NCAA expanding to 96 teams?

This document has been making its way around the web the past day or two:

http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/DI_Champs_Sports_Mgmt_Cab/2010/February%202010/Supp_5_Cover_Sheet_Bylaw%2017%20and%2031%20Review.pdf

It's a set of proposals the NCAA cabinet is considering to reduce costs. The big item is on page 3, under Revenue Generation:

Consider bracket expansion for men's basketball (to generate more money).

There have been rumors going around for a few years now about expanding to 96 teams. It would seem the NCAA might be doing that as soon as 2011...

Good news for us! but adding another round of games... Uhhhh isn't that what the whole season and conference tourneys are for?

I agree. We don't want to make it like the NBA playoffs where half the league makes it and it takes way too long before the games are actually meaningful.

I'm not a fan. It takes away from the prestige of making the NCAA Tournament...

Also, the first day wouldn't be as much fun because there wouldn't be as many Cinderella teams knocking off well-known schools. It will be only little schools playing other little schools (or very mediocre big schools that will sell tickets).

I think they are trying to eliminate the NIT. By calling it the NCAA tournament, they can cash in on the march madness Caché.

So, 32 play-in games ilo 1?

ugh

Pretty much... It will open up a whole new bizarre wrinkle to selection Sunday as well.... Kind of like trying to brew 2 pots of tea with the same bags, might get some of the same color, but the taste is nothing but watered down...

ShipstadPilot11 wrote:I'm not a fan. It takes away from the prestige of making the NCAA Tournament...

Me neither. Really, it's hard to make it into the Dance as it is now. Sure, more mid-majors will get in, but they'll also use the extra spots for more middling power conference teams as well.

One theory is that now that the NCAA owns the NIT they will have the NCAAs with 96 and the NIT with 32.

Let me guess, all about the $$$? Hey, let's add some more bowl games too so a 5-7 team can get in!

I prefer a change, maybe fewer teams. Unfortunely, the Pilots probably would have too weak of record with it's won-loss record to qualify unless it only lost about 3 or 4 games a year. The competion was better, there weren't 4 teams from the A-10 gonna make the field, NOW THAT'S A BIGGER JOKE THAN 6 FROM THE BIG TEN. Those were great tourneys before they started letting every 6th place Big ten,ACC, Sec,Pac Ten team in the field .Larry Byrd,Magic Johnson,Danny Ainge, etc players who later had the talent to star in the NBA were involved in some of the plot lines of eary March Madness tourneys. Not mediocre players ala Christian Laetner, or Miserable Morrison(you knew I had to work him in, "Hey Adam, how's that pro career working out for you, got any pine in your behind") who later gained entry into CBS sports March Maddness tourney. Although I do enjoy the Bulldogs in the tourney in the last decade, because the majority of the years they get pounded silly in the first or second round,lol.

Maybe UP7587, or Geez or someone who's got a kid over 12 yrs old can explain to some of these young and wet behind the ears guys the history of the NIT vrs NCAA tourney. I don't have the time nor the patience , I just know that I have had Major College Basketball games season tickets since 1974. Before some of these experts were born, (tongue in cheek) .In case anybody wants the debate , take it up with Geez or somebodywho's a history buff and will straighten you out. Knocking(Shame on you, Shame , Shame, Shame, Shame on you) the long , and what was once the storied tournament for DECADES,DECADES in College Basketball shows an GIANT IGNORANCE TO THE HISTORY OF COLLEGE BASKETBALL.


If only some of you guys were old enough to watch the 64 team tourney at its inception....Oh well, I never got to have an X-box or cell phone (remember party lines geez, and they werent 976 numbers either guys,lol ) growing up so I guess I really missed out too,yeah right.

MesaPilot1 wrote:I prefer a change, maybe fewer teams. Unfortunely, the Pilots probably would have too weak of record with it's won-loss record to qualify unless it only lost about 3 or 4 games a year. The competion was better, there weren't 4 teams from the A-10 gonna make the field, NOW THAT'S A BIGGER JOKE THAN 6 FROM THE BIG TEN. Those were great tourneys before they started letting every 6th place Big ten,ACC, Sec,Pac Ten team in the field .Larry Byrd,Magic Johnson,Danny Ainge, etc players who later had the talent to star in the NBA were involved in some of the plot lines of eary March Madness tourneys. Not mediocre players ala Christian Laetner, or Miserable Morrison(you knew I had to work him in, "Hey Adam, how's that pro career working out for you, got any pine in your behind") who later gained entry into CBS sports March Maddness tourney. Although I do enjoy the Bulldogs in the tourney in the last decade, because the majority of the years they get pounded silly in the first or second round,lol.

Maybe UP7587, or Geez or someone who's got a kid over 12 yrs old can explain to some of these young and wet behind the ears guys the history of the NIT vrs NCAA tourney. I don't have the time nor the patience , I just know that I have had Major College Basketball games season tickets since 1974. Before some of these experts were born, (tongue in cheek) .In case anybody wants the debate , take it up with Geez or somebodywho's a history buff and will straighten you out. Knocking(Shame on you, Shame , Shame, Shame, Shame on you) the long , and what was once the storied tournament for DECADES,DECADES in College Basketball shows an GIANT IGNORANCE TO THE HISTORY OF COLLEGE BASKETBALL.


If only some of you guys were old enough to watch the 64 team tourney at its inception....Oh well, I never got to have an X-box or cell phone (remember party lines geez, and they werent 976 numbers either guys,lol ) growing up so I guess I really missed out too,yeah right.

BACK TO MY SELF IMPOSED EXILE............shut up, Mesa, er shhut up.....oh well OK

No Mesa, I very much understand what you're talking about. But history can be re-written with green backs (even if they aren't really fully green anymore) as far as the NCAA is concerned...