NCAA Deal Reached; Tourny Expansion for 2011

[tjm62]

I know this has a thread somewhere, but I couldn't find it.

content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2010/04/ncaa-reaches-14-year-deal-with-cbsturner/1

How the tournament expands seems likely to significantly change the nature of college basketball.

[ksf42001]

If it's just to add-in three more play-in games for the right to be the 16th seed, then who cares.

What I'm hoping for though is for the play-in games to be between the final 8 at large teams for the right to be the four 12 seeds. It would at least make the old "last 4 in/out" prove they belong there.

[RBHoya]

Apr 22, 2010 11:22:29 GMT -5 ksf42001 said:

If it's just to add-in three more play-in games for the right to be the 16th seed, then who cares.

What I'm hoping for though is for the play-in games to be between the final 8 at large teams for the right to be the four 12 seeds. It would at least make the old "last 4 in/out" prove they belong there.

I like this too but the downside is that it puts the 5 seeds at a disadvantage because they get less time to prepare for an opponent.

Anyway, I hated 96 so I'll take this. Let's just hope things don't play out like was discussed in the Times article yesterday

[DudeSlade]

This is huge! Ok, not the expansion part, but the actual television agreement is huge. EVERY game is going to be on national TV. No more regionalization and getting some bogus game between Kentucky and SE Podunk St. because there wasn't a west coast team playing at the time. Now, I (and everyone else outside the Mid-Atlantic) are guaranteed of seeing our Hoyas play on NATIONAL TV in every NCAA game. To me, that's huge!

As much as ESPN360 was a blessing to actually get to see us play at all, it still has kinks, especially when trying to project it on an HD TV - this will be a far more easy process for the time being (until internet video takes over from TV some day).

And I expect good things out of the Turner crews when it comes time, as the TNT bunch has done a great job with the NBA.

[Boz]

You have to like the TV aspect of it though. (dudeslade beat me to it)

MMOD has made it somewhat less critical, since you can watch any game at any time, but I still prefer watching live sports on a big TV than my laptop, even if my laptop is hooked up to a big TV/monitor.

I like the idea of the play-ins being between the last 8 teams under consideration. I don't think it's too much of a disadvantage for their eventual 5 seed opponent.

[FLHoya]

Apr 22, 2010 11:34:41 GMT -5 DudeSlade said:

And I expect good things out of the Turner crews when it comes time, as the TNT bunch has done a great job with the NBA.

I reckon it'll be the same roster of CBS broadcast crews (minus Dick Enberg who retired) just on the Turner stations with CBS-style production.

TruTV would definitely be a strange network for the Hoyas. Off the top of my head, can't think of too many out there networks in the past several years to broadcast Hoyas games...the GU/UVA game in Dec 01 was on TBS, and before MASN existed we used to be syndicated sometimes on NewsChannel 8.

[hoya95]

Are we certain that 96 teams is off the table? And if so, for how long? Looks like we might finally have some good news for college sports. (Knock on wood.)

[jerseyhoya34]

Whether the new seeds are play-ins or something else does not really matter. The number of at-larges appears to be staying the same, so the teams benefited are just on what we now conceive as the bubble. The reality is that these moves will simply adjust what the bubble is and the quality of bubble teams. There will still be teams whose bubbles burst, which is part of the fun of March Madness.

[The Stig]

Considering the alternatives, this is great news!

I hope the 4 play-in games are all at-large teams, but even if it's auto-bids, it's much better than 96 teams.

Here's the ESPN story: sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5125307

[superan]

The NCAA tournament is saved!

At least for the next 14 years...

[Boz]

I doubt 96 teams is off the table for all that long.

Certainly I don't think it's off the table for 14 years.

It will be revisited and it will eventually happen, I'm fairly sure of it.

This probably just puts it off for a couple years longer.

[hoya95]

Hopefully we'll find out soon how long until they can opt out and try for 96. My hope is that the deal specifies that it can't be for a few years. At the very least this keeps ESPN's self-promoting hands off of the tournament. My understanding is that ESPN was making the biggest push for 96. Hopefully CBS and Turner aren't. And since the NCAA just got its money, maybe the push for 96 goes away for a while. But since I don't trust the greedy creeps who run college sports for a second, I want to see it in writing.
Now let's see if we can save the Big East. Just another day in the billion dollar world of "amateur" athletics.

[hoya95]

Uh-oh. From Garry Parrish:

"The size of the field is "totally at the NCAA's discretion." In other words, it's 68 for now. Could be more later. "

Knew this was too good to be true.

[kchoya]

So the final four will be on TBS (every other year) starting in 2015? Guess it doesn't really matter...

[JohnJacquesLayup]

I'm really excited for the TV aspect of this deal, with every game shown live. Question for the lawyers on the board: Is there any way this TV deal gets challenged by the cable companies who try to sell the March Madness packages? There's really no need for those now. I don't know anything about how those packages are formed, and whether the cable companies would actually be harmed by this new TV deal. Just interested to hear a little on that aspect...

[whatmaroon]

Not to sound too lame and lawyer-ish, but it depends on DirecTV's contract with the NCAA. It may have expired after this past tournament, or it may have had an out clause, or money may be changing hands.

I'll second the general consensus about it making sense for all games to be shown live. I'd hoping DirecTV, at least (my provider), keeps a mix channel. They do it for things like the Australian Open and Masters, and the pre-existing relationship with the NCAA would, I would think, ease that project.

[redskins12820]

TV deal is good, and this is going to sound weird, but I'm kind of going to miss one close game ending, the CBS announcers throwing it to another game with a minute left, followed by another transition to a close game. Seeing those ending bam bam bam was amazing, and while now you'll be able to just flip the channel, it won't feel the same.

[jgalt]

The extra games should be allowed for any seed below 10 and it should be at the discretion of committee to decide where the extra games should be, but should always be between the last teams in

I think the biggest thing to come out of this is that with games on TBS this again screws over Conan who will be preempted by the final four every other year. Jeez the guy just cant catch a break.

[hifigator]

jgalt, I can't decide whether I agree or not. I get "both sides" of the argument. On one hand, simply put, a team that truly "earned" its way into the tournament shouldn't have to play an added/play-in game over teams that are on the bubble and being granted a bid.

On the other hand, you can't deny the facts. A 16 seed has NEVER beaten a 1. It just simply doesn't happen. I have always thought that the "play=in" game was a boondoggle to begin with, but IF we come from the starting point of having a play-in game, then I think that adding 3 more could be a positive. Think of it this way: the winners of those ultra-small, wekest conferences simply don't have a chance. Yes, I know there is that Belmont over Cuse shocker -- hee hee hee ... -- but realistically, the Robert Morris or Belmonts of the world are only there for a token appearance and their 15 seconds of fame while they hold a 13-9 lead 8 minutes into the game. By pairing 8 of those teams up in four games you accomplish several things. First off, it isn't some isolated slap in the face "play-in" game like it is now. Secondly, you create a somewhat attractive slate of games for TV. Sure, we aren't that interested in almost any of those schools, but the fan can appreciate 4 competitive and contested games. I think that's what you would get. Thirdly, by having those teams that realistically have no shot at winning a tourney game play each other, then they get center stage at least for a moment. Those small programs would probably really benefit from even a bump in the atheltic budget. Lastly, there will be a few more teams in the tourney that have at least a reasoble, remote chance at pulling off an upset win or two.

That being said, I also understand the counter argument. And yes, if you simplify it, you can certainly make the case that the teams that should have to play an extra game should be the very last teams on the bubble, rather than the "worst" teams in the tournament. I just don't know which argument is more sound. In any case, I am much more a fan of 68 than I am of 96. Lesser of two evils?

[hoyarooter]

Except that one Robert Morris of the world probably should have knocked off Villanova this year.

I can live with this change, however it is constituted. I just wish the 96 team concept would disappear, and it won't.

If ratings have anything to do with the decision, the games will be among the last teams in. Let's face it, no one watches or cares about the current play-in game other than the supporters of the teams involved. Adding three more games of a similar nature will just result in three more games that are ignored by most fans.