share

NCAA Tournament Expansion Good or Bad idea?

sheltwon3
sheltwon3's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/30/2009
Posts: 6364
Points: 2607
Offline
NCAA Tournament Expansion Good or Bad idea?

At first i was like no but I think it could help more than hurt because a lot of team in Nit were pretty good and we had so lower seeded teams that barely made it end win so big games so it would be interesting. I really don't see it being as bad as people think. I think then you would have more teams scheduling better because they have more room for error and you can just have some nice tough basketball and not just team with the most NBA players win.


rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1601
Points: 707
Offline
NCAA: It's all about the Money!

Of course it's all about the money. What else should you expect from the NCAA that crams 18 commercials into a 40 minute game? That's 8 four minute media, plus 10 team timeouts, and it ruins the game!

As for education, the NCAA doesn't care about the atrocious graduation rate of the STARTERS on each team.

But when it comes to making extra money, they will do anything. Unfortunately this will probably kill the NIT. For those of you who don't know this, there was a time when winning the NIT was more prestigious than winning the NCAA.

The UnderKanter
Registered User
Joined: 06/12/2009
Posts: 2415
Points: 252
Offline
Why fix it if it aint

Why fix it if it aint broken? The tourney is great the way it is. More teams would just mean more cindarellas. Eventually we will see two no name teams playing each other. Who wants to watch that game other then their own fans? (which probably is not too many) Horrible idea.

DanEboy
DanEboy's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/25/2008
Posts: 2473
Points: 6472
Offline
rtbt, you and those damn

rtbt, you and those damn timeouts!!!!

The only reason why I don't like it is because it gives bad teams a shot to play for the championship game.

Michael.S.
Registered User
Joined: 05/10/2009
Posts: 5992
Points: 1965
Offline
I like your posts, rtbt...I

I like your posts, rtbt...I think you are very smart and informative....just thought i'd put that out there.......

I agree, too. It would decrease the quality of team in the NIT...and decrease the quality of teams in the NCAA tourney....And money is the answer to everything

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1601
Points: 707
Offline
mikenike, Thanks for the Kind Words

mikenike, unfortunately I think it will do more than hurt the quality of teams in the NIT, it might spell doom for the tournament. The NIT is one of America's traditions. In addition, it gives teams who really don't belong in the NCCA Tournament, an opportunity to get some national exposure and a real shot at actually winning a tournament. You know none of those NIT teams has a remote chance in hell to even make it to the Final Four at the Big Dance.

As for the NCAA tourney, it will remove a lot of the excitement at the end of the year that we have now when everyone tries to figure out who will get in. Getting into the NCAA will no longer be an achievement mikenike.

dmo21
dmo21's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/24/2009
Posts: 1035
Points: 847
Offline
hmm..

i dont like the idea, will make the tournament so long drawn out, its why people get bored of the nba playoffs.. also, the first round and maybe second will be mostly just blowout after blowout.. and whats the lowest seed that has everyone anyways? its gonna be the same teams in contention, they just have to beat more teams to get there.. Also, guys will be getting really tired and there will be more injuries..

the I in win
the I in win's picture
Registered User
Joined: 11/28/2009
Posts: 2106
Points: 1522
Offline
as stated above it's all

as stated above it's all about the money but i do like the idea. Mississippi state is all i have to hear to convince me that their should be more teams.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1601
Points: 707
Offline
DanEboy on RTBT and TimeOuts

Dan, I would love to see a college basketball game like it was in the old days when we would actually see at least 5 minutes of uninterrupted action. With 18 timeouts in today's game, we have 1 commercial about every 2 minutes. What happened to the game of basketball? It used to be a game that was occasionally stopped for commercials. Now the NCAA tries to squeeze a ball game in between a never ending parade of commercials.

Instead of going to 96 teams, the NCAA should do something to make the game more entertaining.

Michael.S.
Registered User
Joined: 05/10/2009
Posts: 5992
Points: 1965
Offline
rtbt, you are teaching me

rtbt, you are teaching me alot...because up until this year i didn't watch much college ball, i just started this year because I saw some mixes and j.b.c. game with john Wall and i just had to watch him... I apreciate the knowledge

And dmo you really think the playoffs are boring?

DanEboy
DanEboy's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/25/2008
Posts: 2473
Points: 6472
Offline
rtbt, it is like that in all

rtbt, it is like that in all sports now. Advertisement is money and they will squeeze it in any way they can. It is not going to change, except for the worse. Do you remember the Superbowl? I don't, all I remember were commercials and the halftime show.

I am not disagreeing with you, it just doesn't bother me as much.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1601
Points: 707
Offline
mikenike, the Problem with Getting Old

mikenike, one of the problems associated with getting old is the fact that you remember the way things used to be. In terms of basketball, I vividly remember when they didn't stop the game every 4 minutes for a media timeout. In those days, the action was more fluid, the games were more exciting, and the bench was important.

With 8 four minute media timeouts, the starters literally get an extra 32 minutes of rest. That's why teams like Syracuse and Kentucky can only play 6 or 7 guys. In the old days they would've been killed trying to go through the tournament playing the starting five so long.

No, I don't think the NCAA Tournament is boring, the word I would use is frustrating. As soon as one team starts to gain momentum, you can bet all of the money you have that the game will immediately be stopped for yet another parade of commercials. It really is obscene.

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 11731
Points: 11411
Offline
as for the expansion from 65

as for the expansion from 65 to 96 teams, honestly does anyone really care that much one way or the other? To me, it is just not a big deal at all. It adds one more round and a handful more mediocre teams. It does hurt the meaning of making the tournament, but it also adds more colleges, students, fans, alumni and regions around the country to the best sporting event of the year. The fact that people are making money off this is irrelevant to me as a fan.

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1601
Points: 707
Offline
DanEboy, Everything Is Personal

DanEboy, everyone reacts differently to the world around them. It doesn't bother you but it drives me and the people I know crazy. And you're right, it's terrible in all sports, not just basketball. Allow me to give you my take on that. TV money is the key in both football and basketball, so I understand the need for commercials and readily accept them as necessary. But please, keep it reasonable and don't allow it to interfere with the game.

I'll use the NFL as an example. Team A scores, we have to sit through 4-5 minutes of commercials and then Team A kicks off. Unfortunately they've now made it standard to actually STOP the game after the kickoff. That's the part I find obscene, why would you stop the action for another 3-4 minutes of moronic commercials?

In terms of basketball they've ruined the ebb and flow of the game. We literally cannot see a team gain momentum and keep the pressure on. In addition, the non-stop commercials make the bench almost irrelevant because the starters get an extra 32 minutes of rest.

In sum DanEboy, I wouldn't mind the commercials if they showed a little more respect for the game. After all, isn't that why all of us are watching?

Michael.S.
Registered User
Joined: 05/10/2009
Posts: 5992
Points: 1965
Offline
Yeah, from what I watched

Yeah, from what I watched there is way way more commercials in ncaa than in nba games, in the ncaa games i watched this year, sometimes a commercial would just finish and play would resume, then there is a quick foul and all of a sudden there is another commercial, at first i found that hilarious, but it is straight ridiculous....because of what you were referring to, they might have needed to squeeze in that extra media timeout that they just NEEDED to have

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1601
Points: 707
Offline
mikenike. Here's The Explanation

The NCAA stops the game for a 4 minute media timeout at the 16, 12, 8, and 4 minute mark each half. What frequently happens is a team calls a timeout with let's say 8:05 seconds remaining in the half. We sit through a series of commercials and then play resumes. The next whistle blows maybe 15 seconds later with 7:50 seconds remaining in the half. Oh no! Now we stop the game again for the under 8 minute break and sit through yet another 4 minutes of commercials.

That's the point I was trying to make to Dan. Commercials are a necessary evil but when they ruin the game, it's time to step back and make some changes.

Michael.S.
Registered User
Joined: 05/10/2009
Posts: 5992
Points: 1965
Offline
ok, agreed.... Its kind of

ok, agreed....

Its kind of game changing now that i thonk about it...Thats pushing it, your right

rtbt
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2009
Posts: 1601
Points: 707
Offline
llperez22 on Expanding to 96 Teams

llperez22 in a way I essentially agree with you. Who really cares if the NCAA goes to 96 teams? If it weren't for the probable demise of the NIT, I would probably feel the same way.

But the NIT is one of America's traditions and I would hate to see it disappear.

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 11731
Points: 11411
Offline
im sure those nit teams

im sure those nit teams would gladly jump over to the real tounrament. And the only reason they have an nit is to find out who is the best of the teams that got snubbed but still had a solid year. Now, if you dont make the tounrament with 96 teams, there really is no need for any other tournaments. Selection sunday should decide if you keep playing. Those nit teams must be in a weird position not sure if they should be excited to keep playing or dissapointed they're not in the ncaa tournament.

daryry2412
daryry2412's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/01/2010
Posts: 18
Points: 38
Offline
Why I Am Against the Expansion of the Tournament

I can't say that I'm completely against the idea of a 96 team field (because more teams = more cinderellas as well as more games) and less truly deserving teams getting snubbed (a few that come to mind are: syracuse a few years back, arizona state 2 years ago with james harden, and even this year with ole miss, miss state, and virginia tech). But I am still very strongly against it for several reasons.

1. Plenty and I mean PLENTY of undeserving teams will get into the tournament, meaning you can probably go about .500 in a power conference and still get in, which is a lot like bowl games in college football. You win half your games and you can go to the Music City Bowl, or the Papa Johns.com Pizza Bowl, and even though the teams in non BCS bowl games can't win the championship, why reward teams that have mediocre seasons with a shot at the championship?

2. The athletes would have to miss a substantial amount of time in class. Even a number 1 seed would have their athletes miss a whole week of class with the setup the NCAA has proposed (and the extra 31 teams would miss even more time), and as a current college student, I can say that missing a whole week of class can put you behind by leaps and bounds (and I think we all know that most of the athletes aren't renowned for their academic achievements). So the vast majority of guys who aren't going to be drafted in the 1st round or any round at all suffer greatly from this. For more on the proposed plan heres a link http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/9755/ncaa-trie...

3. The NIT would either become totally irrelevant or disappear. I have to disagree with you llperez22, the NIT and CBI can actually be very beneficial for teams, as they allow you a chance to compete for something while continuing to gain game experience against teams that were either just left out of the tournament or are fairly solid but not really championship contenders. Sure it's not as glamorous as making the NCAA but it's better than just stopping playing completely and it allows you to continue to work on your game, team chemistry, and building momentum for next season. Plus, since the NCAA is obviously doing this for money, the broadcasting rights from these tournaments gives them more money, so if anything, expand those fields to get some more. And the NIT also has a lot of history as several others have said and before the NCAA tournament was around, teams worked to earn a berth in the NIT and winning it meant winning the national championship. So losing this tournament wouldn't be the WORST thing ever, but it wouldn't be anything close to a good thing.

4. My final and maybe most important to me is the bracket pools. If you throw in an extra round, it's hard enough to make all the picks, now it would be close to impossible. And while I'm not one to back down from a challenge, it can sap some of the fun out of it, especially because it just makes everything so much more complex. So you'd alienate the casual fans who make brackets because then there are so many more choices and it becomes more difficult for them to do. Even the hardcore followers wouldn't like it much since their brackets could get screwed over quicker despite all the work they put into the picks. The past couple years and this year especially showed there is plenty of parity in the pool so we don't need to throw in MORE teams to muddy the situation. Since this is easily in the top 3-5 sporting events in anybodies opinion who follows sports (and likely the 2nd behind the superbowl), why change something that is already great?

midwestbbscout
midwestbbscout's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/21/2010
Posts: 1503
Points: 561
Offline
for real....

of all the postseasons in all of sports, the NCAA tournament is totally the one that needs to be messed with.....seriously....it sucks and I hate watching it....

knicksfan7
Registered User
Joined: 06/18/2009
Posts: 3069
Points: 1484
Offline
yeah Midwest, I mean 96 is

yeah Midwest, I mean 96 is just wack, let's go to 347, double elimination tournament as well.

midwestbbscout
midwestbbscout's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/21/2010
Posts: 1503
Points: 561
Offline
The NCAA

They have really lost their god damn mind.....they have 2 major sports.....one tournament they want to ruin and one they don't want to have period....all because of money.....but god forbid a coach takes his kids out to eat once a week with his 5 billion dollar contract....

NCAA = THE BIGGEST HYPOCRISY IN AMERICA.....wise up people....

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 11731
Points: 11411
Offline
okay, let me defend

okay, let me defend expansion(truth is i really dont care one way or the other)

here is what I like about expansion:

1-I for one very much enjoy watching the little schools get in and have their first opportunity to play on the biggest stage in front of people who probably know nothing about them. I live about a half hour from both UC santa barbara who made it this year and UC Northridge who made it last year. Both were 15 seeds and got bounced in the first round. But those schools had a week of excitement and buzzing going on that only the ncaa tournament could provide them. Adding more schools from small conferences that normally only get 1 bid gives these teams, players and fans more hope and it allows for more regions of the country to be caught up in the madness. Sure it will more then likely end after the first week, but who cares.

2-It erases the play in game and it shuts up every single school or sports analysis that screams someone got robbed of a bid. If you cant make a 96 team tounrament, then you really dont have an argument.

3-It should erase the nit. If all those nit teams get into the real tournament, then we have one real post season instead of a half hearted one that people only slightly care about.

Now here are some of the arguments you guys are giving that I disagree with:

"Too many undeserving teams" this might be true. But keep in mind that even with this expansion, only approximately 30% of d1 schools will get in. That is not in any way an out of the ordinary number for teams to be awarded for their season.

"The NIT will go away" like I said, those nit teams will essentially just slide over to the real tournament and im guessing none of those schools would mind that one bit.

"It takes away from kids study time" Not when you consider those schools were gonna be playing in the nit anyways. And lets be honest, how many kids in the american college system are being negatively impacted by this? A couple dozen teams with maybe 15 players on each squad lose a week of school time when its not even finals week anyways. Lets not act like that is a reason to not do it.

"It's about the colleges wanting more money" So what?

daryry2412
daryry2412's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/01/2010
Posts: 18
Points: 38
Offline
Touche llperez22 hahaha

You definitely made some good points with the reasons you support expansion, I can definitely say that I agree wholeheartedly with the first two reasons and even somewhat with the third. But 30% of the teams playing for a championship is just too many.

If you look at the NIT field and were to add them in would you really want teams like: Stony Brook, Illinois St, Weber St, Jacksonville, Quinnipiac, Northeastern, or Coastal Carolina to be playing in the big dance? And even though those are the bottom seeds in the NIT, the top seeds may have had arguments to get in, but why reward a team with a .500 season by letting them play for it all? It takes away the competitive edge from the regular season, making it like the NFL. A team can work to win around 16-19 games and then just coast through the rest of the season and not even try in the conference tournaments, and that just plain sucks.

And as for the study time, its not that they lose time to study, it's that they lose time around their professors, tutors, and classroom. I'm sure the coaches would at least TRY to make them crack a book to try to learn a thing or two while they are away, but it's nowhere near the same as actually being in the classroom and being able to ask for help understanding the material. And if a team wins out in their weekend whether it's the NIT, CBI, or NCAA tournament, they go back to school for most of the week. With the new proposed system, a 1 seed that won all of their games to get to the final four would play Saturday, Tuesday, Thursday, and then Saturday again. And with the team probably having to leave on Wednesday or Thursday at the latest to get there and be prepared, that's A LOT of class to miss. A cinderella team that would get added to the field of 65 would miss even MORE time, and yes this is during finals week for some schools because I have friends who go to a few schools that were in the tournament and some of their finals weeks coincided with the tournament.

Finally, yes the colleges make some money and I don't really have a problem with that, it's the fact that THE NCAA IS THE ONE WHO MAKES THE MOST MONEY FROM THIS. Obviously they have to pony some up to the teams that make it into the tournament and the more you play, the more you make, but the lion's share goes to the NCAA. The past TV deal was worth about 6 billion dollars with CBS. With internet streaming (which wasn't available in the past when the contract was made), more media coverage, and inflation of currency, the new contract could be worth an unimaginable amount of money. If most of it went to the schools, then maybe I'd think less of it, but knowing that this will not be the case, I can't say I'm a fan of it

RSS: Syndicate content