šŸ—ŗ 2024 Conference Realignment thread

Off Topic
81

You want magical symmetry?

Thereā€™s 32 conferences. Expand the tournament to 96. Each of the 32 champs gets a bye. (Havenā€™t throught through the disappearance of the PAC-12 yet). Each of the 64 at larges plays a first round game at a campus site of the higher seeded team on Monday or Tuesday. Then those 32 winners join the 32 conference champs at the sub regional sites Thursday-Friday. Rest of tournament goes on same as before.

Iā€™ll leave it up to some computer algorithm much smarter than me to bracket that setup.

You get an extra 28 teams, whoā€™ll probably go something like 8-20 on the road against higher seeded teams in the first round. Then the rest of the tournament proceeds as always on the exact same schedule.

3 Likes
82

Can we also add a stipulation that there will be no more consolidations of conferences (so that the 32 number doesnā€™t shrink)?

1 Like
83

Well, itā€™s already shrinking to 31 with the end of the PAC-12. Even if the OSU-WSU PAC-12 reverse merger with the MWC happens, the MWC will just disappear. Maybe the UAC breaks off from the WAC/ASUN to get back to 32.

So maybe the top at large gets a bye or you go with 97, I dunno.

I do think having the at larges play an extra game will lead to more lower seeded conference champs pulling round of 64 upsets and a more exciting first weekend.

1 Like
84

The first weekend needs the lower seeds to pull upsets, so Iā€™m cool with that part of it ā€¦ as long as 16 seeds get their chances at the top seeds.

2 Likes
85

Which would be better, a 16 over a 1 in the main bracket or a non-conference champ 1 losing at home in the new 1st round to the last at-large?

Something like South Dakota State over Houston vs Yale over Arizona.

86

Ok, this would be pretty funny (obviously this isnā€™t happening, just fans having fun):

https://x.com/brewbadgers/status/1765512281700319301?s=46&t=wAzMZR-0PRGT1LpN6U5x0g

8 days of conference tournament play before the 1-seed and 2-seed have their first game would be wonderfully absurd.

7 Likes
87

Iā€™m in favor of enough expansion so that thereā€™s eventually a 17-seed that beats a 1-seed, which gets us off the hook as the groundbreaking 1v16 loser.

(Actually, if the NCAA had any stones, Fairleigh Dickinson shoulda been a 17 seed last year. These 16 seed vs. 16 seed play-in games are some BS :grinning:)

13 Likes
88

Agreed.

2 Likes
89

https://x.com/Brett_McMurphy/status/1770114998880333977?s=20

90

They only needed one more school and they couldā€™ve been the Hateful 8ā€¦ more apropos name I think.

3 Likes
91

I think Virginia is suing FSU as part of a group with VT, BC, Wake, Syracuse, and Duke. I donā€™t love the move or the group

2 Likes
92

Ah yes, because as any marriage counselor will attest, the best way to convince your spouse not to leave is to sue them.

4 Likes
93
94
2 Likes
95

Iā€™d be fine with the Big 10, but I swear to God, if our future is tied to VT and we get left out because of itā€¦ā€¦:rage:

5 Likes
96

UNC chairman couldnā€™t even rip the ACC himself? He had to use his BoT? Lame.

1 Like
97

I belive the Big wants FSU and then wants to make a big play for ND. I think the SEC would jump at UVA and UNC.

98

Do you have a source/details of this?

99

https://twitter.com/mbakertbtimes/status/1770086925711311161?s=46&t=R8RfOSdkmZuGdY58WTTYLA

100

Thanks. I get the feeling weā€™re going to be the good soldier until our exit is imminent. Why we probably joined the yes votes for expansion knowing the noā€™s didnā€™t have it. Not the most admirable thing in the world but keeps a cleaner image.

2 Likes