Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Corn Field
    Posts
    23,069

    Default Expanding the Tourney?

    From time to time I see people advocating for the tourney to be expanded. What are everyone else's thoughts? If you did expand it, how would you do it?


  2. #2

    Default

    Hard pass. Would much rather go back to 64 than expand.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    9,309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GophersInIowa View Post
    From time to time I see people advocating for the tourney to be expanded. What are everyone else's thoughts? If you did expand it, how would you do it?
    I think the Big Ten Tourney is big enough the way it is...
    "My life has become a single, ongoing revelation that I haven't been cynical enough." - Chrisjen Avasarala

  4. #4

    Default

    No seed worse than an 8 has ever won. If they add more teams, those teams won't be successful.

    Unless they expand to 128, all expansion will do is make the lower seeds play more games. That will help the higher seeds by wearing out the lower seeds and giving them more opportunity for injuries.

  5. #5

    Default

    Keep everything the way it is now please..
    THIS IS....GOLDEN....GOPHER.....BASKETBALL!!!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    31,949
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    No no no no no no no. If they expand it anymore, the casual fans will tune out of the tournament. Your average office pool participant isn't turning in a 96 team bracket that starts on Tuesday with one day's notice. And the regular season in the major conferences will lose much of their meaning.
    Last edited by howeda7; 03-11-2019 at 03:50 PM.

  7. #7

    Default

    I'd probably quit watching

  8. #8

    Default

    We should go back to 64

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diegopher View Post
    We should go back to 64
    x1000 - 68 has proven to be watered down.

    I also think if we stay at 68, all the play in games should be by at-larges. Leaves a sour feeling in my stomach that the small schools that win their conference tourney have to win another play in game

  10. #10

    Default

    The one idea that intrigued me was an expansion to 96.
    every league gets two auto bids.

    regular season champ and tourney champ.
    If both of those are the same team, that team automatically gets a bye no matter how bad their conference is and the regular season second place gets an auto.


    That wouldn’t ever happen, but it’s the only idea I’ve read that has intrigued me beyond 64.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    31,949
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JimmyJamesMD View Post
    x1000 - 68 has proven to be watered down.

    I also think if we stay at 68, all the play in games should be by at-larges. Leaves a sour feeling in my stomach that the small schools that win their conference tourney have to win another play in game
    Except they get more exposure from the play-in game than they do from getting stomped by 30 while 3 other games are going on Thursday/Friday (games against Tony Bennett and choking UVa excepted )

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diegopher View Post
    We should go back to 64

    I have never watched any of the play-in games and really hope the Gophers never play in one so i don't have to watch.

    There are some nights where I watch the NIT instead as I feel they have better teams than a lot of the 12/12 games (and certainly all of the 16/16).

    What really bothers me is when announcers get carried away, "This is the first Southern conference tourney win since 1996!" Who cares? They beat a fellow 16 MEAC team. That's not the same as a 15 over 2 or something.

  13. #13

    Default

    The current conference tournament format already has in a defacto open tournament. Virtually every team in the country gets a shot at making the tournament no matter how bad their season is (I'm pulling for Western Illinois). There is no need to expand for more "opportunities." Like others have said, any more expansion will drive the casual tournament fan away and quite possibly the goose laying the golden egg.

    We have a hard time justifying 68 teams based on "worthiness" now. What in the world would we do with 96?

  14. #14

    Default

    Go back to 64. The bubble is too soft as it is.

  15. #15

    Default

    32 is perfect for me but it will be expanding until the have diminished the regular season even more. All about the money.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •