2007-09-17 13:52:41 · 6 answers · asked by midland4206 4 in Sports ➔ Basketball
I am in favour of expanding it to say 84 teams. With the parity of college b-ball these days, it is only a matter of time before it happens. Imagine if you ever had a 16 seed beat a one. It will happen one yr mainly because of the parity and the fact that the bigger schools are not getting the recruits that they once did. I hope it happens one day but not to my team!
2007-09-17 14:42:20 · answer #1 · answered by Herr Oberst 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you can't get into the field of 65, chances are good that you have little chance of winning a national championship. And that's what the tournament is designed to do. Getting in is not the goal, winning is not the goal.
You are never going to have the best 65 teams with the conference set up, but you'll get most of them. Heck, George Mason was an at-large team a year ago, and didn't sneak in through winning a weak conference.
2007-09-17 16:30:31 · answer #2 · answered by wdx2bb 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To what benefit? As it is, a 16 seed has no chance of touching a 1 seed. Imagine a 32 seed. It would just make the first few rounds irrelevant.
2007-09-17 13:58:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anon28 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NCAA branch a million Championship is likewise commonplace as March insanity, and pits U.S. college communities against one yet another. For 500 factors, while replaced into it first televised? 1952 is the us99 minutiae answer.
2016-10-09 09:17:15 · answer #4 · answered by weigelt 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no. there's too many teams as it is. plus, then the 1st team would play the 32nd seed which would be a massacre. the 16th seed already cant beat the 1st seed. also, it would take too long and ppl would start thinking it to be boring.
2007-09-17 14:34:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Haha What?!! Why would that help anybody?
2007-09-17 14:37:18 · answer #6 · answered by David 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋