Under the proposal, the NCAA would likely end the NIT. The NCAA tournament would last essentially the same amount of time (i.e., starting on a Thursday and ending two and a half weeks later on a Monday). Here's how it would go down:
- It would start on a Thursday, and the play-in game would be eliminated.
- The top 8 seeds in each region would receive first-round byes.
- Seeds 9-24 in each region would play first round games on Thursday and Friday of the first week
- The winners of first round games would move on to play the top 8 seeds in the second round on Saturday and Sunday.
- For the third round, winners of the Saturday games would play again the next Tuesday, and winners of the Sunday games would play again on Wednesday.
- The winners of the third round games would then move onto the Sweet 16, which would be on its currently scheduled days, that Thursday and Friday, with the Elite 8 following on Saturday and Sunday.
- The Final Four would be the same as well, on the next Saturday, with the championship game the following Monday.
The NCAA says this proposal would include no additional travel time, and that the amount of time student-athletes would be out of school would roughly be the same as the current model. I don't see how that's possible.
Under the current model, if, for example, a 9 seed advances to the Sweet 16, they would be play first and second round games on Thursday and Saturday, and then in the Sweet 16 game the next week on Thursday. They would at least be going to class on the Monday and Tuesday in between.
Under the new model, if a 9 seed advances to the Sweet 16, they would be playing a first round game on Thursday, a second round game on Saturday, a third round game on Tuesday, and the Sweet 16 game on Thursday. I think there is a general rule, that teams arrive at least a day in advance, and I would think it's unlikely that, if the team lost in the Sweet 16, they would head home Thursday night. Thus, those kids would be away from campus from Wednesday of the first week all the way through the second week, missing a week and a half of classes. And, if the regionals are in a different location than the first three rounds, then that team will have to travel to another city on that Wednesday.
Under the current model, if a 1-8 seed advances to the Sweet 16, if they play on a Thursday and Saturday the first weekend, and then on the next Thursday. Like the 9-seed example above, they would be missing class on Wednesday through Friday of the first week and Wednesday through Friday of the second week, for a total of six days (assuming they have class on each week day).
Under the new model, they would play on Saturday, Tuesday, and Thursday. Thus, they would not be going to class the Friday before (the travel day) and the entire next week. This would also be six total days, but it would include an entire week of classes missed (i.e., at least two classes in a row).
Essentially, there is no possible way the new model will result in the same amount of missed classes as the current model. Obviously, this new model doesn't have the student-athletes' interests in mind. The NCAA's motive is entirely transparent: money.
Adding 31 more teams won't make the tournament more competitive. No one is going to care if a 16 seed beats a 17 seed for the right to get stomped by a 1 seed. The NCAA tournament is not broken, so there is no reason to fix it.
Posts
3 comments:
if the NCAA really wants more at-large teams the only way to do it is to have the last X number of at large teams play a play in on tuesday prior (basically expand the 64/65 play-in game to 4 or 8 games on Tuesday prior to real tournament. i don't like this idea (I don't even like the current play in game), but it is better that what has been shared.
Actually, it'll make the 1 vs. 16/17 games more competitive. Right now, the 16 seed is probably a sucky automatic bid. Now, the 16 seed might be the fifth or sixth best team in a major conference. There's a much better chance that they could knock off a #1.
I hate the idea almost as much as I hate Duke.
You're right, Dr. Summers is a robot. This new format would cheapen what it means to be a 1 seed. In a 96-team field, the 1 seed in each region would play the winner of the 16-17 first round game. The 16 and 17 seeds aren't going to be Arkansas-Pine Bluff and Winthrop in the new format. Instead, they'll probably be middle-of-the-pack big conference teams, who will have a better shot at beating a 1 seed. What's the point of being a 1 seed if you're not playing the worst team in your region? Also, I abhor the thought of any sort of re-seeding between rounds, so I don't think that's a healthy solution.
Along those same lines, I thought of another couple negatives to NCAA tournament expansion. One of the major allures of the NCAA tournament is the Cinderella – the low- or mid-major team seeded 12-15 that takes down a 2-5 seed in the first round and maybe even squeaks into the Sweet 16. Cinderella is killed by her wicked stepsisters under the new format.
What are now 14, 15, and 16 seeds will become 22, 23, and 24 seeds. All this does is essentially supplant a low- or mid-major conference champion's chance at a big upset with a middle-of-the-pack big conference team's chance at a much-less-exciting upset. If Ohio beats Georgetown in a 3-14 first round game, that's awesome. If NC State beats Georgetown in a 3-14 second-round game, that's dog shit. Who cares?
For Dayton – this year's NIT champ – this new format would have been terrible. If a team like this year's Dayton team had made it into the proposed 96-team field, three things happen: (1) they only make it in because of expansion, thus weakening the "NCAA Tournament Appearance" banner that would go up in UD Arena; (2) they get beat in the first round as an 18 seed; (3) they don't get to play for 3 extra weeks and win an NIT championship. Of course, I realize that it's not necessarily a school or player's dream to win an NIT championship, but I'm guessing for most, if not all, of the players and staff at UD, they would take that NIT championship any day of the week over a first-round NCAA tournament loss in a 96-team field.
Post a Comment