Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

ACC to propose expanding Dance to 72 teams

Why stop at 72? Why not 80? Or 88?

Wait, why not 124 and just add a whole new round entirely?

No wait, how about 248? Why not 248? Let everybody in! Juice boxes and participation ribbons for everybody!
 
The bigger the field, the bigger the bubble will be. This would just make more teams pissed at who gets in.

Or, it's an attempt to sideline the lesser conferences with auto-bids. I don't like that angle either.
 
I'm not huge on the idea of expanding the tournament and I think its perfect as it stands now (best sporting event on the calendar IMO). This idea is actually a pretty good one. What the ACC is proposing is another first four to take place in the western part of the country-per John Swofford's comments. Let's go back three years and look at the Holy Cross team that beat Southern and then lost to Oregon. That school is in the Northeast, and they won a game in Dayton. Following that, they had to travel out to Spokane to play Oregon.......and any city in that part of Washington isn't the easiest to get to. The thinking here is making the travel easier on teams who have to play at sites on Thursday or Friday if they win more than anything. Its a lot easier to get to sites out here (San Diego or Boise to use this year's examples) from Boulder or Albuquerque than it is from Ohio. All this does is make the travel a little bit easier on the teams who come out of the play-in games. Its not that bad of an idea.
 
Buffnik said:
I like the idea of having 8 teams on the 16 line all having “First Four” games. The domino effect is that everyone ends up with a tougher matchup in Rd1.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...opose-expanding-ncaa-tournament-four-teams-72
Click to expand...

Strong disagree. If we're going to expand (and **** that idea), make it the last teams in to the field do the play in games. I HATE that there are 16 seeds that don't get rewarded with a "real" game in the tourney. Making the dance is their championship, they shouldn't be punished by being sent to Dayton. Does it lessen the odds of 16 vs 1 upsets? Yeah. I don't care.
 
Not Sure said:
Why stop at 72? Why not 80? Or 88?

Wait, why not 124 and just add a whole new round entirely?

No wait, how about 248? Why not 248? Let everybody in! Juice boxes and participation ribbons for everybody!
Click to expand...

You will never make everyone happy. Unless you include everybody in a tournament then the first team or teams out will make the argument that they should be in because they are as good as or better than the last team or teams that did get in. Doesn't matter that neither the last teams in or out have any shot at winning the thing it is just about complaining they should be in.

Then the more you let in the more top teams complain that the bottom teams don't deserve to be in and they the season leading up to the tournament is cheapened.

The last thing we need it to see a bunch of teams that couldn't even come close to winning half the games in their conference stomping their feet that they should be in or waving banners because they did.

I agree with @Goose that for some teams from smaller conferences getting in and going to take a whipping is still their reward, still their dream, and they earn that shot. Hard to make the argument that some team that goes 6-12 in a major conference after fattening up on pre-season payday games to get to 18 wins is being denied their dream. All they had to do is win some more games in conference or their conference tourney to be in.
 
I loooove a good Cinderella sorry. But **** this. First four isn't real, and adding to it won't make me buy it. We get plenty if Cinderella with 64. And no more teams have a legitimate chance of making the second weekend
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top