Yuck: Adding more teams to March Madness among recommendations by NCAA transformation committee

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
62,123
Reaction score
18,592
Points
113
Not a fan.

Per CBS:

The long-awaited report of recommendations from the NCAA Division I Transformation Committee was released Tuesday, and among the most notable items in the 40-page document is the previously reported action that would enable Division I sports to field postseason tournaments that accommodate as much as 25% of a sport's membership.

One potential outcome of these recommendations could be eventual expansion of men's and women's NCAA basketball tournaments. Though industry sources have told CBS Sports there is not a lot of momentum for that change in the near future, for the men's tournament that could mean expanding from 68 to approximately 90 teams based on its current membership of 363 teams.

The recommendations are not mandates, and the full set of them are set to be voted on by the Division I Board of Directors, at the annual NCAA Convention in San Antonio, Texas, next week.

The committee, which spent the past year meeting in an attempt to reshape the structure -- and potential size -- of Division I, wound up not putting forth a humongous overhaul of guidelines that would inherently re-shape the structure of major college athletics.

www.cbssports.com

Adding teams to March Madness field among recommendations by NCAA Transformation Committee

There could eventually be an option for the NCAA Tournament to expand, but that doesn't mean it will any time soon
www.cbssports.com www.cbssports.com

Go Gophers!!
 

BleedGopher said:
Not a fan.

Per CBS:

The long-awaited report of recommendations from the NCAA Division I Transformation Committee was released Tuesday, and among the most notable items in the 40-page document is the previously reported action that would enable Division I sports to field postseason tournaments that accommodate as much as 25% of a sport's membership.

One potential outcome of these recommendations could be eventual expansion of men's and women's NCAA basketball tournaments. Though industry sources have told CBS Sports there is not a lot of momentum for that change in the near future, for the men's tournament that could mean expanding from 68 to approximately 90 teams based on its current membership of 363 teams.

The recommendations are not mandates, and the full set of them are set to be voted on by the Division I Board of Directors, at the annual NCAA Convention in San Antonio, Texas, next week.

The committee, which spent the past year meeting in an attempt to reshape the structure -- and potential size -- of Division I, wound up not putting forth a humongous overhaul of guidelines that would inherently re-shape the structure of major college athletics.

www.cbssports.com

Adding teams to March Madness field among recommendations by NCAA Transformation Committee

There could eventually be an option for the NCAA Tournament to expand, but that doesn't mean it will any time soon
www.cbssports.com www.cbssports.com

Go Gophers!!
Click to expand...
We’ve got a chance then!
 

Not a fan either but fuck it make it like the old one class state basketball tournament at this point
 




I'm for any rule that helps the Gophers and hurts the top teams. Period. I don't care about fairness or 'integrity of the sport' or anything...because there is no fairness or integrity to begin with.
 

Every fucking flowchart these fuckers come up with leads to adding more teams to the tournament. It's the answer to every problem they look into. It's like the flowchart of how you treat medical conditions in a horse: the flowchart all ends in one box: shoot it.
 


This would be a terrible decision. They can claim all they want that it's for the betterment of the student athletes, but this is all about money. The last four at-large teams already have big-time blemishes on their resumes, which is why those final spots are so hard to predict most years. Adding 20+ more teams will weaken the product on the court and ruin the experience for hardcore and casual fans of March Madness.
 









MNJay said:
I'm for any rule that helps the Gophers and hurts the top teams. Period. I don't care about fairness or 'integrity of the sport' or anything...because there is no fairness or integrity to begin with.
Click to expand...
It's not about fairness or integrity. It's about ruining an event that the American sporting public likes by making it a way too long, unwieldy mess that only diehards will watch.
 

howeda7 said:
It's not about fairness or integrity. It's about ruining an event that the American sporting public likes by making it a way too long, unwieldy mess that only diehards will watch.
Click to expand...
Even the diehards might not have enough time to follow it all. Some still need to work.
 

There's a right size for everything. 32 clearly wasn't enough; 48 was weird. The tourney went to the next level of intrigue and excitement when it went to six rounds even. Three weekends of two games each. Perfect size.
 


Ski U Mah Gopher said:
Remember, the NCAA owns the NIT.

The expansion of the NCAA tournament might give cover to end the NIT.
Click to expand...
If they expand to get rid of the NIT it is only so they can maximize the revenue from all post season tournaments. Calling NIT games NCAA 96 is a fraud, but will generate a lot more money than a B class tournament.
 

Bad Gopher said:
There's a right size for everything. 32 clearly wasn't enough; 48 was weird. The tourney went to the next level of intrigue and excitement when it went to six rounds even. Three weekends of two games each. Perfect size.
Click to expand...
Well said.

It just "fits" the way it is right now (though arguments against the First 4 games can and have been made).

I think I remember Tom Izzo saying they go into it looking at it like a 4-team tournament. Win your first tournament (1st/2nd round), move on to the next. Win your second 4-team tournament (regional semifinals/regional final), move on to the next (and so on).

I have a bad feeling they're going to push this through (the comments from commissioners Sankey of the SEC and Phillips of the ACC concern me). I don't ever want to find out what a 96-team field feels like, but sadly money likely will rule over everything, as always.
 

SelectionSunday said:
Well said.

It just "fits" the way it is right now (though arguments against the First 4 games can and have been made).

I think I remember Tom Izzo saying they go into it looking at it like a 4-team tournament. Win your first tournament (1st/2nd round), move on to the next. Win your second 4-team tournament (regional semifinals/regional final), move on to the next (and so on).

I have a bad feeling they're going to push this through (the comments from commissioners Sankey of the SEC and Phillips of the ACC concern me). I don't ever want to find out what a 96-team field feels like, but sadly money likely will rule over everything, as always.
Click to expand...
You always risk killing the goose that laid the golden egg. I firmly believe that baseball has reduced its revenue and relevance with its playoff expansion. Of course, you never really kill the goose; you just sicken it. MLB would argue that the solution to their problems is more of the "cure" that's been harming it--the medieval bloodletting approach.
 

As I've mentioned before, pretty every team in D-1 gets in the NCAA tournament. For us, the Big Ten tournament is pretty much the start of the NCAA tournament. Every Big Ten team gets seeded into the tournament. You win-you advance until you win the Conference tournament, the regional and so on until you're in the National Championship game on the first Monday in April. What's to expand? The conference tournaments have already made sure that every team is eligible to win the NCAA title, as long as they keep winning.
 

Chico Gopher said:
As I've mentioned before, pretty every team in D-1 gets in the NCAA tournament. For us, the Big Ten tournament is pretty much the start of the NCAA tournament. Every Big Ten team gets seeded into the tournament. You win-you advance until you win the Conference tournament, the regional and so on until you're in the National Championship game on the first Monday in April. What's to expand? The conference tournaments have already made sure that every team is eligible to win the NCAA title, as long as they keep winning.
Click to expand...
Absolutely true but accepted by about four people. You, me, and two guys who make road trips to as many conference tournaments as possible. The system basically works, which is really saying something in this day and age.
 

SelectionSunday said:
Well said.

It just "fits" the way it is right now (though arguments against the First 4 games can and have been made).

I think I remember Tom Izzo saying they go into it looking at it like a 4-team tournament. Win your first tournament (1st/2nd round), move on to the next. Win your second 4-team tournament (regional semifinals/regional final), move on to the next (and so on).

I have a bad feeling they're going to push this through (the comments from commissioners Sankey of the SEC and Phillips of the ACC concern me). I don't ever want to find out what a 96-team field feels like, but sadly money likely will rule over everything, as always.
Click to expand...
According to Norlander at CBS, this is a non-starter. Only the basketball committee can do it and for the most part they are basketball people who get it. He even quoted a few anonymous people who said the additional revenue is a mirage. The fact that they have nine years left on a TV deal is saving us all for at least that amount of time. I’ll likely be to my eternal reward by then, one year prior to Ben winning it all! 😇 (For the Gophers).
 

Holy Man said:
According to Norlander at CBS, this is a non-starter. Only the basketball committee can do it and for the most part they are basketball people who get it. He even quoted a few anonymous people who said the additional revenue is a mirage. The fact that they have nine years left on a TV deal is saving us all for at least that amount of time. I’ll likely be to my eternal reward by then, one year prior to Ben winning it all! 😇 (For the Gophers).
Click to expand...
No need to pass on early. We're all similarly cursed.
 

leib0039 said:
Participation trophies for everyone! MNJay likes it, clearly showing how terrible of an idea it is
Click to expand...
howeda7 said:
It's not about fairness or integrity. It's about ruining an event that the American sporting public likes by making it a way too long, unwieldy mess that only diehards will watch.
Click to expand...
I admit...I'm absolutely repulsed by the NCAA Tournament...I hate it unless the Gophers are in it. It's depressing.

I'm for anything that hurts or dilutes the best programs. And I'm for anything that helps the Gophers.
 

MNJay said:
I admit...I'm absolutely repulsed by the NCAA Tournament...I hate it unless the Gophers are in it. It's depressing.

I'm for anything that hurts or dilutes the best programs. And I'm for anything that helps the Gophers.
Click to expand...
How does ruining the NCAA tournament help the Gophers? You don't employ much logic sometimes.

Would Clem! have gotten as much glory from the 1989/1990 tournament runs if no one cared or watched them because they'd become a joke?
 
Last edited:

I like the current 68 number.

That's only 19% of all teams for perspective. If they added any more maybe it could be a play-in to qualify, which we sort of already have.

The NBA lets in too many teams. And then it lasts five months (sarcasm).
 
Last edited:


If it were 90 or 96 teams, would it be possible for there to be a year where the last place B1G team makes it? At that size, I would stop considering "making the tournament" to be the mark of a moderately successful Gopher season (which I guess is where I am already at if we were ever to lose in the First Four).
 

howeda7 said:
How does ruining the NCAA tournament help the Gophers? You don't employ much logic sometimes.

Would Clem! have gotten as much glory from the 1989/1990 tournament runs if no one cared or watched them because they'd become a joke?
Click to expand...
When I say specifics, I'm always very logical. Here I'm not advocating for anything specific.

It's tempting to ruin the NCAA Tournament to just to hurt Kansas, Duke, North Carolina, Gonzaga, and these teams I can't stand. Not saying I would...but I might not cry over it.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom