NCAA Coaches want a 128 team March Madness?

[yankeessuck013]

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/5728390

 

Come on now, isn't that too extreme? Why not make it like Football, and anyone .500 or better gets in?(sarcasm)

 

At most I would want maybe another 10 teams in. There aren't that many teams who can argue they got screwed out of the tourney.

[Beckett95]

i dont know, i kinda like the idea. March Madness is one of the best things in all of a sports and making it longer would be awsome. It would definetely be harder to fill out brackets now.

[Manny Goes Boom]

No way. I agree with Yankeessuck, there are few teams who can argue that they got screwed for not getting in. It makes the conference tourneys more important, and gives it more excitement. I mean if this idea goes through...imagine a team like Uconn or Duke from this year playing the likes of Northern Arizona. It would be less competetive, and that is what makes that time of the year so exciting.

[See Red]

No way. I agree with Yankeessuck, there are few teams who can argue that they got screwed for not getting in. It makes the conference tourneys more important, and gives it more excitement. I mean if this idea goes through...imagine a team like Uconn or Duke from this year playing the likes of Northern Arizona. It would be less competetive, and that is what makes that time of the year so exciting.

 

In the tournament... anybody vs. UConn was competitive. Hell, NAU would probably have UConn on the ropes at some point like every other team they played at one point.

 

I'm in favor of expanding by three teams, making their four opening round games instead of just one. The winners of those games would get to play the #1 seeds, obviously. Because, really, they're 2 or 3 teams that have a convincing argument that they deserved to get in every year. No more.

[Manny Goes Boom]

In the tournament... anybody vs. UConn was competitive. Hell, NAU would probably have UConn on the ropes at some point like every other team they played at one point.

 

I'm in favor of expanding by three teams, making their four opening round games instead of just one. The winners of those games would get to play the #1 seeds, obviously. Because, really, they're 2 or 3 teams that have a convincing argument that they deserved to get in every year. No more.

 

LOL, but you get my point...the talent level differential would be so rediculous, that there would be massacres worse than 1 vs. 16 matchups were a few years back.

 

That's not a bad idea...expanding to 4 opening round games...to see who gets the 16 seeds...but that would be by 3 games, and 6 teams, right?

[See Red]

LOL, but you get my point...the talent level differential would be so rediculous, that there would be massacres worse than 1 vs. 16 matchups were a few years back.

 

That's not a bad idea...expanding to 4 opening round games...to see who gets the 16 seeds...but that would be by 3 games, and 6 teams, right?

 

I don't think so. I could be wrong, but saying it's six would be counting the team that currently gets the 16 twice, wouldn't it?

[Manny Goes Boom]

I don't think so. I could be wrong, but saying it's six would be counting the team that currently gets the 16 twice, wouldn't it?

 

...I think I made things confusing... I meant 6 more teams to make 4 opening round games. ...is that what you meant?

[See Red]

...I think I made things confusing... I meant 6 more teams to make 4 opening round games. ...is that what you meant?

 

... I don't know anymore. :lol: