't get America's full attention until March. Three weekends is all the public and advertisers want.

 

[JCorona]

Then I would say scrap conference tournaments all together and expand the NCAA to 128 teams. They can get all 76 P6 teams in and still have some bids for us mid majors.

 

[ShovelMan66]

Then I would say scrap conference tournaments all together and expand the NCAA to 128 teams. They can get all 76 P6 teams in and still have some bids for us mid majors.

You would take teams with losing records from the P6? That sounds horrible.

 

[nattybry]

The World Cup is the largest, most profitable, some might say the most prestigious sporting event in the world. Guess what, it's open to all countries regardless of size. There is no arbitrary system of including or excluding entries. Everything is decided on the pitch.

I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to open competition. It's what sports is all about. Don't eliminate teams based on arbitrary opinions of so called exerts. Leave it up to the players to decide.

Lol.... Do you realize you just contradicted your whole argument haha. You suggested an open tournament with all 356 teams. (Which by the way is Ridiculous in my opinion) Anyway the World Cup has a qualification process and then 32 advance to play in World Cup. Much like the NCAA and the regular season and conference tournament. Now I think the number should go to 84.There are more D1 teams then when it was decided to go to 64 and then 68, so the overall number should increase. However not all 356 C'mon Man!

 

[jdubb66]

Also, the conference tournament would be VERY boring...

It would be a shame if our confernece tournament got "VERY boring".

 

[jdubb66]

Then I would say scrap conference tournaments all together and expand the NCAA to 128 teams. They can get all 76 P6 teams in and still have some bids for us mid majors.

I don't know about all 76 but let's say we give each power school a set number of bids say 6 total bids including the conference and league champs. We give each second tier school 3 bids including conference and league champs. Then have play in games for the remaining bids or add 1 additional round. with 48 or 64 byes.

 

[Cube Jack]

Good thought. How about having the regular season champ get the auto bid to the NCAA as opposed to the tournament champ (it would be similar to the hexagonal. Like winning the gold cup has no bearing on the world cup).

Conference tourny champs could then get a good look at being an at-large bid, but also have an auto bid to the NIT. A team that had a mediocre season and then gets hot for 3-4 games could secure the auto bid for the NIT and MAYBE be chosen to the NCAA.

The subjective part would be up to the commitee and there would be less basis for argument. Right now it is reversed.

This would kill the conference tournaments. Top teams would sit out their starters. I imagine some teams would petition to opt out altogether

 

[JCorona]

I don't know about all 76 but let's say we give each power school a set number of bids say 6 total bids including the conference and league champs. We give each second tier school 3 bids including conference and league champs. Then have play in games for the remaining bids or add 1 additional round. with 48 or 64 byes.

I was being sarcastic. The tournament could expand to 84 and all it means is that 15 more Power teams get in and mid majors get one extra at large bid. So I figured let’s just cut the bs out and let all the power teams in.

 

[axingfools1]

This would kill the conference tournaments. Top teams would sit out their starters. I imagine some teams would petition to opt out altogether

You are probably right, but I'm just trying to brainstorm ways where the more deserving mid-major teams get in the NCAA on a regular basis. How is it fair that a team with a whole season worth of good play and a title gets bumped in one game? There has to be a better alternative. I think the new CUSA type scheduling may help, but a loss could still be a killer.

 

[minermx07]

What I think would be fun would be expanding the field to 96 teams. Giving the first 32 teams a bye and making the last 64 teams play in the "play-in" games. So 4 brackets of 24 teams each, seeds 1-8 get a bye. Seeds 9-24 play the "first round". Seed 9 versus seed 24 and so on. This way, you could reward regular season winners because the tournament would be big enough to accommodate them.

Auto bids for regular and conference champs.

 

[El Paso 1]

What I think would be fun would be expanding the field to 96 teams. Giving the first 32 teams a bye and making the last 64 teams play in the "play-in" games. So 4 brackets of 24 teams each, seeds 1-8 get a bye. Seeds 9-24 play the "first round". Seed 9 versus seed 24 and so on. This way, you could reward regular season winners because the tournament would be big enough to accommodate them.

Auto bids for regular and conference champs.

I don't like it because there would be too much time off for the top 32 teams and a lot of school would be missed for other teams if they keep advancing.

 

[FeralFelidae]

I do think the NIT has benefited from the current system. The snubbed mid-majors who won their conference are guaranteed a spot in the NIT, and the tournament is seeded now, merit-based, so we don't have those ad-hoc matchups like the olden days where New Mexico gets three home games because they sell out the Pit.

St. Mary's was given a top seed and they had a chance to make a statement, but they lost at home to Utah in the quarters. Western Kentucky, meanwhile, made it to Madison Square Garden. With the current NIT, I feel like the four teams that make it to Madison Square Garden have made their case that they deserved an at-large NCAA bid. It's still a consolation prize, but I feel like winning the NIT means something, even making it to New York means something. I actually watched much of the tournament and I enjoyed Western Kentucky's run. Meanwhile, the CBI hasn't had a Power 5 team in years.

 

[minermx07]

I don't like it because there would be too much time off for the top 32 teams and a lot of school would be missed for other teams if they keep advancing.

You misunderstand my idea. The top 32 would miss just one game. The bottom 64 teams would play one game against each other. The winner of the 9-24 game would move on to play the 8 seed. The winner of the 10-23 game would play the 7 seed and so on.

 

[El Paso 1]

You misunderstand my idea. The top 32 would miss just one game. The bottom 64 teams would play one game against each other. The winner of the 9-24 game would move on to play the 8 seed. The winner of the 10-23 game would play the 7 seed and so on.

I understand now and I like the idea, but I don't know if something like this would ever happen.