PDA

View Full Version : Barf!



Collier11
2/1/2010, 02:39 PM
And Leroy give it up, I dont want this kind of expansion either so dont come in here acting like you are a know it all :texan:

Sources: 96-Team March Madness Is “Done Deal”
Posted by Brooks on Feb. 01, 2010, 1:29pm

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.

John Ourand and Michael Smith of SPORTSBUSINESS JOURNAL reported this morning that if the NCAA opts out of its current broadcast rights deal with CBS, the governing body will consider, “expanding from a 65-team tournament to either 68 or 96 teams.”

The NCAA-CBS broadcast rights contract has three years and $2.131 billion remaining. SBJ reports, “the NCAA has until Aug. 31 to exercise its right, though it hopes to conclude the process much earlier.”

A 68-team field would add three games to the current 65-team format, and a 96-team field would add 31 games to the tourney.

SBJ also notes that ESPN, Fox and a Turner-CBS collaboration may vie for broadcast rights of the tournament.

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.

The NCAA reportedly wants a new, 14-year deal with its network partner(s) with an early opt-out only available to the NCAA. (Overplaying its cards?)

As my sources indicate, the NCAA is already dead-set on expanding to a 96-team hoops tournament, so what affect will that have on interest in March Madness and the regular season?

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.

Frozen Sooner
2/1/2010, 02:43 PM
Yeah. Still don't think we'd make it in this year.

Boomer.....
2/1/2010, 02:44 PM
What a crock! And football still can't get an 8 or 16 team playoff.

Boomer.....
2/1/2010, 02:46 PM
Might as well be like the college bowl season and invite every mediocre or better team. Except now you will see teams under .500 in the big dance.

sooner_born_1960
2/1/2010, 02:48 PM
I don't see the big deal here. By comparison, every high school team in Oklahoma gets to play for the state championship. The regular season isn't meaningless.

JLEW1818
2/1/2010, 02:58 PM
post the link

badger
2/1/2010, 03:00 PM
I would have liked to seen the first round expanded, but to give top tier teams a first-round bye.

JLEW1818
2/1/2010, 03:01 PM
College Football is so much better than College Basketball

bri
2/1/2010, 03:02 PM
I hope they don't re-do the theme music, 'cause "Ninety-Six Shining Moments" just isn't as catchy.

sooner_born_1960
2/1/2010, 03:03 PM
I would have liked to seen the first round expanded, but to give top tier teams a first-round bye.
Isn't that how it would work? Basically 32 play-in games.

bri
2/1/2010, 03:04 PM
32? Damn, business is about to pick up in Dayton.

sooner_born_1960
2/1/2010, 03:04 PM
Seeds 33 through 96 have to play a game to make it to the 64-team tournament.

Collier11
2/1/2010, 03:08 PM
post the link

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/source-march-madness-with-96-teams-done-deal-27742

The link was posted by Steward Mandel of SI on twitter

NormanPride
2/1/2010, 04:25 PM
I enjoy watching sports, so no matter how big the playoff is, the regular season will never be pointless to me. It does beg the question - why not college football?

badger
2/1/2010, 04:49 PM
Isn't that how it would work? Basically 32 play-in games.

Now that I think about it, you're right - a full bracket would be 128.

If the mid-majors end up being all of the play-in games, will there will be major shenanigans called?

sooner_born_1960
2/1/2010, 04:53 PM
I imagine they'll try to honestly seed the 96 teams.

soonervegas
2/1/2010, 05:23 PM
That's still only 25% of the college basketball teams........approved.

Eielson
2/1/2010, 06:15 PM
This is why we don't want a playoff in college football. It's not going to stop at 4 teams. It won't stop at 8, either.

JLEW1818
2/1/2010, 06:17 PM
I'm fine with how college football is

Eielson
2/1/2010, 07:07 PM
I am too. I think we COULD benefit from 4 teams. I just know it won't stop there.

JLEW1818
2/1/2010, 07:10 PM
yah just imagine if it was say 8 team playoff

Florida losing to bama would have been mostly meaningless

say Nebraska beats texas... it would not matter.

silverwheels
2/1/2010, 07:44 PM
yah just imagine if it was say 8 team playoff

Florida losing to bama would have been mostly meaningless

say Nebraska beats texas... it would not matter.

Not true.

And 96 teams is way too many. If anything, I'd like to see the tourney go back down to 32 teams.

JLEW1818
2/1/2010, 09:21 PM
how is it not true?

if it was an 8 team tourney, Florida still would have been ranked top 8, as would texas

sure their rankings for the 8 team playoff would be different. but the loss would still be for the most part meaningless


I like College Football how it is

silverwheels
2/1/2010, 09:52 PM
how is it not true?

if it was an 8 team tourney, Florida still would have been ranked top 8, as would texas

sure their rankings for the 8 team playoff would be different. but the loss would still be for the most part meaningless


I like College Football how it is

You're assuming that places in an 8-team playoff would be determined by (human) rankings. Doesn't have to be that way.

Most people who are big college football fans assume that the only way to separate teams is by ranking them with stupid polls. The human polls are probably the biggest gripe I have with the system in football.

JLEW1818
2/1/2010, 10:36 PM
ok so what teams would have been in over 1 loss texas and 1 loss florida, assuming texas lost

?

basketball is ranked by "stupid" polls as well

i mean u could not rank, have traditional bowls like now, like the Rose bowl as one the q-finals. but say USC won the Pac 10, and they are undefeated. and Ohio St wins the big 10, and they have 4 losses .... If a 4 loss team ever has the chance to go to the national, the system sucks...


i love the ranking of teams

Eielson
2/1/2010, 10:40 PM
ok so what teams would have been in over 1 loss texas and 1 loss florida, assuming texas lost

Bama, BSU, TCU, and Cincy (even though we know/knew they shouldn't).


basketball is ranked by "stupid" polls as well

The human polls don't have much to do with the NCAA Selection Process.

JLEW1818
2/1/2010, 10:55 PM
Bama, BSU, TCU, Cincy, correct

okay that is 4, still room for another 4....

silverwheels
2/1/2010, 11:03 PM
ok so what teams would have been in over 1 loss texas and 1 loss florida, assuming texas lost

?

basketball is ranked by "stupid" polls as well

i mean u could not rank, have traditional bowls like now, like the Rose bowl as one the q-finals. but say USC won the Pac 10, and they are undefeated. and Ohio St wins the big 10, and they have 4 losses .... If a 4 loss team ever has the chance to go to the national, the system sucks...


i love the ranking of teams

No bowl games in the playoff until the Championship. That's way too much travel.

Human polls suck.

JLEW1818
2/1/2010, 11:03 PM
ic

do you prefer BCS computers? heh.

silverwheels
2/1/2010, 11:05 PM
ic

do you prefer BCS computers? heh.

No, but a system like Elo rankings would be preferable to anything we're using now or anything we have used.

JLEW1818
2/1/2010, 11:17 PM
your are number 1 on my pole

silverwheels
2/1/2010, 11:19 PM
Hey, dude, you're the one that likes big sausage, not me.

Eielson
2/1/2010, 11:37 PM
Bama, BSU, TCU, Cincy, correct

okay that is 4, still room for another 4....

Oklahoma State.

Collier11
2/1/2010, 11:40 PM
Hey, dude, you're the one that likes big sausage, not me.

If your preference is tiny sausage then Jlew is your man

Eielson
2/1/2010, 11:51 PM
If your preference is tiny sausage then Jlew is your man

How do you know? :P

JLEW1818
2/1/2010, 11:54 PM
Heh. If u have never visited their website, it is a must. Not appropriate for kids or office

Collier11
2/1/2010, 11:57 PM
How do you know? :P

he shows it to everyone, you dont even have to ask

John Kochtoston
2/2/2010, 12:06 AM
This is why I oppose a college football playoff. Sure, it will start with 4 or 8 teams, but it will be up to 32 within 10 years. Money means the powers to be can't help but **** with a good thing.

On the expanded basketball tournament, if it happens, EPIC FAIL. The 64-team format just works (I know it's 65, but I consider that a minor annoyance). I don't know why they just can't leave well enough alone.

JLEW1818
2/2/2010, 12:08 AM
I'd say its the new generation of people and all their liberal views... messing things up

GottaHavePride
2/2/2010, 01:52 AM
It's the "every child is special" crowd doing this. Bill Hicks had a good rant on the subject.

For the record, I am against the proposed March, April, and May Madness.

bri
2/2/2010, 02:00 AM
Here's why this will fail: You know how whenever there's a year where the top seeds get knocked off and everyone bitches 'cause "nobody" teams are in the E8 & FF? Yeah, well, let's increase the odds of all the favorites having a bad night. GENIOUS!

Collier11
2/2/2010, 02:10 AM
This will fail because there now might be years that a 16-15 team will get an at large, epic fail

ndpruitt03
2/2/2010, 04:07 AM
The only way this is good is if they get rid of the NIT and any other post seasons in college basketball. Other than that this sux.

If you get rid of the NIT and have this as the tournament then it's no big deal to me because the same amount of teams are getting post season play anyway.

King Barry's Back
2/2/2010, 07:47 AM
Seeds 33 through 96 have to play a game to make it to the 64-team tournament.

I think that's a great idea.

And as for the bit about "keeping these kids out of school" and why we can't "have a football playoff" -- that's a red herring.

Most of these lower ranked are going to be bounced immediately after their play-in game anyway, so it won't make much difference.

Another thought -- what kind of impact will this have on the NIT, and that other strange third-tier tournament?

If the Big Dance will take the best almost 100 teams, what dogs are the other tournaments gonna bid?

On the other hand, assuming that 33 thru 96 play a play-in game, and half of them will lose, if those play-in losers are still eligible for the also-ran tournaments -- seems like a good deal for them.

Get that theoretical chance to go into the NCAA and "play for it all," and then still get to finish up in the NIT or whatever.

sooner_born_1960
2/2/2010, 09:01 AM
The top eight seeds in each region wouldn't play any extra games, so I don't see where the top seeds have a greater chance of being eliminated.

badger
2/2/2010, 09:29 AM
Not true.

And 96 teams is way too many. If anything, I'd like to see the tourney go back down to 32 teams.

Interesting thought... but then there would be very little room left for at-large bids and it would mostly be a tourney of conference champions... conference tournament champions. Suddenly, college basketball's regular season would mean even less and it would all come down to one week of basketball at a site that might not be neutral for some teams.

This might bring the NIT back to life and make room for additional tournaments like the CBI, but if they would to scale it back, I'd say return it to 64 teams. The play-in game is BS.

soonervegas
2/2/2010, 09:45 AM
I am agreeing with NickZepp....oh the humanity. The fact is there are numerous teams in the NIT that could make a sweet 16 run. If, IF you got rid of the NIT you are really just allowing more quality teams into the Dance. Teams getting into the NIT these days frequently have 20+ win seasons and are some of those dangerous mid majors that didn't get a 2nd bid for their conference.

96 teams does not dillute the tourney at all. How many games would be competitive on Wednesday? I am thinking alot. Many of those 6-7 seeds would get abused by mid majors seeded at 17 and 18.

Ya, I just said 17 and 18 seeds.....

badger
2/2/2010, 11:10 AM
If they go to 96 teams, like the BCS, they should do something to include more mid-majors, especially if they're looking to eliminate the NIT. For example, guaranteeing bids to both conference champions and conference tournament champions for each conference. If one team wins both, then, well, not much you can do there... and those conferences probably only deserve one auto bid.

I think that the tourney has 31 auto bids as-is, with 30 conference tourney champs and one for the Ivy League regular season champ. Even if this number goes up to 61 auto bids, there would still be 35 at-large spots open, which is about the same as the current setup.

the_ouskull
2/2/2010, 12:14 PM
I would have liked to seen the first round expanded, but to give top tier teams a first-round bye.

If the selection process weren't so arbitrary (not to mention secretive) I'd agree with you. But, whenever an "undeserving" team that really needs the bye winds up getting it, you'll have more "foul" cried than after the initial selection process by the bubble teams. It's the whole "do you take a large conference six seed over a small conference two seed," argument re-done, and the answer is almost always "yes," because of the relative size. It's a money-driven machine, and you want the fans of the 30,000-person school with an established tradition, not the fans from the 5,000-person liberal arts college in Hippieville, because "Hippies don't spend money." (Cartman, 2005)

So, when a Georgia Tech or someone gets a bye over a San Diego, then... well, is that really the system you want determining our national champion? What about when "White All-American 2011" gets hurt during the ACC tournament, Duke loses, then they're suddenly d*mn near a bubble team, and, the next thing you know, they're not only in, but they're in with a bye. We won't need SETI, 'cause the cries from all over the planet will be heard across the universe at a much lower cost to taxpayers.

I'm not saying that any of those things are foregone conclusio... well, I actually AM saying that the Duke thing would happen... but the system would have to be monitored to death. Maybe making the entire process completely public would help it along, even? Who knows...

the_ouskull

badger
2/2/2010, 12:53 PM
That's why I'm saying that if they expand the tourney, they should also expand the auto bids... or we may have all 16 Big East teams in the field of 96 :eek:

SteelClip49
2/2/2010, 01:29 PM
FBS and FCS should combine and everyone has a shot. The playoff picture would be even more legit.

cheezyq
2/2/2010, 01:45 PM
I imagine they'll try to honestly seed the 96 teams.

I think it's so they can justify allowing all 16 of the Big East teams into the tourney instead of just 8-9. Plus, to make things fair some years, they have to seed some of those NBA-level teams as low as an 8th seed. Now they can move those 8-9 teams up into the top 5-6 seeds and get the others in through the lower seeds.

opksooner
2/2/2010, 11:28 PM
.....and everyone gets a pretty ribbon so they'll feel good about themselves.

Statalyzer
2/4/2010, 06:12 PM
Long live mediocrity!