Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Brookline, MA

    NCAA signs 14-year deal with CBS/Turner; 68 team tourney next year

    Official press release from the NCAA: http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaah...+agreement+rls

    Sadly, I think that the 96-team tournament is still on the way, but it won't be happening next year. The good part about this is that every first and second round game will be on a different station, so no more criticism of not being able to watch a particular game.

  2. #2
    CBS Sports has broadcast the NCAA Division I Menís Basketball Championship since 1982. This yearís broadcast of the Championship game earned an average national household rating/share of 14.2/23, up 31% from a 10.8/18 last year, the highest rating in five years.

    I guess all that Duke hatred translates into viewership!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lewisville, NC
    68 teams---each region gets a play-in game, I guess?

    Glad to see the extended coverage for early round games

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by arydolphin View Post
    Official press release from the NCAA: http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaah...+agreement+rls

    Sadly, I think that the 96-team tournament is still on the way, but it won't be happening next year. The good part about this is that every first and second round game will be on a different station, so no more criticism of not being able to watch a particular game.
    So that kills the DirecTV monopoly on Mega March Madness, yes? (I mean, I suppose DirecTV could still offer such a package, but there's no point to it since everything will be on the regular channels). I'll trade a 68 team tournament for that. Question, though - are the play-in games all going to be for 16 seeds? Or will the last 8 at large teams have to face off in opening round matchups? Because I would greatly prefer the latter.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  5. #5
    Limiting the NCAA tournament to 68 teams is good news for UNC. They will have a chance to come back and win the NIT next year!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Calipari Hell
    Beats the 96-team alternative (at least for now).

    Nice to have all the games available, of course, although it'll be strange to see the Final Four on TBS in a few years. Will TBS retain the CBS production? Not that CBS does it perfectly, but the CBS approach/music/graphics/etc. are kinda tournament tradition at this point.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Washington, DC

    New NCAA Tourney deal: 68 teams

    From espn:
    http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5125307

    The story is CBS will retain the rights, but they're adding Turner Broadcasting as well. This means every game will be shown in its entirety on different networks (think TBS, TNT).

    Also, I can't really tell from the article, but it looks like they decided against the 96 team tournament, and opted instead to go with 68.

  8. #8
    Pros: No 96 team tourney (yet), I can watch every Duke game without a special package, and the play-in round becomes mildly more interesting.

    Con: I will now have to listen to Kenny Smith before, at the half, and after Duke games.

  9. #9
    Recommend merging w/thread started on this topic 40 minutes ago.

  10. #10
    Great news! It seems like they still could theoretically increase it to 96 teams during their April 29th meeting...but that sounds unlikely at least for this year. Perhaps 96 will be farther down the road, but I hope not. At least we get to watch all the games on TV at once; that's certainly a welcome development.

    Yeah, they definitely aren't clear if the additional teams are simply going to be play-in games. Honestly, if they want better TV ratings/revenue, they should make the at-large bubble teams play in those opening round games. Would people rather view Arkansas-Pine Bluff vs. Winthrop or a Virginia Tech - Illinois matchup? Clearly, the latter is going to get better ratings and then you still reward teams for winning their conference tournament. Just my opinion...But then you'd probably have to put them as an at-large into like a #12 seed or something like that, so that might logistically not make sense.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Washington, DC
    I apologize, totally missed the other thread. *Shame*

  12. #12

    Winners & Losers

    Winners

    Number 1 seeds (and other high seeds), who will still play a small conference champion in the first round, not a major conference team like they could in a 96 team field.

    Losers

    Small conferences (assuming the 4 play-in games are champions of 8 small conferences).

    Rabbit ears viewers, who won't get to see the chamionship game in 2016.

    ESPN

    UNC, who might have made the 2011 tourney in a 96 team field.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philly
    Quote Originally Posted by pfrduke View Post
    So that kills the DirecTV monopoly on Mega March Madness, yes? (I mean, I suppose DirecTV could still offer such a package, but there's no point to it since everything will be on the regular channels). I'll trade a 68 team tournament for that. Question, though - are the play-in games all going to be for 16 seeds? Or will the last 8 at large teams have to face off in opening round matchups? Because I would greatly prefer the latter.
    I'd imagine it's the former, and there are actually a couple of good reasons to not do the latter. First, it would create a competitive imbalance in the middle of the field for starters. There's no way you can assume that the last 8 teams (playing for four spots) would fall neatly into a single seed line. For example, this past year, the last 4 teams in ranged from 10-12 in seed. There is no fair way to determine which 7-seed would get to have a play-in winner and which 5-seed would have to play a rested team. Yes, I know that only one 1-seed got a play-in before, but there is little competitive difference between the 16 seeds, rested or not. This won't be the case with the at large teams. The other issue is time between games.

    Second, the 16-seeds typically have their championship up to a week or more before the play-in game, plenty of time to rest, whereas the last at-large teams could be playing the weekend before, and with 4 play-in games, there will likely be no Friday guarantee. This year, that could have caused a scenario where a team like Miss. St. would have played for the SEC title on Sunday, a play-in on Tuesday, a First-round game on Thursday, and if they somehow won the last two, a second round game on Saturday. Adding in the early SEC tourney games, that's 6 games in 9 days, something the NCAA would likely try and avoid.

    At the end of the day, you end up pushing the lowest 8 low major conferences into play in games, where these teams always got crushed in the first round anyway. These aren't legit mid-major teams that you just haven't heard of because of their conference affiliation, they aren't that good. Having 4 play in rounds may lessen the stigma of playing the game and legitimize wins gained in that round, at least for low-major bragging rights. I could see the play-in games turning into a sort-of basketball bowl game for low majors, now that they will all be subjected to it.

    It's not a terrible idea to try and make the last 8 at large teams play in, but it needs a more refined idea on how to do it (see the link in my signature if you want to read a more refined idea on how to do just that)
    Pratt '09
    GO DUKE!

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Neals384 View Post
    Winners

    Number 1 seeds (and other high seeds), who will still play a small conference champion in the first round, not a major conference team like they could in a 96 team field.

    Losers

    Small conferences (assuming the 4 play-in games are champions of 8 small conferences).

    Rabbit ears viewers, who won't get to see the chamionship game in 2016.

    ESPN

    UNC, who might have made the 2011 tourney in a 96 team field.
    Odd enough, this isn't quite correct:

    See those smaller conferences, yes they'll need to win the play in game to get into the 64 team field....

    BUT, and this is KEY, the money a small conference gets from a team winning a play-in game is the SAME as if they won any other game.

    So the small conferences that WIN their play-in games get money as if they won the first round....which is a big deal to those conferences (its like 250K split between the members...a nice extra bit of revenue for smaller funded bball programs).

    So yeah, from a fundamentalist point of view, the smallest conferences are getting jobbed. But less so than you'd think.

    ------------------

    Of note: this does make 16 seeds probably BETTER and more likely to beat 15s, as the play-in games will probably be between the 4 would-be 16s and 4 would-be 15s, meaning a #1 seed is essentially going to be playing a 15 seed most of the time.
    <devildeac> anyone playing drinking games by now?
    7:49:36<Wander> drink every qb run?
    7:49:38<loran16> umm, drink every time asack rushes?
    7:49:38<wolfybeard> @devildeac: drink when Asack runs a keeper
    7:49:39 PM<CB&B> any time zack runs, drink

    Carolina Delenda Est

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Dillon, Colorado
    Can't complain about this. Hope they stay with 68 for a few years.

    I think "losers" will include 2 and 3 seeds -- some years, that will be us. They'll play slightly better teams in the first round as more weaker teams get stuffed into play-in games. Thought of another way, 2's will play what are now 14's and 3's will get current 13's. I don't think 1-seeds will be affected much as they should be good enough to beat any minor conference champion that gets thrown at them. OTOH 4's are already somewhat vulnerable to lose to 13's, so matching them against 12's wouldn't change much there.
    Between me and every ideal I always find Scheisskopfs, Peckems, Korns and Cathcarts. And that sort of changes the ideal. -- Joseph Heller

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burlington, VT
    Good news:
    -the conference play and conference tournaments stay relevant
    -the competition remains high
    -the tournament remains "elite" instead of a free-for-all party
    -the NCAA get their money without completely ruining the tournament
    -all games will be broadcast live on separate networks

    Bad news:
    -could just be a temporary fix with a 96 team expansion coming in the future
    -tampering with an already pretty solid format (although this proposal is not so bad)

    Question marks:
    -How will the format work? Each region getting a play-in? If so, between small conference champions or at large bubble teams?
    -What will it look like on the other networks like TBS, TNT, truTV?

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Neals384 View Post
    Winners

    Number 1 seeds (and other high seeds), who will still play a small conference champion in the first round, not a major conference team like they could in a 96 team field.

    Losers

    Small conferences (assuming the 4 play-in games are champions of 8 small conferences).

    Rabbit ears viewers, who won't get to see the chamionship game in 2016.


    ESPN

    UNC, who might have made the 2011 tourney in a 96 team field.
    CBS not airing the marquis game of one of their signature events on their over the air network is one more step to self-obsolescence.

    Going to 96 teams would have been a running leap there, like adding in all the intrigue and drama of the NIT to their NCAA National Championship coverage.

    Did the NCAA and CBS retain the online internet rights for all the games?

  18. #18
    Oh sure - all of you with your play in game for each region have a logical way of doing it, but wouldn't it be more fun to have a play-in tourney ahead of time? ACC Tournament style and to take place during the week before the first round. Monday night - each team flying in that day - 4 games in the first play-in round, a semi-final and final ... on successive days ... and the winner gets to play a Friday game versus a number one seed.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The City of Brotherly Love
    Quote Originally Posted by DallasDevil View Post
    Con: I will now have to listen to Kenny Smith before, at the half, and after Duke games.
    Pro: Listening to Sir Charles keep Kenny in line.

  20. #20
    If I had a dollar for every time I posted or said the tournament would be on espn next season, I would have had enough to fly to durham for the banquet.

    That typed, I am S O happy to be wrong.

    To celebrate, punch up some of these:

    http://www.gusjohnsongetsbuckets.com/


Similar Threads

  1. Surprise Team, Coach Of The Year, Newcomer Of The Year In The ACC
    By NYC Duke Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 03-01-2010, 01:21 PM
  2. MBB & WBB NCAA Champs in same year
    By NYC Duke Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-01-2009, 05:16 PM
  3. Florida Inks 10 year/$100 Million Deal w/ Fox Sports
    By gotham devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-17-2008, 06:25 PM
  4. Down year for ACC or just a down year for NCAA?
    By ACCBBallFan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-26-2007, 08:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •