Thoughts on adding a loser's bracket in the Big Dance?

by goingforthecorner on Mar 14, 2010 4:07 PM CDT

With the ongoing speculation of the NCAA Tournament expanding to 96 teams, the criticism of it is clearly legit, as it would lower the quality of basketball, along with eliminating any element of suspense going into Selection Sunday. There would be no "Bracketology", or no "bubble teams".

From a financial perspective, adding more games is great idea. It's simple logic: more games = more $$$.

But I believe there are better ways to increase the number of games without reducing the quality of basketball - adding a loser's bracket. Not only are you adding more games, but the quality of basketball is better than simply including teams ranked 66-96. Also, while this is certainly debatable, the "one-and-done" concept of the NCAA Tournament is cruel in nature. Why not give teams a 2nd chance? These are kids after all, so I believe they should be allowed to have a bad game in the tournament, especially considering the pros get multiple chances in the playoffs (each series can go up to 7 games).

The problem with this is there would be too many games to be played. A 96-team single-elimination tournament would have 95 games (N-1, where N = # of teams). A double-elimination tournament for a 64 teams would be (2N-1) 127 games!

So this is where my idea comes into focus. Start the 64-team tournament as usual. The first 2 rounds will be single-elimination like normal. Start the loser's bracket at the Sweet 16. So basically, you're awarded an extra life by winning your first two games. Round 1 is 32 games, Round 2 is 16 games, and the loser's bracket for 16 teams would be (2*16 - 1) 31 games. So if my math is right, this solution would have 79 games total.

What are your thoughts?

All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Interesting.

Haven’t heard this one yet, but worth exploring for sure. How much longer would this make the tournament then (# days)? April ~~Madness~~… Apeshit?

by Infield Elephant on Mar 14, 2010 4:31 PM CDT reply actions

Matchup chaos

Can you see a good way to get a team out of the losers bracket? Look at CWS — ugly.

Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.

by Caradoc on Mar 14, 2010 5:36 PM CDT reply actions

Hmmmm.....

I am thinking…..interesting indeed.

"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." ~ Will Muschamp
""I always felt like, and I paid a price for it, that it didn't seem right for one guy to bring me down." ~ The Tyler Rose

by Mulliganville on Mar 14, 2010 7:45 PM CDT reply actions

Personally...

I dont like it. It would make the upsets so much less memorable, as the losing team wouldnt be knocked out. Good idea, but its not my cup a’ tea. :P

by Paramount on Mar 15, 2010 5:44 PM CDT reply actions

I like the idea

But not having a championship game could be trouble for TV, plus I like the one championship game. how about making the sweet 16 and elite 8 rounds double elimination, where 2 teams get into the final 4 unbeaten (let them play the team from the other sides loser’s bracket) and the other 2 teams enter if they win the loser’s bracket? This would only add 8 more games, but it would be interesting and the games added would be better competition. If you wanted more games you could have double elimination from the round of 32.

by Wells on Mar 16, 2010 11:38 AM CDT reply actions

Not a bad idea

by goingforthecorner on Mar 16, 2010 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions

NIT

I thought the NIT was the loser’s bracket.

"I live in the tower with Coach Brown." -Bevo

by run Bevo run on Mar 16, 2010 11:40 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs

touche

by goingforthecorner on Mar 16, 2010 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions

Maybe we should expand the football season so that EVERY team can play in a bowl?

JK. Interesting idea but March Madness is currently the most perfect scenario in all of sports. Don’t wanna screw that up. Just too dynamic to change. You’d quickly lose classics like Villanova beating Georgetown, Danny & the Miracles beating ou, & NC State beating Phi Slamma Jamma. As much as I still am bitter about that last one, it is still legendary after 2 decades.

by robthecob on Mar 16, 2010 3:28 PM CDT reply actions

and divine as it made a name for a man whose calling was so much greater.

"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." ~ Will Muschamp
""I always felt like, and I paid a price for it, that it didn't seem right for one guy to bring me down." ~ The Tyler Rose

by Mulliganville on Mar 16, 2010 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions