Tourney Expands...but Only to 68 Teams

[bukie]

They used it as leverage to get a new deal, and the new deal doesn't limit the tournament to 68 teams. There's still room to expand, and they likely will in the next few years.

[hawkeyecub]

They used it as leverage to get a new deal, and the new deal doesn't limit the tournament to 68 teams. There's still room to expand, and they likely will in the next few years.

 

Understood. My point is that the incentive for expansion on the NCAA's end was to get the new deal. Now that they've got that deal, they don't have the major incentive to expand to 96 until we get to around 2020 or so.

 

They aren't going to make substantially more money by expanding it while staying within the current tv deal. They also heard much of the backlash against it over the last few months. As I said CBS/Turner may think they can get more return on their investment by expanding but it's not their decision.

[chuckywang]

They used it as leverage to get a new deal, and the new deal doesn't limit the tournament to 68 teams. There's still room to expand, and they likely will in the next few years.

 

Understood. My point is that the incentive for expansion on the NCAA's end was to get the new deal. Now that they've got that deal, they don't have the major incentive to expand to 96 until we get to around 2020 or so.

 

They aren't going to make substantially more money by expanding it while staying within the current tv deal. They also heard much of the backlash against it over the last few months. As I said CBS/Turner may think they can get more return on their investment by expanding but it's not their decision.

 

If the membership wants to expand, the NCAA will try to expand. Sure, the NCAA has its money now, but the association still answers to their constituents.

[Illini Iceman]

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.

 

If I was a 15 or 16 seed I would rather get a play in game where I could be competitive then just get thrown in to a first round game against the #1 or #2 seed and get destroyed. Sure there are examples of low seeds keeping it close (or even a few #2 seeds winning) but for the most part the entire NCAA tournament experience for those teams is getting blown out of the gym.

[biittner77]

I'd like to see the play in games be for a #9 seed since the #8 is the lowest rated home seed. That gives the play in teams a chance to actually make the final 4 if they can beat the #1 seed in the second round. This also helps the #1 seeds in that they will know who they are playing in the 1st round sooner and will give them extra time to prepare for that team.

[SouthSideRyan]

Why should the 9 seed have to win more games than the 10 seed? They already have to face the best team in their bracket in the 2nd round, now they have to win 2 games, just for that chance?

[chuckywang]

I say just take the last 8 at large teams for the play in games and after you get the 4 winners, you then make your bracket. Edited May 3, 2010 by chuckywang

[Mark Priors Calves]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/ncaa-tournament-expands-to-however-many-teams-hone,17353/