No. I don't think the actual ability to fit it on a piece of paper is as big of a deal with the advent of online bracket managers. But there are still many that do it that way. In any case, the bigger and more unweildly you make it, the more you will drive away the casual fan.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Tournament Expansion Immediate?
- Thread starter SelectionSunday
- Start date
No. I don't think the actual ability to fit it on a piece of paper is as big of a deal with the advent of online bracket managers. But there are still many that do it that way. In any case, the bigger and more unweildly you make it, the more you will drive away the casual fan.
Pewterschmidt
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 4,128
- Reaction score
- 75
- Points
- 48
This is all about increasing revenue. The NCAA won't match the 10 year, $6 billion contract it signed with CBS for the last deal so they feel like they must come up with a way to maintain or increase the revenue.
Some ideas I've heard that could increase revenue but not subject us to the idiotic 96-team field:
1. Make the Elite-8 and later a best of 3 series. Would add no fewer than 7 additional games (14 max) to the tourney. Would make it more difficult for a cinderella to make it to the Final 4 but some might not see that as a con. Problem would be how would you schedule the games.
2. Expand the play-in games. Take final 4 at-large spots and make them play-in games (8 teams total involved). Adds an additional 4 games. Could be played on a Tuesday and those teams play on the first Friday (meaning they would have some rest for their first round game). I think there would be great intrigue for those 4 games. Con is it kind of ends the bubble debate, even though I guess it could extend to those that didn't make one of the 4 play-in games
3. Change the tournament so the first round is 4 days long instead of 2. First round would start on a Tuesday and would end on that Friday. This allows for all games to be played in Primetime, where ratings are much better than afternoon games. I hate this idea since I love the anticipation for the 11:15 AM Thursday tipoff. One of my favorite things in sports. However, this has some merit in generating revenue. It would move 16 games from the afternoon to primetime and that has to be worth some cash, plus attendance at the games would be higher. One big con: the turnaround to start the tourney on that Tuesday would be tough if Selection Sunday is kept intact.
All of the above would keep the tournament to no greater than 68 teams involved and all would increase revenue. Each has its pitfalls but it's certainly better than 96 teams.
Some ideas I've heard that could increase revenue but not subject us to the idiotic 96-team field:
1. Make the Elite-8 and later a best of 3 series. Would add no fewer than 7 additional games (14 max) to the tourney. Would make it more difficult for a cinderella to make it to the Final 4 but some might not see that as a con. Problem would be how would you schedule the games.
2. Expand the play-in games. Take final 4 at-large spots and make them play-in games (8 teams total involved). Adds an additional 4 games. Could be played on a Tuesday and those teams play on the first Friday (meaning they would have some rest for their first round game). I think there would be great intrigue for those 4 games. Con is it kind of ends the bubble debate, even though I guess it could extend to those that didn't make one of the 4 play-in games
3. Change the tournament so the first round is 4 days long instead of 2. First round would start on a Tuesday and would end on that Friday. This allows for all games to be played in Primetime, where ratings are much better than afternoon games. I hate this idea since I love the anticipation for the 11:15 AM Thursday tipoff. One of my favorite things in sports. However, this has some merit in generating revenue. It would move 16 games from the afternoon to primetime and that has to be worth some cash, plus attendance at the games would be higher. One big con: the turnaround to start the tourney on that Tuesday would be tough if Selection Sunday is kept intact.
All of the above would keep the tournament to no greater than 68 teams involved and all would increase revenue. Each has its pitfalls but it's certainly better than 96 teams.
GopherGold24
Member
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2008
- Messages
- 284
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
Just my thoughts
I would love to see ESPN/ABC get the package. Say what you want about the talkingheads over at ESPN, but if they were to get the deal we would be able to watch all the games in their entirety. This might not be that big of a deal for the casual fan, but for someone like me its a must. I can watch my team play 95% of their regular season/conference tournament games but when it comes to the biggest game of the the year I only get 1 of 4 games the first 2 days? That is junk. Its archaic and CBS knows it. Put the main regional game on ABC, then sprinkle the rest across ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNNEWS with 24/7 coverage on say ESPNCLASSIC (or one of the Disney channels if its an option). Yes, I am aware that I can get the package through Direct TV but this time of year I am seen at many different bars and eating establishments and the CBS pacakge just doesnt make it as "fan-friendly" as it should be. Let Digger, Reese, Billas and whomever else talk all day on one of the sister stations while all games are being televised, Im a junkie so the more the better.
As far as expanding the tournament. The 64 team format we currently have began in 1985 (I believe) so I think it would be worth taking a look at how many D1 teams were actually competing in 1985 versus the roughly 340(?) that are competing now. Maybe adding a few teams is necessary, but to go to 96 would be a big mistake. For us Gophers, just imagine this past season minus any wins in the BTT and say 3 more losses to Illionis, Iowa and Wisconsin and we are probably still in the field of 96. That just doesnt seem right to me. I just checked and there were roughly 300 teams in 1985 versus 347 currently which is an increase of roughly 15%. So, given that math maybe the tournament should have 75 teams. Here is how I would do that. Take the last 8 teams by RPI, these will all be conference champs from lesser conferences. Those 8 teams will play 4 play in games to play the 4 #1 seeds. It will give all 8 teams their day in the sun as they will be nationally televiesed games. So now we are at 68 teams. Next, take the last 8 teams to get at large bids and have them play 4 games to match up against the 4 #5 seeds. THis would put us at 72. Close enough for me. The 8 teams playing hte play in games to meet the #5 would be very popular and this scenario will not mess with how we fill out our brackets.
I would love to see ESPN/ABC get the package. Say what you want about the talkingheads over at ESPN, but if they were to get the deal we would be able to watch all the games in their entirety. This might not be that big of a deal for the casual fan, but for someone like me its a must. I can watch my team play 95% of their regular season/conference tournament games but when it comes to the biggest game of the the year I only get 1 of 4 games the first 2 days? That is junk. Its archaic and CBS knows it. Put the main regional game on ABC, then sprinkle the rest across ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNNEWS with 24/7 coverage on say ESPNCLASSIC (or one of the Disney channels if its an option). Yes, I am aware that I can get the package through Direct TV but this time of year I am seen at many different bars and eating establishments and the CBS pacakge just doesnt make it as "fan-friendly" as it should be. Let Digger, Reese, Billas and whomever else talk all day on one of the sister stations while all games are being televised, Im a junkie so the more the better.
As far as expanding the tournament. The 64 team format we currently have began in 1985 (I believe) so I think it would be worth taking a look at how many D1 teams were actually competing in 1985 versus the roughly 340(?) that are competing now. Maybe adding a few teams is necessary, but to go to 96 would be a big mistake. For us Gophers, just imagine this past season minus any wins in the BTT and say 3 more losses to Illionis, Iowa and Wisconsin and we are probably still in the field of 96. That just doesnt seem right to me. I just checked and there were roughly 300 teams in 1985 versus 347 currently which is an increase of roughly 15%. So, given that math maybe the tournament should have 75 teams. Here is how I would do that. Take the last 8 teams by RPI, these will all be conference champs from lesser conferences. Those 8 teams will play 4 play in games to play the 4 #1 seeds. It will give all 8 teams their day in the sun as they will be nationally televiesed games. So now we are at 68 teams. Next, take the last 8 teams to get at large bids and have them play 4 games to match up against the 4 #5 seeds. THis would put us at 72. Close enough for me. The 8 teams playing hte play in games to meet the #5 would be very popular and this scenario will not mess with how we fill out our brackets.
This is all about increasing revenue. The NCAA won't match the 10 year, $6 billion contract it signed with CBS for the last deal so they feel like they must come up with a way to maintain or increase the revenue.
Some ideas I've heard that could increase revenue but not subject us to the idiotic 96-team field:
1. Make the Elite-8 and later a best of 3 series. Would add no fewer than 7 additional games (14 max) to the tourney. Would make it more difficult for a cinderella to make it to the Final 4 but some might not see that as a con. Problem would be how would you schedule the games.
2. Expand the play-in games. Take final 4 at-large spots and make them play-in games (8 teams total involved). Adds an additional 4 games. Could be played on a Tuesday and those teams play on the first Friday (meaning they would have some rest for their first round game). I think there would be great intrigue for those 4 games. Con is it kind of ends the bubble debate, even though I guess it could extend to those that didn't make one of the 4 play-in games
3. Change the tournament so the first round is 4 days long instead of 2. First round would start on a Tuesday and would end on that Friday. This allows for all games to be played in Primetime, where ratings are much better than afternoon games. I hate this idea since I love the anticipation for the 11:15 AM Thursday tipoff. One of my favorite things in sports. However, this has some merit in generating revenue. It would move 16 games from the afternoon to primetime and that has to be worth some cash, plus attendance at the games would be higher. One big con: the turnaround to start the tourney on that Tuesday would be tough if Selection Sunday is kept intact.
All of the above would keep the tournament to no greater than 68 teams involved and all would increase revenue. Each has its pitfalls but it's certainly better than 96 teams.
#3 is actually mildly intriguing. While I love the first two days of the tournament, it'd be nice NOT to have to take days off work to enjoy it. Moving all of the games to prime time would maintain the 4 games going at the same time, which is really what is fun about it.
It would set up a couple of issues. No league would want thier tournament to end on Sunday anymore. Also, there would be even greater incentive then there already is for teams that are locks to basically lose on purpose early in thier conference tournaments to rest. Finally, there would be complaints about the disparity in days off between rounds for those playing on Tuesday vs. Wednesday and Thursday vs. Friday.
One possibility: The first round still starts on Thursday and goes through Sunday. The second round and Sweet 16 occur on the second week-end Thursday-Sunday. The Elite 8 occurs Wednesay and Thursday night the same week as the Final 4.