The Really Big Dance?

[airowe]

But the potential expansion of the NCAA tournament has support in collegiate circles, particularly from college basketball coaches. The idea talked about with TV networks would likely take it from its current field of 65 teams to 96 teams and add another week to the competition, with the top 32 teams receiving byes. The move has been characterized as folding the NIT into the NCAA tournament.

The NCAA clearly expects that the added week of games would significantly increase the tournament’s rights fee. A larger field would mean more content, more scheduling opportunities and theoretically more revenue for the broadcaster and the NCAA, which derives more than 90 percent of its total annual revenue from the tournament’s media deal. Nearly all of that revenue passes through the NCAA and is distributed to its member institutions.

http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/64263

[mgtr]

Why bother with small changes, why not just increase the field size to the total number of Division I teams (300+)? In fact, why not just eliminate the regular season and replace it with the tournament?
The NCAA is getting too greedy by far.

[Indoor66]

Why not make it like the NBA and have a best of 7 series as well? We could stretch the season to July 1. I think this is a stupid idea.

[weezie]

Yeah, who cares about Augusta anyway?

[Bluedog]

The Onion's thoughts:

http://www.theonion.com/content/vide...rch_madness_to

Edit: woo hoo! Mike Gminski!

[YourLandlord]

http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/64263

Is that right? 90% of its total annual revenue from the tournament's media deal? Is that total annual basketball revenue?

[sagegrouse]

Is that right? 90% of its total annual revenue from the tournament's media deal? Is that total annual basketball revenue?

No, it's 90% of TOTAL revenue. The NCAA gets very little from college football because the post-season money is wrapped up in the bowl games.

A football playoff system would probably benefit the NCAA, not to mention TCU and Boise State fans.

sagegrouse

[BlueintheFace]

God, I hope this doesn't happen. It is so good right now.

[YourLandlord]

God, I hope this doesn't happen. It is so good right now.

You do realize it used to be 32...and people like it better now...

[Duvall]

Let's be honest, there are already more spots in the tournament than there are deserving teams. 64 is the perfect number for a balanced tournament - get rid of the play-in game and leave it alone.

[Johnboy]

Is that right? 90% of its total annual revenue from the tournament's media deal? Is that total annual basketball revenue?

You may be able to find it here, if you do a little web-mining. (My connection here at home is godawful slow and I'm just not patient enough).

[roywhite]

Let's be honest, there are already more spots in the tournament than there are deserving teams. 64 is the perfect number for a balanced tournament - get rid of the play-in game and leave it alone.

Agree; and conference tournaments give nearly every team a chance to play their way into the tournament. A team can have a mediocre or even poor season and still have a shot at making the NCAA field by getting hot during the conference tourny.

Think of those celebrations we see when an upstart wins their tournament to get to the "Big Dance". That, among other things, would likely be a casualty of an expanded NCAA field.

Don't mess with the current format.

[BlueintheFace]

You do realize it used to be 32...and people like it better now...

hahahahah... yah, I do. Thanks.

You do realize that many of the teams that would not have been included in a tournament of 32 have made it to the final four in the current field size? You do realize that none of the teams included in the expanded field would have a shot at that same accomplishment right?

[Jarhead]

Golly, I can't wait for the inaugural Toilet Bowl game, but that won't happen until we get 256 teams involved, just like in basketball. The Onion is a little over board on the 4KB tourney, but we may have to go there to keep the coaches happy.

Seriously, folks. Let's look at this. If expanding the tourney is good, then let's go to 160 teams. In the first week, the bottom 128 teams would play on Thursday and Friday, cutting that part of the field to 64 teams. On Saturday and Sunday, those 64 teams play to cut it to 32. Those 32 would then face the 32 higher ranked teams, and the tourney would continue just as it does now. Oh, yeah, before we do that we have to have a selection Sunday to seed the entire field of 160 teams. That will probably take at least a week to accomplish, so we have to add a week to do that. That puts us beyond the middle of April.

However, when the broadcasters get the list of the 128 lower ranked teams they will need at least another week to package the programming, and now we are going until late April. We are still sitting at the Ides of March. The coaches had already complained that some conferences will be sending all of their teams, so they are arguing to get more of the top 32 seeds for their conferences. The NCAA saw this coming so they decide to allocate the number of teams from each conference, so the conferences would have to decide who goes.

The only fair way to do that would be to have a double elimination tourney for each conference. This would put championship week into May. By then, all basketball watching would be preempted by nice weather, and baseball. Nobody's watching college basketball. Oh, yeah, who would be watching the 128 worst teams in week one when the tourney starts? How did we get in this fix? Let's cut it back a little bit. How about leaving it like it is?

[YourLandlord]

hahahahah... yah, I do. Thanks.

You do realize that many of the teams that would not have been included in a tournament of 32 have made it to the final four in the current field size? You do realize that none of the teams included in the expanded field would have a shot at that same accomplishment right?

Well this just isn't true. The bottom 32 teams are seeded 9-16.

"many" of the teams that would not have been included have made it to the final four? really? exactly how "many" 9-16 seeds have made the final four?

certainly not "many"

[gep]

Why not make it like the NBA and have a best of 7 series as well? We could stretch the season to July 1. I think this is a stupid idea.

Well... if the NCAA wants to change something, I'd go for a best of 3 or best of 5. This "sudden death" "single elimination" "survive and advance" doesn't get the "best" teams into the championship

[BlueintheFace]

Well this just isn't true. The bottom 32 teams are seeded 9-16.

"many" of the teams that would not have been included have made it to the final four? really? exactly how "many" 9-16 seeds have made the final four?

certainly not "many"

1979: Penn (in the first year after expansion)

1986: LSU

2006: George Mason

Many... Few .... One. You can call it whatever you want. The point remains.

[Duvall]

Well this just isn't true. The bottom 32 teams are seeded 9-16.

"many" of the teams that would not have been included have made it to the final four? really? exactly how "many" 9-16 seeds have made the final four?

certainly not "many"

Yes, but many of the bottom seeds come from leagues that received automatic bids during the 32-team era. So it's not just a matter of looking at the 9-16 seeds - many of the 6-8 seeds that have reached the Final Four also would not have made it.

[BlueintheFace]

Yes, but many of the bottom seeds come from leagues that received automatic bids during the 32-team era. So it's not just a matter of looking at the 9-16 seeds - many of the 6-8 seeds that have reached the Final Four also would not have made it.

...and there have been "many" 6-8 seeds that have made it to the Final Four.

[pfrduke]

Well this just isn't true. The bottom 32 teams are seeded 9-16.

"many" of the teams that would not have been included have made it to the final four? really? exactly how "many" 9-16 seeds have made the final four?

certainly not "many"

That's not entirely true. The real difference is in the number of at large teams. In 1978, when there was a field of 32, there were 16 at large teams. In 2009, there were 34. So the question is how many of the at-large teams that wouldn't have made it in a field of 32 would have made the final four.

Even assuming that several automatic qualifiers take up top seeds, the "excluded" at large teams can start checking in as early as 6, and certainly by 7. There have been 8 seeds recently in the FF - UNC & Wisconsin come to mind (although I'm sure none of us have problems with a system that takes away a UNC FF spot).