March Madness goes even madder

ACC College Basketball General43

For those not keeping up with daily sports rumor news, the NCAA is reportedly considering the expansion of the tournament to 96 teams as early as 2010-2011.

This rumor has picked up steam throughout the day today and now seems to be at a flash point. The first outlet to report the possible expansion of the tournament, as far as we can tell, was Sports by Brooks, a sporting celebrity news site similar to Deadspin. That may damage the credibility of the story, but it certainly doesn’t make the chance for expansion or the discussion of it go away.

Here’s some excerpts from the Sports by Brooks story.

Sources at ESPN and inside the administration at a powerhouse NCAA basketball school told me today that the NCAA basketball tournament going to 96 teams is a “done deal.”

An ESPN source said, “It’s a done deal with the expansion of the tournament. Depending on how soon a (TV) deal is done, the added teams could start next year. The NCAA confirmed that bidders would be interested in 96 teams, so they’re going with it.”

Another ESPN source confirmed to me that the network was in the formative stages of pondering a bid for the expanded tournament.

Brooks gives his opinion of expansion later in his post.

I’m one of those guys who lightly follows the regular season but loves the postseason tournament. Going to 96 teams will render the regular season even more meaningless and I’m not so sure that March Madness will be as fervently embraced with the dilution of the field and added number of games. Like my bracket isn’t big enough already?

If they’re going to go to 96 teams, why not just make the whole season a double elimination tournament?

And if the NCAA is going to drag out the hoops tournament even more, causing players to miss more class, how can it continue to justify not having a college football playoff?

Someone needs to check the water in Indianapolis. Might wanna consider a boil warning.

Brooks posted a follow-up this evening along with other links about the issue.

The Sports Business Journal also had a story regarding the possibility of expansion that focused more on the TV side of the argument.

CBS and Turner Sports are in discussions to create a joint bid for the NCAA tournament rights if the NCAA decides to opt out of its current CBS deal.

The broadcaster and cable network could share rights to the tournament if the NCAA decides to expand the field to 96 teams. In that scenario, the channel broadcasting the Final Four would pay 60 percent of the annual rights fee and the other network would pay 40 percent. The broadcast partners would alternate coverage of the Final Four each year.

Other networks, including ESPN and Fox, also are considering making bids for the tournament’s rights.

The broadcasters are basing their bids on an expanded tournament field, according to a request for proposal issued by the NCAA to potential bidders late last year. A copy of the RFP was obtained by SportsBusiness Journal.

The NCAA has its sights set on expanding from a 65-team tournament to either 68 or 96 teams if it opts out of the CBS contract, according to the 12-page RFP.

Aside from allowing 32 mediocre teams the chance to extend their seasons following conference tournaments, I can’t think of a single positive for expansion. More games does mean more TV exposure, but who is going to watch a No. 1 seed like Kansas play a mediocre mid-major or a team from the bottom half of a bigger conference? Does a 6-10 team from the ACC honestly deserve a chance to play for the National Championship?

This episode is yet another example of the money hungry attitude of the NCAA. It’s a shame that the desire to make money overpowers the integrity of the sport.

About StateFans

'StateFansNation' is the shared profile used by any/all of the dozen or so authors that contribute to the blog. You may not always agree with us, but you will have little doubt about where we stand on most issues. Please follow us on Twitter and FaceBook

ACC College Basketball General

43 Responses to March Madness goes even madder

  1. VaWolf82 02/01/2010 at 10:55 PM #

    who is going to watch a No. 1 seed like Kansas play a mediocre mid-major or a team from the bottom half of a bigger conference?

    The same people that watch the Papa John’s Bowl game or the average BB game on Saturday…..fans of the two teams and sports junkies.

  2. D_Medlin 02/01/2010 at 11:01 PM #

    So does that make it worth it?

    Just asking. Not necessarily disagreeing because I know my butt would probably be on the couch watching.

  3. StateFans 02/01/2010 at 11:16 PM #

    I think it is a horrible idea. Rewards mediocrity and de-values the regular season so much that it is almost inconsequential. It is amazing that they would want games to mean even less than they already do.

  4. VaWolf82 02/01/2010 at 11:23 PM #

    It doesn’t matter whether or not the games “mean anything” or not. What matters is how much someone is willing to pay for 16 more games in March.

    It does make me whether or not more NCAAAT games will affect viewership in Dec – Feb. Fewer viewers in the regular season would mean smaller contracts for the various conferences….and the ACC depends heavily on their BB contract.

    My initial thought is that more NCAAT games would have little/no effect on regular season viewership. If I’m wrong, so what? But the consequences are a little more severe for those that are going to vote on this proposal.

    I’ve never been a proponent of a CFB playoff. But I find it interesting that one of the excuses used for no FB playoff is the time required….yet somehow that plays no effect on BB. Can someone explain how that works?

  5. wufpup76 02/01/2010 at 11:35 PM #

    From the forum discussion which I should’ve posted here but didn’t see it (sorry!):

    Terrible. Awful.

    No No No No No No No No No No No No No.

    Of course, Jim Boeheim and most of the head coaches are full on board.

    Boeheim is HWSNBN before there was a HWSNBN. He has lobbied for an expansion for decades, primarly so coaches such as himself who are fortunate enough to land power conference jobs would more or less have lifetime contracts without fear of being fired because you’d be in the NCAAT guaranteed every season. And you could schedule the OOC part of your schedule ALL at home and play 15 teams rated 300-315 in Div. 1. and then make the tourney by going 9-9 in the Big East or whatever.

    ^This is exactly what Boeheim used to do every year until the committee started punishing Syracuse and leaving them out of the field for not leaving the state of New York until Feburary. Of course he threw a public tantrum about it, but you’d better be sure their OOC schedule started getting a lot tougher with actual road games included.

    Well, guess what will happen as soon as expansion takes place?

    Expansion is a terrible idea. Apathy would be the face of college basketball. Everyone outside of Div. 1 head coaches (who of course want job security – lazily) and the NCAA says this.

    This is awful. I might as well start watching the NBA if this expansion crap goes through.

    “Hey guys – you don’t really have to earn anything in life. Just protest about it long enough and you’ll probably get your way eventaully!” – Any Power Conference Div. 1 Basketball Head Coach

  6. 61Packer 02/01/2010 at 11:56 PM #

    This sounds like something Jed is pushing, to get us into the Big Dance, even as a #96 seed. Might work.

  7. BJD95 02/02/2010 at 12:04 AM #

    It’s a racket to give extra (and unwarranted) job protection for the coaches’ cabal. Stupid, stupid idea.

    I’m on board with 68, as I would love to see the last 8 at-large picks in a “play in” round for the 12 or 13 seed in each region. Anything else royally screws with the bracket (and the ability for casual fans to bet and become interested). THAT is why TV ratings are so high, it becomes a national event beyond just a procession of games.

    Beware, for it is possible to kill the golden goose.

  8. Wolfy__79 02/02/2010 at 12:09 AM #

    i think this is a horrible idea. i don’t know really what to say about it. i would be more in favor of shrinking the field. this is nonsense. as if the level of college hoops isn’t bad enough, we’d be killing the goose that laid the golden egg. .. as a friend of mine said. this may completely destroy college hoops. there aren’t enough good teams to fill that roster every year… introducing more sorry teams and even putting players health on the line. that is too much. there is a total disconnect b/t us and those who make these decisions. maybe this will mark the NIT returning to the premiere tournament. i’m not pro college football playoffs, except maybe for the bcs teams… it is just too much.. you can’t even say its too much of a good thing in this case.. if this happens, i will empbrace it… but college hoops will definetly be taking a hit. i read this earlier on wolfpackwire.. i was waiting for it to surface here… where do i line up to make a stink of this boneheaded idea!

  9. 4in12 02/02/2010 at 6:56 AM #

    I think they should go to a 256 team double elimination format. It’ll be like hockey! They play the regular season to seed 90% of the teams in a tournament that lasts until June! What could be better!

  10. Rochester 02/02/2010 at 7:37 AM #

    If it ain’t broke … the NCAAT was the perfect sporting event. Why would you mess with perfection? Idiots.

    This could backfire on some of these bubble coaches. Imagine they make the NCAAT three years in a row because of the expanded field and go one-and-done every time. That’s almost worse than not making it under the 65-team setup.

    I hate this idea, but it looks like it’s really going to go through. If it’s really in place next year and we don’t make it, I guess that will be the end of the Lowe era in Raleigh.

  11. philliepacker 02/02/2010 at 7:51 AM #

    Well we still would be on the outside looking in. On a side note I understand since the ncaa took over the nit they are changing the selection process . I hear they are leaning more towards rewarding mid and low majors.

  12. wolfpackbball 02/02/2010 at 7:52 AM #

    As far as I’m concerned, there is one perfect thing about college sports, and it is March. I hate to see this screwed up over money.
    Of course, football is screwed up and won’t change over money, so I guess it all makes sense.
    Next up, 32 teams to Omaha!

  13. wolfie91 02/02/2010 at 7:53 AM #

    bad idea.

  14. wufpup76 02/02/2010 at 7:54 AM #

    “This sounds like something Jed is pushing, to get us into the Big Dance, even as a #96 seed. Might work.”

    Lee Fowler thought of this expansion stuff years ago.

    It’s the world that is just now catching up to him.

  15. tvp1 02/02/2010 at 8:28 AM #

    4in12, that’s close to my idea.

    If the NCAA wants to do this, then they should just fully expand the tournament to let every team in. I’m dead serious.

    Limit division 1 to 256 teams (too many D-1 teams cannot compete anyway), and let everyone go to the tournament. Have the first two rounds played on the home courts of the top 64 teams, then go to neutral sites after that. Only those top 64 teams get seeded, everyone else gets drawn at random. You’d only have to add one more weekend to the tournament. The games from the second weekend (round of 64) on would all be really high quality, because the small conference chaff would be eliminated in the first weekend. You’d still have incessant “bubble” watching, except the bubble would be to get seeded (and get the coveted home court advantage).

    Tell me this wouldn’t work.

  16. The Captain 02/02/2010 at 8:30 AM #

    This is a terrible idea as it virtually insures most of the top 32 teams to the second round. There is no way that a rested 2 seed will now lose to a 15 seed that has played two nights before. Don’t expect any guarantied 5/12 upsets either. And the 8 seed will pull away late in the 8/9 games.

    Television should realize that what made March Madness special is now being destroyed for the almighty dollar in the short term.

    Plus, at some point, these kids have to attend class. When are these esteemed presidents going to realize that there is an academic side to college basketball?

    I was against ACC expansion and I was right there – now I’m against this idea.

    The Captain

    PS – If Herbert was still here, I would refer to this as the “Herb Sendek Job Protection Act”.

  17. rtpack24 02/02/2010 at 8:33 AM #

    Bad idea. 64 or 65 is probably too many. They have one of the greatest sporting events that the whole country pays attention to and now they will muck it up like everything else. If this happens it will be a sad day in college basketball.

  18. The Captain 02/02/2010 at 8:35 AM #

    Someone tweet Lee Folwer and remind him of the lyrics to Joni Mitchell’s Big Yellow Taxi – “They paved paradise and put up a parking lot…..you don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone.”

  19. PackFanSince74 02/02/2010 at 8:38 AM #

    so……………you’re sayin’ we got a shot at the tournament!!!

  20. ncsufan13 02/02/2010 at 8:49 AM #

    Pretty soon the regular season is just going to be a couple of exhibition games followed by the D1,D2,D3 1024 team tournament which will be referred to as December-June Madness.

  21. 4in12 02/02/2010 at 8:53 AM #

    tvp1 – If you do it like the soccer leagues and drop the poorest performers to D-II (or 1-A or non-tournament division or some other nonsense) and allow the best of the second tier up to D-1 you might have something. Can you imagine the screaming about that? It would make the bitching about being left out of the tournament seem like background noise.

  22. Pack Mentality 02/02/2010 at 9:08 AM #

    1) The regular season will lose a lot of significance.

    2) I consider a season in which you don’t make the NCAAT a failure as it is. Does this mean that if you barely make the expanded tourney you’re secure with your job. We would still have to make Sweet 16 runs or further to show any significance. This would greatly fracture fan bases worse than they already are. Some would say that making the tourney at all should relieve a coach of any chance they may be fired. While others (like me) want more results than just making the tourney. This would be the HWSNBN scenario to a much greater extent and affecting many more schools.

  23. PackerInRussia 02/02/2010 at 9:47 AM #

    I hate the idea. It’s bringing one the worst part of CFB (low-level bowls) to CBB. There is no rule that says NCAA basketball/March Madness must remain popular! (although big TV contracts help negate any such notion) I have a hard enough time filling out a 64-team bracket. I doubt I’m going to take the time to care about filling out a 96-team bracket which would mean I have no vested interest in watching a lot of those games. The concept of a single elimination tourney where (almost) anyone can win (within reason) would fly out the window. NO lower level team is going to advance very far. With a few exceptions, they don’t currently either, but winning a few games now vs. in the new format are very different things. Cinderella will be traded in for Cinderella’s ugly stepsisters: teams that make a run of several games early only to run out of gas when reality hits and they play one of the big boys. Imagine a few early upsets (when no one cares yet) which means you set up several rounds/weekends of mediocre teams going at it only to meet their eventual end when they finally get back to playing a really good team. By then there will be no drama left (if there ever was any), and that team will meet its demise. Of course I’m speaking in terms of enjoying the game, not $$, so I’m not even speaking the NCAA’s language.

  24. 61Packer 02/02/2010 at 10:10 AM #

    The tournament is great but there are a few changes I’d like to see. The biggest would be for no more same-time starts for the opening round games. Start 4 games an hour apart, not all 4 at the same time. CBS does this evidently to give their local affiliates the 5pm-7pm time slot free of games, even if it means starting games out west as early as 9am just so they can start 4 games between noon and 12:30pm.

    I like having all the games on tv, and I understand that we won’t be able to see all of each game, but must the NCAA continue to allow CBS to start as many games as possible at the exact same time? I say if they won’t change this, then give the contract to somebody else, preferably ESPN. I like their announcers better anyhow.

  25. newt 02/02/2010 at 10:13 AM #

    Please let them just be floating this idea to gauge public opinion…

    Another possibility is that the bar for evaluating coaches would change to “How far did you get?” Round of 32 would probably be the minimum for mediocrity and Sweet 16 for pretty good. Coaches and ADs should be careful what they wish for – because they would have to beat teams in the top-100 of the RPI to make the round of 32.

1 2

Leave a Reply