An embarrassing 8-22 season
- Thread starter Eight Legger
- Start date
It’s another reason to expand ncaa tourney. Those r basically all dead even NIT. Just cut NIT and expand. The portal opens March 24. Teams will continue to opt out of NIT.
Memo SpiderTrap
I can't imagine Coach Mooney returning this season. It is time for someone else to rebuild the program.
I liked the NIT when it had the eligibility rules of if you win your regular season conference title, you get an auto bid to NIT. This gave lower level teams who won their league, but lose in the conference tourney - a good post-season to play in and you usually had a good number of P5 programs play in it as well. Plus - you had the carrot of playing in MSG for the final four, which is a good thing.
NOW - it has changed and as usual - is skewed to the P5 programs. For this year - two top Non NCAA teams from the ACC and SEC get auto bids. Then the top remaining team from the next 12 conferences (rated by KenPon). So I don't see P5 teams backing out this year because they have agreed to this setup. But you could see players opt out for their teams. If your a kid looking to transfer - why play in the NIT, get in the portal - get the process started and move on.
But even if you got rid of the NIT - still not in favor of expansion. Like I said before (stolen from Jay Bilas) - the tourney is already expanded. Everyone in their conference tourney is in a play-in game. Look at last night. Delaware - a 12 seed in CAA and overall
16-19 record made it to the CAA finals before losing to UNCW. That was their play in games. They had a chance and lost. So to me - expansion is not needed. We already have it.
Trap the NIT rules were same last year & u said exact same thing. U said there would be collusion of p5 teams to play in NIT. I said watch there will be tons of opt outs. R we doing this again? I don’t think u get it. It’s not skewed to p5 bc they mostly opt out. That rule was put in place just so NIT could hopefully get some p5s bc they knew so many opt outs. It wasn’t pushed by p5 it was pushed by nit/ncaa. Trying to get some eyeballs on it. I don’t mind that rule bc u want a few bigger teams but there r not going to be too many. Fact is it’s more open to teams on Richmond level. Very evident. And the elimination of low major winning the league rule helps us too. Whether u like that rule or not, it helps Richmond…in years we actually have a chance.
That's the way I would look at it realistically. At least the A-10 invites everyone so everyone, no matter how bad you were, has a chance.
yeah, but nobody saw it. nobody talked about it. nobody filled out a bracket. if the tree falls but nobody hears it, did it make a sound?
the smaller conference tournaments have no where near the same impact as making March Madness.
we're already past 64 teams. I'm all for expanding the play-in games.
We wouldn’t even be invited to the Virginia High School basketball class 1A district tournament this year.
We barely beat Florida Tech and they went 6-22 in Division 2.
Come on - they looked like a team on the upswing - have you checked out their SOS before making this comment?
That’s why Coach Tarrant’s name is on the court! Thanks for the memories Coach!On the other hand, seasons ending .600 winning or better since 1955 is an interesting list
Richmond Spiders Men's Basketball Index | College Basketball at Sports-Reference.com
Check out the Richmond Spiders College Basketball History, Stats, Records, Polls, Leaders and More College Basketball Stats at Sports-Reference.comwww.sports-reference.com
Go Spiders!
Yes, but Fla Tech got up to play a legendary D1 team. Great effort by Fla Tech.
Nobody is watching the 98 plays 99 play in game to see who plays the 11th ranked team from the SEC. And to think by expanding that more mid-majors will get an opportunity is crazy. You expand - your just letting 19-12 Standford, 17-15 Florida State, 18-14 Cincy, 17-14 Nebraska, and other low end P5 programs get into the tourney and mid-majors and lower conference teams will be pushed further down in seeding. Your chances of the cinderella stories will practically disappear because of the amount of games and teams mids will have to play.
It should at least be 72. Bottom two AQ and bottom two at-large in each of the four regions as play in.
With 96, it would be 16vs17 in each region to play 1, or 24v9 to play 8.
First year I didn't watch a minute of Spider men's basketball. Hell, it's the first year I missed watching more than a game or two.
Joyfully following the Spider women's team all year instead. Plan to pack the car on Saturday and head out to wherever we are playing next week! Go Spiders!
Joyfully following the Spider women's team all year instead. Plan to pack the car on Saturday and head out to wherever we are playing next week! Go Spiders!
What do u mean 98 plays 99? I’d actually go for 96 myself & rip off band aid (and really open it up to non majors) as I’ve said b4 but that’s not being talked about as far as I know. & ppl r watching those play in games. Agree with sman we r past 64 anyway. I always laugh when 1 argument is why mess it up it’s perfect. They must not realize we r past 64. What’s a few more play in games when u have 4.
While I get this very loose theory of league tourneys as play ins…those would still be there they wouldn’t go away for most leagues so that excitement remains. And u even have it for the bad p5 teams. Plus those guys still playing for seeding.
I want expansion for the mids. That is who is squeezed out the most imo. And so many r deserving. Drake might have been out without winning mvc. That’s nonsense.
even with less expansion say 8-14, non p5 like mids or lower won’t get all the bids but have to get a good part. I’m a little cynical due to p5s power too but I actually don’t think there would be a ton of desire to put teams w like 6 wins in p5 conference in. But maybe u give up a couple if it gets u much more midmajor access.
I realize it won’t help Mooney I’m thinking about our next coach and future Richmond access I think we’d like to see at least better ncaa odds, at least I would.
Also the auto bid mids & lower won’t be playing those games or be pushed down. The play ins r for at larges and 16 seeds. Tho that could change. U r protected in a sense with the auto. u will still have march madness upsets which is great for TV early rounds. & now you'd get those upsets from non majors in play in games, tho in reality they really r not upsets.
That's my take Trap.
PS again the NIT is dying. just cut it & that can partially be absorbed by NCAA. I don't know why u keep saying u don’t see P5 teams backing out of NIT. More back out than play.
While I get this very loose theory of league tourneys as play ins…those would still be there they wouldn’t go away for most leagues so that excitement remains. And u even have it for the bad p5 teams. Plus those guys still playing for seeding.
I want expansion for the mids. That is who is squeezed out the most imo. And so many r deserving. Drake might have been out without winning mvc. That’s nonsense.
even with less expansion say 8-14, non p5 like mids or lower won’t get all the bids but have to get a good part. I’m a little cynical due to p5s power too but I actually don’t think there would be a ton of desire to put teams w like 6 wins in p5 conference in. But maybe u give up a couple if it gets u much more midmajor access.
I realize it won’t help Mooney I’m thinking about our next coach and future Richmond access I think we’d like to see at least better ncaa odds, at least I would.
Also the auto bid mids & lower won’t be playing those games or be pushed down. The play ins r for at larges and 16 seeds. Tho that could change. U r protected in a sense with the auto. u will still have march madness upsets which is great for TV early rounds. & now you'd get those upsets from non majors in play in games, tho in reality they really r not upsets.
That's my take Trap.
PS again the NIT is dying. just cut it & that can partially be absorbed by NCAA. I don't know why u keep saying u don’t see P5 teams backing out of NIT. More back out than play.
Last edited:
Right now 68 teams 4 play in games
Could be;
72 teams (8 games 2 per region)
76 12
80 16
84 20
88 24
92 28
96 32 (similar to when there was 48, 16 games & 16 byes)
Could be;
72 teams (8 games 2 per region)
76 12
80 16
84 20
88 24
92 28
96 32 (similar to when there was 48, 16 games & 16 byes)
Last edited:
Do it like the FA Cup in England. Everyone is in, and it gets played during certain windows throughout the year, culminating in March once it gets down to 64 teams. Pure draw of ping-pong balls each round.
Dominate the sports calendar for every "tournament" window throughout the year.
Dominate the sports calendar for every "tournament" window throughout the year.
Similar threads
