Posted: Monday, February 1, 2010, 5:45 PM | 16 comments |
 

Should the NCAA Tournament expand?
options
 

Should the NCAA Tournament expand?
Yes, to 68 teams.
Yes, to 96 teams.
No, it should stay the same.
View results

The big news of the day is word that the NCAA is ready to expand its men's basketball tournament.

Sports Business Journal and the blog Sports By Brooks have confirmed through separate sources that expansion to either 68 or 96 teams is on the table.

SBJ's John Ourand and Michael Smith report that "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."

Ourand and Smith acquired a copy of the Request for Proposals that the NCAA issued, and has on-the-record quotes from Greg Shaheen, the NCAA's senior vice president for basketball and business strategies.

(That title doesn't take much translation, does it?)

The 68-team tournament would have four play-in games. It's not clear whether those would be fore conference champions or at-large teams, but we can guess.

The NCAA is also looking to do some serious muscle-flexing. It wants "a 14-year term on its next media deal, with a 'no-penalty, early termination right in favor of the NCAA,' according to the RFP" seen by SBJ.

If the tournament expands to 96 teams, broadcasts would be shared by a cable outlet and a broadcast network. Thus the joint bid between CBS and Turner. But you know that ESPN will put everything it can on the table to get the rights for itself.

Sports By Brooks spoke with a source at ESPN who 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."

I haven't seen the RFP published online anywhere. But CAAHooops.com's Michael Litos found this PDF of minutes from a January 4 meeting of the NCAA's Division I Championships/Sport Management Cabinet.

The document includes a long list of suggestions for how to cut costs and raise revenue. And right there on Page 3 of the report, under the "Revenue Generation" section, is the big kahuna:

Consider bracket expansion for men’s basketball (to generate more money).

Notice that it doesn't say "to allow more student-athletes to enjoy participating in the post-season," or "to keep more coaches employed," or "to get more non-BCS conference schools on national television."

It says "to generate more money." That's about as blunt as it gets.

There are actually a lot of proposals in the document. Some of the more interesting ones:

- "Prohibit hotel accommodations on the night before home contests."
- "Evaluate the number of complimentary tickets student-athletes are permitted to receive for NCAA championships."
- "Review officials’ fees and do not rely too heavily on market value. There is inherent value in officiating NCAA championships."
- "Evaluate food provided to media at NCAA events."
- "Look at impact of reducing committee member per diem."

I think we know which one of those will happen (and which one probably won't).

There also appears to be a possibility that the NCAA will consider overturning its ban on alcohol advertising. That would be a huge revenue generator.

So now I turn to you. Should the NCAA Tournament be expanded? Have your say in the poll and the comments.
Posted by Jonathan Tannenwald @ 5:45 PM  Permalink | File Under: NCAA Tournament | 16 comments
16
Comments   
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 6:52 PM, 02/01/2010
    I don't think it really matters if they go to 68, but 96 will take away some the prestige of making the tournament. But finally, it would be a sin if the tournament ends up on ESPN. One of the things that makes the tournament great is using rabbit ears to watch the games at work or school. And not everybody has cable on every TV in their house. It is an NCAA event, college students should be able to watch it for free.
    — AreaMan
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 7:34 PM, 02/01/2010
    Keep your greedy hands off the tournament....Whats the purpose other than greed..................
    — ILUVPHILLYCITYOFLOSERS
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 7:34 PM, 02/01/2010
    Since I was a freshman the year that Drexel was "the first team out" I say make it a field of 68 with 4 play-in games. If they expand it to 96 then you will have more BCS teams with 6-10 Big East records getting in. A bare minimum should be that you have to have a conference record of .500 or better to get in. Although the mid-majors will still get screwed.
    — DrexelDragonFan
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 8:34 PM, 02/01/2010
    Expand the NCAA tournament to include 16 football games played in December and january. Leave the BB the way it is.
    — Mitchboe
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:26 PM, 02/01/2010
    I would add in three more play-in games, of any bubble team say for a twelve seed with the winner going to the ncaa and the loser to the nit. I also would not allow any conference champion to be in a play-in game, you won your conference, you play in the real tournament
    — irishsccr81
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:57 PM, 02/01/2010
    A #16 has never beaten a #1 so it seems like a waste of time to expand the tournament.
    — Phillies2008WSChamps
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:58 PM, 02/01/2010
    A #16 has never beaten a #1 so it seems like a waste of time to expand the tournament.
    — Phillies2008WSChamps
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:58 PM, 02/01/2010
    A #16 has never beaten a #1 so it seems like a waste of time to expand the tournament.
    — Phillies2008WSChamps
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:27 PM, 02/01/2010
    I'm with Champs. The tournament is already big enough, and until a 16 beats a 1, it's useless. I don't like any of the proposals that cut out the students or the media either. Everyone rags on the media, but most people (especially on the college beats) don't make much money. Cutting officials costs will lead to less skillful officiating.
    — HandNik
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 9:01 AM, 02/02/2010
    If you go to 96 teams, you might kill off the NIT tournament, but you will effectively kill off the two other insignificant post-season tournaments that usually take small college teams with sub-.500 records.
    — phillyguy73
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:15 AM, 02/02/2010
    well alot of BCS schools get in out of league rep with double digit losses... the expansion could allow some lesser known conferences with some pretty good team to make it... the last four out are often just as good or sometimes better then the last 8 in...
    — madkins7
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:21 AM, 02/02/2010
    What will we go? From March Madness to April Appoplexy? I can't afford to have the semi finals and final on April 15.......unless the NCAA bullies the IRS (RIGHT!) into changing tax day to April 30th.
    — taxsrme
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 11:21 AM, 02/02/2010
    What will we go? From March Madness to April Appoplexy? I can't afford to have the semi finals and final on April 15.......unless the NCAA bullies the IRS (RIGHT!) into changing tax day to April 30th.
    — taxsrme
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:26 PM, 02/02/2010
    Wow - they can't add a four or eight team football tournament because of the students, but then can add thirty more teams to the basketball tournament. That's consistent!
    — Sgerat
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 6:34 PM, 02/02/2010
    NO! NO! All the hall of fames, and most of the playoffs in all sports are now screwed up because the rich just want ot get richer. More teams in the playoffs do not mean better games just more money. The baseball hall of fame is so diluted now it is a shame. Look at the NFL SEMI-Pro Bowl. Terrible! We are now a world of mediocrity.
    — chucksf


16 comments | View All Comments | View All By Latest
View comments: 1  |  2
About Jonathan Tannenwald
I fell in love with the Big 5 at first sight upon moving to Philadelphia in 2002. At various points in my journalistic career, I've covered all six of the region's Division I teams. During that time, I've eaten many soft pretzels from the Palestra's concession stands, which is how this blog got its name.

I write primarily about the University of Pennsylvania and the Ivy League, but I also cover the other basketball and football teams across the city from time to time. In the spring, you'll find coverage of the Penn Relays here.

In addition to all of that, I write Philly.com's soccer blog, The Goalkeeper.

You can contact me by email by clicking here.

Join on Facebook    Follow on Twitter

Advertise Here
Latest College Videos
COLLEGE SPORTS NEWS FROM PHILLY.COM
South Florida romps over Villanova
'Nova's Wayns is city's best player
Drexel escapes scare in 63-61 win
 
Owls will be tested by Bonnies
BoopStats: The Old Temple one-two
Moore's second-half sparks Temple in win