2024-2025 B1G Basketball Thread

[FearlessF]

UNL and Hoiberg are complete trash

so, it doesn't matter

[ELA]

UNL and Hoiberg are complete trash

so, it doesn't matter

So they'll get in as a #20 seed

[ELA]

I saw a post that said in case you are wondering how much things have changed, on this day 20 years ago Louisville and Charlotte had a top 15 matchup to determine the CUSA regular season championship

[medinabuckeye1]

Once they expand the tournament, all the P4 needs to do is not be complete trash, and the regular season will become completely meaningless

Did I miss something?  Is there a credible NCAA Tournament Expansion proposal being advanced?  

My own preference would be to expand by 12 teams to 80.  My 80-team format would be as follows:
First Weekend:
Thursday/Friday:

• Eight locations
• Four locations per day
• Two games per location
• Eight games per day, total of 16 games to get down to 64

Saturday/Sunday:

• Eight locations
• Four locations per day
• Four games per location
• 16 games per day, total of 32 games to get down to 32

Monday/Tuesday:

• Eight locations
• Four locations per day
• Two games per location
• Eight games per day, total of 16 games to get down to the S16

One of the big advantages of this format is that it moves the Tournament's busiest two days from Thursday/Friday as now to the weekend when more people can watch.  I think that would improve ratings.  Additionally, with only eight games per day on Thursday/Friday and Monday/Tuesday, I believe that the bulk of them could be played when at least most of the country is off work.  My schedule would be:

• 3pm, game #1 at an EST location
• 4pm, game #1 at another EST location
• 530pm, game #2 at the location of game #1
• 630pm, game #2 at the location of game #2
• 7pm, game #1 at any location
• 8pm, game #1 at a MST/PST location
• 930pm, game #2 at the location of game #5
• 1030pm, game #2 at the location of game #6

I think that the NCAAT games would be better and more competitive.  As it stands, there is a dramatic drop-off in performance after the #12 seeds.  The #12 and above have each won at least 1/3 of their games but #13 seeds have only one about one-in-five and it gets worse below there.  Obviously part of this is because lower seeds play higher and thus better opponents but I believe that a bigger part is that you run out of actually deserving teams at roughly the #11 or #12 seeds.  All you have after that are "tallest midgets" and those midgets get increasingly less impressive the further you go.  Expanding to 80 teams would force the "tallest midgets" to play a game before you sent them out against the best teams in the Country.  This would weed out the weakest of them and provide better opposition for the opening games for the #1-4 seeds.  

It would give all conferences and all teams at least one winnable tournament game each year.  As it is the #16 seeds have only ever won twice in 156 tries (1.28% or one in 78).  #15's are slightly better with 11 wins but that is still only 7% while #14's have 23 wins (15%) and #13's have 33 wins (21%).  Some one-bid leagues are nearly always #15 or #16 seeds and haven't won an NCAA game in years.  

[betarhoalphadelta]

Or they could, ya know, leave it the F alone. 

[medinabuckeye1]

Or they could, ya know, leave it the F alone.

LoL.  I get the sentiment.  Frankly I think they should have left it the F alone instead of adding the play-in games but that ship already sailed.  

It may seem odd that I'm always a proponent of NOT expanding the CFB postseason and yet I am a proponent of expanding the CBB postseason.  I just see them as different sports with different formats.  @ELA 's comment about expanding the CBB playoff making the regular season meaningless to me seems silly.  It already is and has been for decades.  Even with a 64 team tournament and no play-in games, every conceivable NC contender is already included.  That, to me, is the definition of a meaningless regular season.  

As a bubble team, Ohio State this year is a prime example.  The Buckeyes are squarely on the bubble so regular season games are very important for them in terms of making it or not.  It is only relevant in terms of Ohio State making it or not and consequently it is relevant for a few other bubble teams because the spots are finite so if tOSU does, somebody else doesn't.  None of that matters in terms of the NC because neither tOSU nor the other bubble teams jockeying with them for position are capable of winning the whole thing. 

Note:
A grand total of nine #9 seeds and below have ever made it to the F4 and none of them have ever won an F4 game let alone a NC.  All of the bubble teams are at that level or below, they have ZERO chance of winning the NC.  

A grand total of three #12 seeds and below have ever won a second-weekend game.  Those "tallest midgets" are included for decorative purposes only, they have no bearing on the tournament beyond pulling a cute little upset here or there.  

[ELA]

Did I miss something?  Is there a credible NCAA Tournament Expansion proposal being advanced? 

My own preference would be to expand by 12 teams to 80.  My 80-team format would be as follows:
First Weekend:
Thursday/Friday:

• Eight locations
• Four locations per day
• Two games per location
• Eight games per day, total of 16 games to get down to 64

Saturday/Sunday:

• Eight locations
• Four locations per day
• Four games per location
• 16 games per day, total of 32 games to get down to 32

Monday/Tuesday:

• Eight locations
• Four locations per day
• Two games per location
• Eight games per day, total of 16 games to get down to the S16

One of the big advantages of this format is that it moves the Tournament's busiest two days from Thursday/Friday as now to the weekend when more people can watch.  I think that would improve ratings.  Additionally, with only eight games per day on Thursday/Friday and Monday/Tuesday, I believe that the bulk of them could be played when at least most of the country is off work.  My schedule would be:

• 3pm, game #1 at an EST location
• 4pm, game #1 at another EST location
• 530pm, game #2 at the location of game #1
• 630pm, game #2 at the location of game #2
• 7pm, game #1 at any location
• 8pm, game #1 at a MST/PST location
• 930pm, game #2 at the location of game #5
• 1030pm, game #2 at the location of game #6

I think that the NCAAT games would be better and more competitive.  As it stands, there is a dramatic drop-off in performance after the #12 seeds.  The #12 and above have each won at least 1/3 of their games but #13 seeds have only one about one-in-five and it gets worse below there.  Obviously part of this is because lower seeds play higher and thus better opponents but I believe that a bigger part is that you run out of actually deserving teams at roughly the #11 or #12 seeds.  All you have after that are "tallest midgets" and those midgets get increasingly less impressive the further you go.  Expanding to 80 teams would force the "tallest midgets" to play a game before you sent them out against the best teams in the Country.  This would weed out the weakest of them and provide better opposition for the opening games for the #1-4 seeds. 

It would give all conferences and all teams at least one winnable tournament game each year.  As it is the #16 seeds have only ever won twice in 156 tries (1.28% or one in 78).  #15's are slightly better with 11 wins but that is still only 7% while #14's have 23 wins (15%) and #13's have 33 wins (21%).  Some one-bid leagues are nearly always #15 or #16 seeds and haven't won an NCAA game in years. 

Credible?  Nothing has been released, but it pretty clear its happening next year.  Because they've decided to give shitty P4 schools a 20th chance.

They keep noting about how much D1 has grown since they went to 64.  Except it hasn't grown by competitive teams.  The teams that have been added to D1 since they went to 64 have a 12% winning percentage in the tournament, and it's closer to 8% if you eliminate the games where they go head to head in play in games.

It's just about coaches of shitty P4 teams trying to keep their jobs by saying they made the tournament.  It's already WAY too easy for P4 teams to make the tournament.  An Oklahoma team who is currently 4-12 in the SEC is on the bubble.  It basically is just to guarantee that every P4 team can make it, because it takes a special kind of shitty to not make it as is

[ELA]

As a bubble team, Ohio State this year is a prime example.  The Buckeyes are squarely on the bubble so regular season games are very important for them in terms of making it or not.  It is only relevant in terms of Ohio State making it or not and consequently it is relevant for a few other bubble teams because the spots are finite so if tOSU does, somebody else doesn't.  None of that matters in terms of the NC because neither tOSU nor the other bubble teams jockeying with them for position are capable of winning the whole thing

I mean VCU made a national championship game when they shouldn't have gotten in.  Anyone who gets in can make it.  Sorry, but OSU sucks this year, and under any expanded format they would be comfortably in, which is laughable

[medinabuckeye1]

Credible?  Nothing has been released, but it pretty clear its happening next year.  Because they've decided to give shitty P4 schools a 20th chance.

They keep noting about how much D1 has grown since they went to 64.  Except it hasn't grown by competitive teams.  The teams that have been added to D1 since they went to 64 have a 12% winning percentage in the tournament, and it's closer to 8% if you eliminate the games where they go head to head in play in games.

It's just about coaches of shitty P4 teams trying to keep their jobs by saying they made the tournament.  It's already WAY too easy for P4 teams to make the tournament.  An Oklahoma team who is currently 4-12 in the SEC is on the bubble.  It basically is just to guarantee that every P4 team can make it, because it takes a special kind of shitty to not make it as is

The Oklahoma example is an outlier.  Ohio State is close to .500 in the league and close to the bubble.  That is always my assumption, if we are on the right side of .500 in the league we'll be safely in.  If we are right at .500 or a game or two either way, we'll be on the bubble.  If we are under .500 we'll be out.  

Adding 12 teams doesn't meaningfully change that equation.  At most, *MAYBE* 9-11 becomes safe.  

You keep calling them "Shitty P4 teams" but the reality is that while Ohio State is on the knife edge of the bubble, there will be at least around 20 teams substantially shittier than Ohio State that will get in.  

[ELA]

It's not going to be an outlier going forward.  With these mega conferences, plenty of shitty P4 teams are going to get in.

Yes, plenty of worse teams than OSU are going to get in.  Nobody is forcing OSU to accept a pay check to stay in the Big Ten.  Just like Mick Cronin complaining about his travel.  Yes, you just kick the can down of what a play in game in, but if OSU-Nebraska last night is a game between two safely in teams, you are really testing the "give a shit" limits.  You want Penn State-Northwestern to be a play in game?  Wherever you draw the line, there will be stakes, but that line is already so low, that 5-15 SEC teams might get in.  The line is presently between mid and ass.  I have no interest in making the line between ass and mega ass.  I already said the BTN pretending like anyone cares who makes the BTT.  Expansion literally makes that the NCAA tournament line.  We are already at a point where you can win 5 conference games and get in, and people are pretending there is an argument that teams that win fewer should get in?

[medinabuckeye1]

Sorry, but OSU sucks this year, and under any expanded format they would be comfortably in, which is laughable

I mean, I'm obviously not happy with Ohio State's performance this year but they are playing Indiana this weekend with a chance to finish .500 in the league.  

That certainly isn't great but I think it is above "sucks", I think it is mediocre.  

[ELA]

I mean, I'm obviously not happy with Ohio State's performance this year but they are playing Indiana this weekend with a chance to finish .500 in the league. 

That certainly isn't great but I think it is above "sucks", I think it is mediocre. 

So you think .500 teams playing for a shot at a national title means we need to expand access?

[FearlessF]

not to pile on but,........
a 500 team with a double OT win on their home floor vs a shitty UNL team

[ELA]

I hate MSU football fans, but man, UM basketball fans are like watching Arizona Coyotes playoff game in terms of simply not even knowing rules