• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Phillips wants Bball Tourney to Expand

College basketball is falling behind and the gap is widening really quickly. I'm not sure this is the answer to stay relevant but the status quo certainly isn't
 
Agreed. The tournament is the one thing that works. Changing it won't help.

Getting rid of one-and-done may be the thing that kills it. Hopefully NIL can save it.
 
PhDeac said:
Agreed. The tournament is the one thing that works. Changing it won't help.

Getting rid of one-and-done may be the thing that kills it. Hopefully NIL can save it.
Click to expand...

totally disagree about one-and-done, imo that was a disaster for college basketball. total lack of familiarity with the best players means fewer compellingly storylines or interesting characters, which has tanked interest.

that along with too much tourney expansion have been the issue imo.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
totally disagree about one-and-done, imo that was a disaster for college basketball. total lack of familiarity with the best players means fewer compellingly storylines or interesting characters, which has tanked interest.

that along with too much tourney expansion have been the issue imo.
Click to expand...

I'll always support our sports teams but given how basketball has quickly moved to the annual "Rent-A-Team" model, it's kind of hard to get interested. I guess the flip-side is if your HC knows how to really work a portal, your team can win a national championship with players you've never heard of before the season began.
 
There’s still going to be “one and done” players just players who weren’t NBA prospects out of high school. The new NBA rules just take away talent who otherwise would have gone to college.

I have a tough time buying the logic that college basketball is worse off because KD, Zion, Wiggins, Cunningham, and other guys who could have gone out of high school had to go to college instead of going directly to the league.
 
PhDeac said:
There’s still going to be “one and done” players just players who weren’t NBA prospects out of high school. The new NBA rules just take away talent who otherwise would have gone to college.

I have a tough time buying the logic that college basketball is worse off because KD, Zion, Wiggins, Cunningham, and other guys who could have gone out of high school had to go to college instead of going directly to the league.
Click to expand...

I think you are an outlier fan.

Most people who watch college basketball don't watch it because of the quality of talent, otherwise they would just watch the NBA, or the G-League or any number of other professional leagues that would beat college teams. And it's a very small minority of college basketball fans that are even bigger NBA fans and enjoy watching future NBA talent.

When I watched college basketball a lot, it was often driven by hate. Hatred of JJ Redick or Melchionni. Hatred of Hansbrough's hype, which drove me to watch random UNC games hoping they would lose. I think that's what drives storylines and rivalries, which is what creates interest. Watching the best 19-year old players is not very interesting, because the guys who are 20+ years old are way better, and I can just watch them instead.
 
Forbes was a little pissed that beating BC and Miami in the ACC-T mean nada.

Had to beat Duke at Duke or beat Duke in the ACC-T.

ACC seems a little too Duke focused.

I don't like Duke.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
I think you are an outlier fan.

Most people who watch college basketball don't watch it because of the quality of talent, otherwise they would just watch the NBA, or the G-League or any number of other professional leagues that would beat college teams. And it's a very small minority of college basketball fans that are even bigger NBA fans and enjoy watching future NBA talent.

When I watched college basketball a lot, it was often driven by hate. Hatred of JJ Redick or Melchionni. Hatred of Hansbrough's hype, which drove me to watch random UNC games hoping they would lose. I think that's what drives storylines and rivalries, which is what creates interest. Watching the best 19-year old players is not very interesting, because the guys who are 20+ years old are way better, and I can just watch them instead.
Click to expand...
This is where I am.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Leave it to the NCAA to try and address arguably their most successful product
Click to expand...

It’s ridiculous. It’s literally the only part of college hoops that isn’t broke and it’s what they want to “fix.”
 
Complacent Deac said:
Forbes was a little pissed that beating BC and Miami in the ACC-T mean nada.

Had to beat Duke at Duke or beat Duke in the ACC-T.

ACC seems a little too Duke focused.

I don't like Duke.
Click to expand...
Duke focused, yes. But not sure I agree necessarily that we would have to had won two games in the ACCT. Of course the Va Tech run did not help.
 
Buttermaker said:
Same here.
Click to expand...

Worth noting two of the people Apetit mentioned were NBA lottery picks.

What separates college football, college basketball, and college baseball is that football can definitively say it’s the best collection of 18-22 year old football players. Basketball used to be able to say that and ratings and interest have declined since they could. Baseball can’t say that and is largely irrelevant except for the postseason which is where basketball is headed.
 
Ball State Deac said:
Duke focused, yes. But not sure I agree necessarily that we would have to had won two games in the ACCT. Of course the Va Tech run did not help.
Click to expand...
Hey, that's exactly what Forbes was told, according to Forbes' video post-ACC tourney. Unless I mis-heard him.

And he was not real happy about that.

I remember thinking "damn, we should have showed up on a neutral floor and beat BC, then played Miami for revenge game, but that win would NOT have gotten us in."
 
It’s not just about Duke. It’s about the lack of quality wins because UNC and VT became quality wins after Wake was already effectively eliminated.
 
it's a bad idea but i kinda get it because college basketball sucks otherwise and they don't have a lot of cards to play other than making the one good thing they have bigger
 
Complacent Deac said:
Hey, that's exactly what Forbes was told, according to Forbes' video post-ACC tourney. Unless I mis-heard him.

And he was not real happy about that.

I remember thinking "damn, we should have showed up on a neutral floor and beat BC, then played Miami for revenge game, but that win would NOT have gotten us in."
Click to expand...
Fair enough.
 
Disagree with expanding the NCAAT, but Jim Phillips is doing his job. He is the ACC advocate. Expanding the NCAAT means more ACC teams get in. WF was among the first team's out of the tournament last year. Phillips is not responsible for overseeing the overall health of NCAA Basketball.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top