You Want To Change March Madness?
Written by Chriso, Tuesday March 30 2010
Sheryl Crow sang that "A Change Will Do You Good." Lately I've heard politicians talking about change that I can believe in. But do you want to change March Madness? To answer a question with a question: Why?
There has been talk about expanding the tournament to 96 teams. This is a mistake for several reasons. First, I do not recall a #16 ever beating a #1. Why? Because it never has happened. The #16 seed has never won the opening round, and the #15 rarely does. Why add more teams when the teams at the bottom rarely have success. Actually, it would create a situation where it might be better to be a #20 seed then 15-18.
Next, consider that 10 teams seeded 9-14 won their first round this year, while only 14 lost. However, with 96 teams, those seeds would have to play a game before that round, with a chance to be eliminated, have key players injured, or just be worn down even more. The Sweet 16 included Northern Iowa, a #9 seed, knocking out the top team in the tournament, Kansas. It also had three double digit seeds, including the Ivy League champion Cornell. With the extra game, it would make it harder for those seeds and easier for seeds 3-8.
Instead of expanding the tournament to get the right teams in there, why not change the teams that are already there. Change the automatic bids. Under the current system, regular season conference champs are given a post-season bid in either the NIT or the NCAA, and winners of the conference tournament are given an automatic bid to the NCAA. This means that teams with a record below .500 can make the NCAA, while they would not be in the NIT. Why not change it so the regular season champs still could be in either tournament, but the conference tournament champs will also be in either the NIT or the NCAA. Then develop a system where the best teams are in the NCAA. The combined total of the NIT and NCAA still equal 96 teams, but it means distributing the teams in the proper post-season tournament.
There are some changes that could make March Madness better. Stretch out the sweet 16 with earlier starts in the day and later at night rather than having games overlap. Reseed the teams in the final so that Duke against West Virginia would be the championship, not the semi-final. But don't increase it to 96 teams. It would ruin the madness.
Tags:
Recent West Virginia Articles
- Big East Bringing Back Temple?
- West Virginia Mountaineers Looking for Open Spaces
- Final Four--Still Riding With The Mountaineers
- You Want To Change March Madness?
- Welcome to Mountaineers haven
Leave a comment
Not So Fast! To publish your comment, you have to login
Not Registered? Register now as it only take 20 seconds!
Click here to browse
2 comments
Please sign in to rate!
96 seems to be inevitable... 10 teams (9-14) won this year, and 10 teams in that range won in 2009 in round 1, these are the teams that would be less likely to win in the future and the advantage goes to the 3-8 seeds...I don't think that 48 teams is going to happen, but a nice thought, sort of like how most sports have expanded too far....
Please sign in to rate!
Chriso, I agree totally against expansion.I posted an article that the tourney should revert to 48 teams as it was years ago. Of course that would never happen because of the lack of money it would bring in. http://www.playerpress.com/articles/ncaa-men-s-basketball-tournament-the-weakest-at-large-field-in-history