NCAA Tournament to likely expand to 96 teams in 2011

[imb]

hahahaha there's no way a kansas football fan is trying to talk football smack

 

 

Hey, you were the one talking basketball smack to a KU fan when your team paid Tiny Gallon to help lead them to a 14-18 record.

 

hahahaha, are your feelings really this hurt? hopefully the jayhawks football team lucks into another lucky couple of years sometime in the next 3 decades to soothe your pain (ps. the money was from some idiot in florida, and I think all the money went to the buffet line)

[NCCubFan]

If the goal of the tournament is to crown a true national champion (not to just raise as much money as possible)......

:pig: :pig: :pig: :pig: :pig:

[bcl412]

The more I think about it the more I welcome a 96 team tournament.

 

I still kind of want to see a 300+ team super tournament featuring all division 1 teams though.

[SpongeWorthy]

When someone makes fun of OU they're butt hurt whiners but when imb smacks talk you it's because it's fresh and inventive.

 

just fyi

[imb]

thank you

 

that's one, who else is with me

[snoodmonger]

hahahaha there's no way a kansas football fan is trying to talk football smack

 

 

Hey, you were the one talking basketball smack to a KU fan when your team paid Tiny Gallon to help lead them to a 14-18 record.

 

hahahaha, are your feelings really this hurt? hopefully the jayhawks football team lucks into another lucky couple of years sometime in the next 3 decades to soothe your pain (ps. the money was from some idiot in florida, and I think all the money went to the buffet line)

 

I wasn't being all that serious. Though it will be interesting to see who's worse-ku's fb team or ou's hoops team.

 

What I don't understand about the revenue argument is this: wouldn't a football playoff generate a ton of revenue too? If so, why fight it so hard.

[imb]

if ou fans have their way, it will be the sooner basketball program, since all these idiots want now is 10-cade davises

[Banedon]

And you haven't really made a compelling argument in favor of it the new format, either.

 

Revenue.

 

Booster donations are way down because of the economy, so schools need to pay for sports programs how they can. Basketball is one of the few college sports that actually make money, so they need that revenue to pay for other sports. This gets more revenue to more schools, and doesn't negatively affect the teams involved in the tournament in any way.

 

I meant an argument that shows how it improves the tournament as a sporting event and a championship event.

 

Well I'm sorry that the NCAA didn't realize they needed to fulfill your requirements of what benefits needed to be met, but I think "more revenue without much in the way of negatives" was sufficient for them.

 

Increased revenue is a given. Obviously, that's why they're considering expansion, and it's why they'll do it, regardless of the public perception of the move.

 

It's pretty obvious that, in this thread, people weren't debating the revenue benefits of expanding the tournament. They're debating how an expanded tournament affects the event itself.

 

If you can't figure out the distinction between the two, you're kind of an idiot.

 

Listen, can we get the rules to this argument in writing? I mean, I don't wanna be an idiot and not follow the 10 snoodmonger commandments of discussion tournament expansion here.

 

The point is, there doesn't have be a compelling argument in favor of expansion that doesn't involve revenue. As you pointed out yourself, that's why they want to expand. Frankly, the compelling argument needs to be made from the other side...that there's some great harm being done by expanding the tournament. And so far, I haven't seen one.

[weis21]

What I don't understand about the revenue argument is this: wouldn't a football playoff generate a ton of revenue too? If so, why fight it so hard.

Apparently it's not about overall revenue. A football playoff would almost certainly have a greater interest, not to mention additional games, that would generate more money for television networks and NCAA as a whole. The issue that I have heard is about how the money is divided. Under the current format, each school and each school's conference stands to make a certain percentage depending on their particular bowl. If a playoff were to be created, it is believed that the schools and the school's conference would make considerably less because it would be spread out in a more even manner throughout NCAA.

 

I guess kind of like the same assumption that Notre Dame doesn't join a conference because they already have the attention and benefits without having to share their profits with a dozen other schools.

[biittner77]

What I don't understand about the revenue argument is this: wouldn't a football playoff generate a ton of revenue too? If so, why fight it so hard.

Apparently it's not about overall revenue. A football playoff would almost certainly have a greater interest, not to mention additional games, that would generate more money for television networks and NCAA as a whole. The issue that I have heard is about how the money is divided. Under the current format, each school and each school's conference stands to make a certain percentage depending on their particular bowl. If a playoff were to be created, it is believed that the schools and the school's conference would make considerably less because it would be spread out in a more even manner throughout NCAA.

 

I guess kind of like the same assumption that Notre Dame doesn't join a conference because they already have the attention and benefits without having to share their profits with a dozen other schools.

 

This is exactly the case. That's why a playoff can only happen if the BCS conferences formed their own division. I'd imagine the NCAA fought fight against that for the sake of the mid majors.

[Derwood]

in basketball, every single school in the NCAA splits the earnings evenly, regardless of who wins (or even makes the tournament). The reason the bowl games can get away with giving millions to single schools is because the NCAA doesn't sanction the BCS. There IS no NCAA championship in football

[NCCubFan]

Yes there is. It's called the Football Championship Subdivision (formerly Division 1-AA).

 

I know what you meant, though.

[Soul]

It would be a difficult choice for me between a Golden Girls re-run and, say, #90 vs. #56.

 

Beyond that, it's not going to affect me. I just won't be watching, that's all. I don't particularly like the idea but imb is right in the sense that it's no skin off my back.