Tourney Expands...but Only to 68 Teams

[Andy]

This coming in the news release for a new 14-year deal signed by CBS/Turner Sports and the NCAA today.

 

Some key tidbits of the new deal:

 

Late Wednesday, the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Committee unanimously passed a recommendation to the Division I Board of Directors to increase tournament field size to 68 teams beginning with the 2011 Championship.

 

The NCAA today announced a new 14-year television, internet and wireless rights agreement with CBS Sports and Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., to present the Division I Men’s Basketball Championship beginning in 2011 through 2024 for more than $10.8 billion. As part of the agreement, all games will be shown live across four national networks beginning in 2011 – a first for the 73-year old championship.

 

Beginning with the 2011 championship, opening- , first- and second-round games will be shown nationally on CBS, TBS, TNT and truTV. CBS and Turner will split coverage of the regional semi-final games. CBS will provide coverage of the regional finals, as well as the Final Four® including the National Championship Game through 2015. Beginning in 2016, coverage of the regional finals will be split by CBS and Turner with the Final Four and the National Championship game alternating every year between the CBS Television Network and Turner’s TBS.

 

Under the new rights agreement, NCAA March Madness on Demand®, the Emmy Award-winning video player that provides live streaming video of the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Championship, will continue to be launched from NCAA.com and CBSSports.com. Turner has also secured the rights for any Time Warner digital property. The player will be operated and developed by Turner and have enhanced digital rights allowing the NCAA to deliver content for multiple Turner and Time Warner platforms.

[bukie]

I think this is worse than the 96 team expansion idea.

[kujay]

Guess the migration to cable was inevitable, but I like that it will allow for all games to be broadcast live. That's definitely an improvement, though I suppose it would obviate the need for the Mega March Madness package.

 

As for the expansion of the field, how is it going to work?

[bukie]

Guess the migration to cable was inevitable, but I like that it will allow for all games to be broadcast live. That's definitely an improvement, though I suppose it would obviate the need for the Mega March Madness package.

 

As for the expansion of the field, how is it going to work?

It'll be 4 play-in games among the bottom 8 AQs.

[kujay]

Guess the migration to cable was inevitable, but I like that it will allow for all games to be broadcast live. That's definitely an improvement, though I suppose it would obviate the need for the Mega March Madness package.

 

As for the expansion of the field, how is it going to work?

It'll be 4 play-in games among the bottom 8 AQs.

 

In that event, I don't see the point. Do we really need more mediocre .500 teams from big conferences in the tournament?

[Andy]

Guess the migration to cable was inevitable, but I like that it will allow for all games to be broadcast live. That's definitely an improvement, though I suppose it would obviate the need for the Mega March Madness package.

 

As for the expansion of the field, how is it going to work?

It'll be 4 play-in games among the bottom 8 AQs.

 

In that event, I don't see the point. Do we really need more mediocre .500 teams from big conferences in the tournament?

Illinois would've gotten in with 68 this year, so the obvious answer is yes. :-)

[bukie]

Guess the migration to cable was inevitable, but I like that it will allow for all games to be broadcast live. That's definitely an improvement, though I suppose it would obviate the need for the Mega March Madness package.

 

As for the expansion of the field, how is it going to work?

It'll be 4 play-in games among the bottom 8 AQs.

 

In that event, I don't see the point. Do we really need more mediocre .500 teams from big conferences in the tournament?

Any form of expansion was going to make this happen.

 

This type of expansion does more to minimalize the efforts of the small-conference tournament champion than a 96-team would.

[chuckywang]

Does this pave the way for the Great West conference to get an automatic bid?

 

Also, will CBS still do its thing where they cut live into games that are going down to the wire? I know that all games will now be shown live on one network or another, but it's nice to have CBS switch for us and not have to keep track of every single game all the time. I would hate to miss an exciting finish just because I lost track of a game somewhere along the way.

[Guest]

Does this pave the way for the Great West conference to get an automatic bid?

 

Also, will CBS still do its thing where they cut live into games that are going down to the wire? I know that all games will now be shown live on one network or another, but it's nice to have CBS switch for us and not have to keep track of every single game all the time. I would hate to miss an exciting finish just because I lost track of a game somewhere along the way.

 

My guess is that they'd still have the scores at the top of the screen, hopefully with the channel they're on for easy flipping. My guess on cut-ins is that it would depend on how regional the current CBS game was.

[SouthSideRyan]

Does this pave the way for the Great West conference to get an automatic bid?

 

 

No the Great West is a collection of the worst teams in D1 basketball (Yeah, worse than the SWAC/MEAC). They will not get an auto bid. I wouldn't give them an auto bid if the tourney went to 96. It sends a message to really shitty teams to go D1 for basketball form an awful conference and get a payout.

Edited April 22, 2010 by SouthSideRyan

[UMFan83]

I hate hate hate hate this crap. Why do conference winners get penalized when (admittedly sometimes better) at large teams with .500 records in the conference get to start in the first round? What is the point of having conferences and championship tournaments? I am sure the teams that have been eliminated in the playin game the last few years will tell you that they didn't feel like they were in the tournament. The teams that won don't feel like they won a tournament game (although I'm sure coaches stress it to recruits).

 

And furthermore, the casual basketball fan could care less about these play in games. I don't think I've watched more than 30 seconds total of play in games. I've never heard anyone talk about these games after the fact. Most people don't even know when the game is played. Wouldn't there be like 500 times more interest if the play in games were betweeen the last 8 at large teams in the field? I would watch that with avid interest. The idea is, yes you are a border line NCAA team, so prove it by beating another bubble team.

 

Of course they don't do this because having more BCS at larges in the tourney means more exposure for them, more money for the schools and more viewers for the real NCAA tournament. But logically, this makes no sense. What if baseball added a second Wild Card team, but instead of having the 2 WCs play in a play in tournament, they chose the 85 win NL Central Cubs and 83 win West champ LA Dodgers to play into the playoffs? There would be outrage. Not entirely the same thing since D1 teams don't all compete on the same level, with the same resources, etc, but its a similar analogy.

[Flames24Rulz]

It's still eventually going to get expanded to 96 teams.

[SouthSideRyan]

It's still eventually going to get expanded to 96 teams.

 

Yep, this is their way of easing into it. 96 teams is why they need cable in the new deal, because CBS isn't going to committ to airing low rated game during the week.

[hawkeyecub]

I don't care what any of you say, this makes my [expletive] day. It beats the hell out of 96 and having all 4 games live on tv without having to buy a package or watch on my laptop is awesome.

[snoodmonger]

It's still eventually going to get expanded to 96 teams.

 

Yep, this is their way of easing into it. 96 teams is why they need cable in the new deal, because CBS isn't going to committ to airing low rated game during the week.

 

I've actually resigned myself to the 96 team tourney, and in some weird way, I started looking forward to it.

[soapy]

Guess the migration to cable was inevitable, but I like that it will allow for all games to be broadcast live. That's definitely an improvement, though I suppose it would obviate the need for the Mega March Madness package.

 

As for the expansion of the field, how is it going to work?

It'll be 4 play-in games among the bottom 8 AQs.

This is my only problem with this. The play-in games should be between the final at-large teams in.

[Derwood]

all 4 play-in games should be for the 12 seeds

[CubColtPacer]

The play-in games have to also be fair to the high seeds. Why should certain 5 seeds get to play teams who are tired and have had very little preparation for them while 4 seeds play very similar rested teams? That's the problem that hasn't been solved with having the last at-larges play each other.

[Old Style]

Very happy they decided against 96. :yahoo:

[Banedon]

Very happy they decided against 96. :yahoo:

 

Who says they have? I think this is highly likely just a baby step.

[hawkeyecub]

Very happy they decided against 96. :yahoo:

 

Who says they have? I think this is highly likely just a baby step.

 

Very possible but a big reason for going to 96 was the tv deal. They have a 14-year tv deal now based on a 68-team format. Perhaps CBS/Turner would decide they can get a lot better return on their investment if they add the extra round but from the NCAA's standpoint they have what they wanted.

[bukie]

Very happy they decided against 96. :yahoo:

 

Who says they have? I think this is highly likely just a baby step.

 

Very possible but a big reason for going to 96 was the tv deal. They have a 14-year tv deal now based on a 68-team format. Perhaps CBS/Turner would decide they can get a lot better return on their investment if they add the extra round but from the NCAA's standpoint they have what they wanted.

They have a deal through 2014, and 96 teams is still on the table during the deal.

[ISUCubsFan]

I think adding 3 teams is pointless (better than 31 though), but being able to see every game on TV is a huge plus.

 

The Great West isn't eligible for a bid until 2020 or something, so no need to worry about them.

[Derwood]

The play-in games have to also be fair to the high seeds. Why should certain 5 seeds get to play teams who are tired and have had very little preparation for them while 4 seeds play very similar rested teams? That's the problem that hasn't been solved with having the last at-larges play each other.

 

Because the top 4 seeds are the 16 best teams in the country and are already getting paired with cupcakes (for the most part). We keep hearing that "last teams in" usually occupy the 12 seeds, so why not let the bubble teams play for the honor?

[hawkeyecub]

Very happy they decided against 96. :yahoo:

 

Who says they have? I think this is highly likely just a baby step.

 

Very possible but a big reason for going to 96 was the tv deal. They have a 14-year tv deal now based on a 68-team format. Perhaps CBS/Turner would decide they can get a lot better return on their investment if they add the extra round but from the NCAA's standpoint they have what they wanted.

They have a deal through 2014, and 96 teams is still on the table during the deal.

 

Are you talking about the previous deal through 2014 and those talks or am I misunderstanding you?

 

The driving force behind a possible expansion to 96 was trying to get a new tv deal via an opt-out or when the previous deal expired in 2014. Now that they have that deal for the next 14 years, I don't see a major incentive to jump to 96 in the next handful of years.