Selection show

Donate To GopherHole
Missouri, Texas, and SMU should all be out. SDSU Aztecs, New Mexico, Tulsa or Seton Hall in. St. Johns #3 seed. Kansas #6 seed. UCONN #4 seed. Kentucky #8 or #9 seed. Alabama #6 seed. St. Louis #7 seed. BYU #8 seed. Utah St. #6 seed. I feel that the mid majors need more representation. Mountain West, SFA this year, A10, AAC, Belmont this year, Navy this year. They should make it a certain amount of wins, a .500 or .600 or better conference record (depending on conference and its strength) to be even considered for a spot in the tournament. That would get rid of this SEC bullshit in the tournament. The tournament has turned into a money grab for the big 4-6 in conferences and the rest are getting destroyed.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Agree but they must stand to make something because otherwise they would not be so desperate to do it. The only thing that is certain is that it has nothing to do with competition, it is all about $$$.

64 team field is great. Few to any fans seem to be calling for the field to expand and yet the powers that be still want to do it.
Click to expand...
Ope3 said:
I think it's more about the P5 teams wanting to assert power and get more teams in the field.

Maybe the $$$ isn't about a bigger revenue pie, just the big boys getting a larger chunk of it.
Click to expand...

Just checking out Jim Boeheim's appearance on the Dan Patrick's Show (from last Friday) he basically validated what I suggested. He listed several of the reasons why he supports NCAA Tournament Expansion and none of them had anything to do with $$$.

Having 3 sites across the country like Dayton would reduce travel for those teams. Basically, his goal was for when the Field is down to 64 Teams, he wants it to be the "Best 64" at that point. A Field of 76 in his vision would still include mid-majors and low-majors, but weed a lot of them out before the weekend.

More teams included. More players included. More Coaching security for Teams that make it.

He referenced it is only going to get tougher for teams outside the Power 5 to compete due to lack of NIL and/or Revenue sharing.

If that is the case, in my opinion the only $$$ element is to ensure that such expansion is at least offset by modest increase in TV revenue. I have very little doubt the increase would be modest, especially if the games are not stand alone and take place on Tuesday & Wednesday, potentially in the afternoon of the first week of the event.
 
Last edited:

Ope3 said:
Just checking out Jim Boeheim's appearance on the Dan Patrick's Show (from last Friday) he basically validated what I suggested. He listed several of the reasons why he supports NCAA Tournament Expansion and none of them had anything to do with $$$.

Having 3 sites across the country like Dayton would reduce travel for those teams. Basically, his goal was for when the Field is down to 64 Teams, he wants it to be the "Best 64" at that point. A Field of 76 in his vision would still include mid-majors and low-majors, but weed a lot of them out before the weekend.

More teams included. More players included. More Coaching security for Teams that make it.

He referenced it is only going to get tougher for teams outside the Power 5 to compete due to lack of NIL and/or Revenue sharing.

If that is the case, in my opinion the only $$$ element is to ensure that such expansion is at least offset by modest increase in TV revenue. I have very little the increase would be modest, especially if the games are not stand alone and take place on Tuesday & Wednesday, potentially in the afternoon of the first week of the event.
Click to expand...
Boeheim's been whining for expansion for years. It's a terrible idea and the "more job security" angle is the only one that's a sure thing.

Unless they make the play-in all 13-16 seeds that people can ignore, it will damage the viewership long term. Doing the former really devalues the tournament for the small conferences IMO.
 

howeda7 said:
Boeheim's been whining for expansion for years. It's a terrible idea and the "more job security" angle is the only one that's a sure thing.

Unless they make the play-in all 13-16 seeds that people can ignore, it will damage the viewership long term. Doing the former really devalues the tournament for the small conferences IMO.
Click to expand...

I completely agree.

I'm to the point where my enthusiasm has already waned, I might get ahead of the curve and skip filling out a Bracket this year.
 

howeda7 said:
Boeheim's been whining for expansion for years. It's a terrible idea and the "more job security" angle is the only one that's a sure thing.

Unless they make the play-in all 13-16 seeds that people can ignore, it will damage the viewership long term. Doing the former really devalues the tournament for the small conferences IMO.
Click to expand...
Hey, you know, I'm not gonna sit here and claim that 64 is the right number or the only number. But man, does it work well. Six rounds, three weekends, no extra round for random teams, which they call the first four but which is really the first eight, considering the Final Four is four teams, so it already has that idiocratic stupidity going for it. If anyone thinks there's a better number than 64, there should be some rhyme and reasoning behind it besides the "more is better and makes more money" reasoning, which entirely lacks reason. If more is better and there is unlimited money to be made, invite everyone and see how that works for you. I feel like there's already been a small erosion of interest in the tourney, and expansion to 68 teams is a nonzero part of it.
 


Bad Gopher said:
Hey, you know, I'm not gonna sit here and claim that 64 is the right number or the only number. But man, does it work well. Six rounds, three weekends, no extra round for random teams, which they call the first four but which is really the first eight, considering the Final Four is four teams, so it already has that idiocratic stupidity going for it. If anyone thinks there's a better number than 64, there should be some rhyme and reasoning behind it besides the "more is better and makes more money" reasoning, which entirely lacks reason. If more is better and there is unlimited money to be made, invite everyone and see how that works for you. I feel like there's already been a small erosion of interest in the tourney, and expansion to 68 teams is a nonzero part of it.
Click to expand...
Most casual fans tune in because of their office/family bracket pool. Make the tournament start for real on Tuesday afternoon, 42 hours after the Selection Show, and a large % of those people will no longer participate. Surely, the NCAA geniuses realize that?

Instead go back to 64 and get the NIT/Crown merged into a real 2nd tournament with some NIL behind it. Fox/ESPN will bid more for that than the incremental revenue you will gain by putting Tuesday/Wednesday afternoon play-in games on Peacock or Amazon.
 

Bad Gopher said:
Hey, you know, I'm not gonna sit here and claim that 64 is the right number or the only number. But man, does it work well. Six rounds, three weekends, no extra round for random teams, which they call the first four but which is really the first eight, considering the Final Four is four teams, so it already has that idiocratic stupidity going for it. If anyone thinks there's a better number than 64, there should be some rhyme and reasoning behind it besides the "more is better and makes more money" reasoning, which entirely lacks reason. If more is better and there is unlimited money to be made, invite everyone and see how that works for you. I feel like there's already been a small erosion of interest in the tourney, and expansion to 68 teams is a nonzero part of it.
Click to expand...

From the beginning of the First Four, it was said to reference the number of games in Dayton, not how many teams.
 





You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom