Something to think about
What helps us become a lock for the tournament more? Throwing a million or two more at the program or expansion of the tourney to 76 teams? Getting rid of the automatic bid for conference tourney champs would help even more. Limit those lesser conferences to 1 bid only. Either an at-large or tourney champs. Their choice. Just my humble thoughts.... Maybe expanding the field is all we needed. Our team last year was capable of a Sweet 16 run had we gotten the chance with everyone healthy....
23 Replies
2mo
(In response to this post by ftsumterhokie)
2mo
making the tournament to expecting 2 - 3 wins in the tourney.
(In response to this post by ftsumterhokie)
2mo
is really all about. This is clearly a move to
Wipe out the NIT. That is where the eyeballs will be coming from.
(In response to this post by ftsumterhokie)
2mo
in the NIL age. The costs for playing the game are now too much for a lot of schools when you look at the revenue generated.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2mo
better TV ratings than the NIT games. The NCAA owns the NIT.
It's a case of a "company" replacing a lower profitable product with a higher profitable product.
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2mo
And the tournament should be 96 teams absorbing the NIT
Reg season champ
Conference Tournament champ
32(+) at-large bids
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
V
VT One
2mo
games are at the home courts of the top 64 teams. 1 hosts 128, 2 hosts 127, and so on. After the first round, rank the 64 team field 1-64, and resume a format at regional sites like we have now.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
2mo
To me, 96 gets the mid-major schools the opportunity they deserve without changing the at-large bids currently in place. Id even be in favor of a combination of our two ideas to go 96 and then re-seed after the first 64 teams play to make a final field of 64.
If we go to 128 you have to double the number of at-larges which would encompass the CBI at that point.
One thing in favor of your idea would be allowing teams to keep from rushing injured players back before theyre ready. If its easier to get in both with an auto bid and an at-large then I dont think VT pushes Tyler Johnson back when they did, even though he was technically healthy. Another couple weeks would have helped getting him strong again
(In response to this post by VT One)
2mo
want a 13-17 team in the tournament? I sure don't. It's like everyone gets a trophy in T-ball.
(In response to this post by VT One)
V
VT One
2mo
(In response to this post by ancient alien 2018)
E
EDGEMAN
2mo
How can they get their entire conference into the NCAAT if a losing record disqualifies their bottom feeders?
(In response to this post by ancient alien 2018)
E
EDGEMAN
2mo
...Selection Committee and a 16-15 B1X team made the tournament, so there is precedence for ~.500 teams (and even teams with losing records) to make the playoff, especially if the tournament expands.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
2mo
You could still have 128 without having teams with losing records.
But you would be adding all the 2nd and 3rd place teams in lower level conferences, and to be honest, few people are interested in seeing those teams.
(In response to this post by ancient alien 2018)
K
KCHokie2
2mo
** Edited by KCHokie2 at 5/18/2026, 6:24:45 AM
(In response to this post by SteveInBaltimore)
2mo
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
E
EDGEMAN
2mo
(In response to this post by VT ChemE 1986)
2mo
championship game was held on or around Thanksgiving Day. Given that it was competing against the NFL and college football, I don't know how many people tuned in to watch any of those games.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)