this is the biggest piece of news i ever saw on this site.

Have you set up a league, RCade?

Have you set up a league, RCade?

A great idea.

Go Gators!

(I know, they don't have a chance, but once a Gator, always a Gator!)

ORANGE & BLUE! GOOOOOOO TEAM!

Lost a $10 bet in Vegas on them a couple years ago when they didn't cover the spread. Ended my sports betting career right then.

Low threshold of pain ya got there, DaProf.

Man, Kentucky BARELY pulled that off today.....whew!
Feel bad for Miss. State not getting in, though...they played their asses off against us.

Yeah,
Well, I had just saved a bunch of money on my...

No wait...I'd actually made $5000 playing blackjack and craps that day.

Lose money - sports betting.

Make money - craps & blackjack.

Ever since then, I've been rolling bones when my ADHD acts up and doubling down when it doesn't. Makes a great second income.

Consider this. If they added another weekend of play, then almost all teams could make it to the big dance (256). I know, I know, it would screw the NIT, plus the bracket wouldn't fit on one page anymore. As far as I'm concerned, the present arrangement is fine. But, since the NCAA is considering expanding the tournament to 96 teams, what the heck?

So why should they open the tourney to more teams? Was any team with any chance of actually winning not selected? You want to be selected, win more games.

It seems like not grading papers with a red pen or 6 yr-old soccer teams where they do not keep score and everyone gets a trophy.

Screw the NIT? Who cares about the NIT? Who watches the NIT? That being said, why expand at all? Or does the regular season and conference tournaments mean nothing? There's always about 4 or 5 teams that whine about being screwed, but so what? They're all from mid-majors that nobody cares about anyways. I say no.

Of course, I say no as well. Those teams who consider themselves left out are most likely not a threat to win the championship at all. The previous two posts are expressing my point. The system is fine as is. Why does the NCAA feel that it is necessary to expand at all?

$$$$$

Yeah SDSU!

Hey Murph, I'll take Tennessee and give you 10 points. $100??

#11 | Posted by Republican4ever at 2010-03-14 10:20 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

$$$$$

figures

Re: #9 and #11: There are teams that get left out that have a much, much better chance to win it than a bunch of the teams that are in the tournament.

Montecore true but I like the automatic bids from small conferences. Once in a while you get some pretty cool upsets.

Go Orange! What the hell I live here.. gotta root for the home team even if it hurts.

Cornell made it!

Sweet they will take it all for sure this year.

Go Ohio State!!

#1 - Like there's something more important than the NCAAs. Ha!

#6 - You got that right, TheTom! Miss State gave entucky all it could handle. Yesterday's game made it apparent that the Wildcats just have the will to win and nothing can stop them this year.

At least, that's my story...

And I agree with all the others who said expanding the tournament is just stupid. Of course it's about money. One could argue that it's already too big at 64 teams - well, 65, with that silly "play-in" game. Regular season and conference tourneys would become meaningless.

But ok, I have to admit, the first weekend might be the most fun - the non-stop games, the upsets, the kids playing their hearts out.

kentucky vs kansas

" much, much better chance to win it than a bunch of the teams that are in the tournament."

Then cut back the automatic bids.

Look at all the conference winners that are 16, 15, and 14 seed. Although Sienna will advance.

Aren't both of the play-ins conference champs?

"Montecore true but I like the automatic bids from small conferences. Once in a while you get some pretty cool upsets.

#17 | Posted by jackass"

I agree with this, so disagree with the suggestion LetUs made in #23. I also think that 64 is plenty of teams.