Columnist takes issue w/Knight's idea to expand tournament

[Mr. Neutral]

And takes shots at Knight's decidedly un-TV ready persona as well. I agree with both stances.

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/colum ... 07313.html

[Biff Tannen]

There was a guy who wrote for ESPN.com a few years back, I can't remember the name, but he was a proponent of getting rid of the conference tourneys and having EVERY team get in (Giving byes to the top few seeds of course), sort of like the Indiana HS basketball tourney used to be. That is unrealistic only because the Conferences make too much money off of those tourneys for them to willingly get rid of them. I agree keep it 64 teams. Only thing I would change: in the final four have a 4 team round robin (and if theres a tie, then a tie-breaker game). Now that would be fun to watch!

[passthepuck?]

If you saw Kent State play you might want to contract the field of 65.

[MuskieCinci]

The only problem I have with the tournament is that it is at 65 teams. That is such a horrible number, and the play in game is so meaningless. Either have 68 teams with 4 play in games and make it an event, or shorten it back to 64 teams.

[DoubleD86]

I somewhat agree with Knight on the Conference Tourneys, except my opinion is modified:

I think its unfair, especially to small conference teams, to be the best in your conference all year and win your conference by 5 games. Then you have one bad day and a lesser deserving team makes the tourney as the one bid from your conference. I like the excitement and drama of Conference Tourneys, but I think they should be trashed. Give the regular season champion the automatic bid and stop playing the Tourney. Really, the only reason for the Conf. Tourney is to get the auto bid. Most people put more stock in the regular season championship anyways. I just think for those conferences that only get one bid, the best team all year in that conference deserves to be the team representing their conference.

[Mr. Neutral]

From a purist's point of view, I would tend to agree with you, DoubleD.

From a realistic point of view, none of us see the conferences giving up this money-maker, and this is the conf. have-nots last shot to make the NCAA, with THAT additional $$$. And when a conference like the A-10 places 3 teams in the NCAA as opposed to one.....

Look how many times we've gone into our conf. tourney on the bubble, or we thought we were on the bubble, hoping to win 1-2 more games and push X over the top re the selection committee.

[drudy23]

$$$ talks.

From what I understand, it is up to the conference to determine how its conference receives an automatic bid. And I would bet 90% of ADs would say that the true conference champion is the regular season champ. So, why then does every conference but one have a conference tourney?

The answer is obvious.