I can deal with 68. But the play in games should be between the last 8 teams to get in, not automatic qualifiers. They could play for the 12 seed or something like that.wilson wrote:I can totally deal with 68 teams. A wacky number, but no wackier than 65, and waaay better than 96.CameronBornAndBred wrote:Now they only want to expand to 68 teams, which would still leave the holes playing in the NIT.
Also, CBS and Turner will show all of next year's games live.
http://crazietalk.net/blog1.php/2010/04 ... d-of-money
NCAA Expansion - If you HAD to vote...
Moderator: CameronBornAndBred
- Jesus_hurley
- Graduate Student at PWing school
- Posts: 1234
- Joined: September 12th, 2009, 8:35 pm
- Location: Durham NC
Re: NCAA Expansion - If you HAD to vote...
Re: NCAA Expansion - If you HAD to vote...
I disagree. As it is, the last few automatic qualifiers have virtually nil chance to win a game in the tournament. Participants in the last several play-in games have said themselves that they really enjoyed participating in it, because they got the stage to themselves and had a chance not just to participate in the proceedings, but to actually notch a win. I think this format will work just fine.Jesus_hurley wrote:I can deal with 68. But the play in games should be between the last 8 teams to get in, not automatic qualifiers. They could play for the 12 seed or something like that.wilson wrote:I can totally deal with 68 teams. A wacky number, but no wackier than 65, and waaay better than 96.CameronBornAndBred wrote:Now they only want to expand to 68 teams, which would still leave the holes playing in the NIT.
Also, CBS and Turner will show all of next year's games live.
http://crazietalk.net/blog1.php/2010/04 ... d-of-money