$840 million per year for 14 years for NCAA Tournament - CBS \ Turner

[ChicosBailBonds]

That's some serious jing.

DIRECTV paid the NFL about $1 billion per year for 13 games every Sunday for the entire season (about 220 games).  CBS\Turner are talking $840 million for 3 weeks of games and about 95 games (if my math is right...it's late and a few beers so who knows).

Difference is that CBS can only broadcast games on CBS and College Sports Television as well as TNT and TBS for the Turner stations (the article says TruTV, but that would be a real reach....I guess Time Warner wants to push that channel because it's not a high viewed channel).  That's only 4 games at one time.  So they are paying some serious serious jing for thin considering the only way a fan can watch them all is going to be through someone that has the bandwidth (DIRECTV, DISH, or a multicaster)

Looks like ESPN is out of the bidding as they won't increase beyond $800 million.  Can't blame them, tremendous amount of money.  CBS obviously didn't want to lose it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5100441

[cheebs09]

What does this do for the expansion to 96? Does it affect it in any way?

[vacinator]

I wonder how is that distributed back to the schools?   Or how it compares to what the networks pay for those crummy BCS bowl games?

[Jay Bee]

I watch TruTV (f/k/a CourtTV) nearly 24/7.  If they put some damn #18 seed's game on and make me miss a good episode of Forensic Files, I will be heated.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I wonder how is that distributed back to the schools?   Or how it compares to what the networks pay for those crummy BCS bowl games?

I'm sure the cuts will be higher than in the past, but much of this money will go to run the NCAA.  I'd like to see them add rules enforcement teams, something they badly lack and will need more than ever due to the money involved.

[HouWarrior]

What does this do for the expansion to 96? Does it affect it in any way?

espn.com article notes...
The NCAA makes nearly 98 percent of its money from the NCAA men's basketball tournament.

even w/espn droppong out of the bid-- an extra $150-200mil /year makes a 96 team expansion attractive to ncaa---although also, note new tourney chairman wants to stay at 64

[Brewtown Andy]

espn.com article notes...
The NCAA makes nearly 98 percent of its money from the NCAA men's basketball tournament.

And if they'd pull their heads out of their butts and run a football national championship tournament, they wouldn't have to worry about how much money the basketball tournament brings in.

[NersEllenson]

And if they'd pull their heads out of their butts and run a football national championship tournament, they wouldn't have to worry about how much money the basketball tournament brings in.

But running a football tournament would mean too much time out of school for the football players.  It's okay to consider expanding a basketball tournament to 96 teams and an extra round - added on top of the fact college basketball teams play 33-35 regular season games, compared to football's 12 games per year.  The explanation or excuses for a lack of an Elite 8 type of tournament for college football are ridiculous.

[oldwarrior81]

I wonder how is that distributed back to the schools?   Or how it compares to what the networks pay for those crummy BCS bowl games?

The NCAA uses a 6 year tourney total of games a conference played to payout the money.  A conference earns one point/unit for each tourney game a member school played.  If the Big East teams play a combined 15 tourney games each season they will have a total of 90 units over the 6 year period.  The Big South will have 6 units if their representative loses in the first round in each of the six seasons.  

The money is paid out in multiple areas (Basketball Fund, Grant-in-Aids, Student Assistance, Sports Sponsorship...) with the Basketball Fund amounting to about 40% of the total paid out.  The Basketball Fund single unit was equivilent to about $222,000.  The BigEast, with my example of 90 units (15x6), would collect around $20 million annually.  The Big South, with 6 points, would collect a little over $1.3 million.

It is then up to the conference to determine how to disperse the monies.  For example, Conf. USA pays 50% of the money directly to the school that "earned" the units, and then splits the remaining money 13 equal ways.  Big advantage for Memphis.  

Also when Marquette, Cincinnati and Louisville left C-USA they left their units behind.  Which meant the C-USA teams collected on Marquette's 2003 tourney run for the next 5 years.

The last time I saw the numbers for the BCS Bowl Series I believe Fox was paying about $20 million for the each of the top 4 games and the Rose Bowl, which has a separate contract, was around $30 million.

link to a pdf from the NCAA
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/46f776004e0d547d9ef9fe1ad6fc8b25/Revised+Revenue+Distribution+Summary_012709.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=46f776004e0d547d9ef9fe1ad6fc8b25

[MarquetteDano]

The NCAA uses a 6 year tourney total of games a conference played to payout the money.  A conference earns one point/unit for each tourney game a member school played.  If the Big East teams play a combined 15 tourney games each season they will have a total of 90 units over the 6 year period.  The Big South will have 6 units if their representative loses in the first round in each of the six seasons.  

So, just to be clear, there is no difference what games you appear only that you appear?  I was just thinking that Butler got all the way to the Final (thus, six appearances in total for the Horizon) and the PAC-10 went 3-2 in the tourney and had only one Sweet Sixteen team but the Pac-10 will get a share very close to that of the Horizon? (six games versus five games)

[Brewtown Andy]

But running a football tournament would mean too much time out of school for the football players.  It's okay to consider expanding a basketball tournament to 96 teams and an extra round - added on top of the fact college basketball teams play 33-35 regular season games, compared to football's 12 games per year.  The explanation or excuses for a lack of an Elite 8 type of tournament for college football are ridiculous.

The way the NCAA laid out their plan for the 96 team tournament, the teams that reach the Elite Eight will have played 4 games in 8 days, all while missing 7 days of class.  Or 5 in 10 if they're a 9-24 seed, and they would miss nearly 2 weeks of class.

[GGGG]

And if they'd pull their heads out of their butts and run a football national championship tournament, they wouldn't have to worry about how much money the basketball tournament brings in.

You don't get the dynamics.  The NCAA collects the basketball revenue, and then uses that money to basically run its operation, distributing only a small amount back to the conferences.

The BCS schools don't want to cut the NCAA in on the action...the BCS conferences benefit from the current arrangement because they don't have to share anything.  If they ever have a more regular championship, you can pretty much be guaranteed that it would be done outside of the NCAA.

[ChicosBailBonds]

But running a football tournament would mean too much time out of school for the football players.  It's okay to consider expanding a basketball tournament to 96 teams and an extra round - added on top of the fact college basketball teams play 33-35 regular season games, compared to football's 12 games per year.  The explanation or excuses for a lack of an Elite 8 type of tournament for college football are ridiculous.

The extra round doesn't take them out of ANY additional school.  The round would start on Tuesday of the same week.  The students leave Monday or Tuesday anyway for the sites.

The NCAA is not the one blocking a football playoff...FOR THE LAST TIME.  THEY DO NOT CONTROL DI COLLEGE FOOTBALL.  Why do people continue to compare the two??   

[ChicosBailBonds]

And if they'd pull their heads out of their butts and run a football national championship tournament, they wouldn't have to worry about how much money the basketball tournament brings in.

Tell the BCS and the conferences....the NCAA can't pull their heads out of their butts because THEY DO NOT CONTROL DI COLLEGE FOOTBALL!!!!!!!!

[wadefan#1]

Man, I wish I had that kind of money.

[Brewtown Andy]

Tell the BCS and the conferences....the NCAA can't pull their heads out of their butts because THEY DO NOT CONTROL DI COLLEGE FOOTBALL!!!!!!!!

That was my point.

The NCAA does not even recognize a champion for D1 football. 

[Brewtown Andy]

The extra round doesn't take them out of ANY additional school.  The round would start on Tuesday of the same week.  The students leave Monday or Tuesday anyway for the sites.

But if you're winning, you don't even have the option to go to Monday or Tuesday classes.

The NCAA's plan is start games on the same Thursday they usually do, so round of 96 on Th-F, 64 on Sa-Su, 32 on Tu-W, 16 on Th-F, and 8 on Sa-Su.

If GOD FORBID a 9 or lower seed makes the Sweet 16, they will have to miss 2 full weeks of school.  That would have been Washingon, Cornell, St. Mary's and Northern Iowa this year.

[GGGG]

That was my point.

The NCAA does not even recognize a champion for D1 football. 

Because it is not in their power to do so.

[Dawson Rental]

The extra round doesn't take them out of ANY additional school.  The round would start on Tuesday of the same week.  The students leave Monday or Tuesday anyway for the sites.

The NCAA is not the one blocking a football playoff...FOR THE LAST TIME.  THEY DO NOT CONTROL DI COLLEGE FOOTBALL.  Why do people continue to compare the two??   

While I have no proof, and I guess if I'm honest I'll have to admit I don't really know, BUT I strongly suspect that the BCS conferences are happy to have the public confused on this point.  It keeps them from being seem as money grabbers for taking Div I football out of the NCAA.  When they have those short TV spots at halftime touting the schools involved in the game being televised, they always talk about the NCAA, not the BCS. (maybe that's some evidence)

[Dawson Rental]

The NCAA uses a 6 year tourney total of games a conference played to payout the money.  A conference earns one point/unit for each tourney game a member school played.  If the Big East teams play a combined 15 tourney games each season they will have a total of 90 units over the 6 year period.  The Big South will have 6 units if their representative loses in the first round in each of the six seasons.  

The money is paid out in multiple areas (Basketball Fund, Grant-in-Aids, Student Assistance, Sports Sponsorship...) with the Basketball Fund amounting to about 40% of the total paid out.  The Basketball Fund single unit was equivilent to about $222,000.  The BigEast, with my example of 90 units (15x6), would collect around $20 million annually.  The Big South, with 6 points, would collect a little over $1.3 million.

It is then up to the conference to determine how to disperse the monies.  For example, Conf. USA pays 50% of the money directly to the school that "earned" the units, and then splits the remaining money 13 equal ways.  Big advantage for Memphis.  

Also when Marquette, Cincinnati and Louisville left C-USA they left their units behind.  Which meant the C-USA teams collected on Marquette's 2003 tourney run for the next 5 years.

The last time I saw the numbers for the BCS Bowl Series I believe Fox was paying about $20 million for the each of the top 4 games and the Rose Bowl, which has a separate contract, was around $30 million.

link to a pdf from the NCAA
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/46f776004e0d547d9ef9fe1ad6fc8b25/Revised+Revenue+Distribution+Summary_012709.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=46f776004e0d547d9ef9fe1ad6fc8b25

So, if the 32 additional spots in the NCAA tourney end up mostly in the hands of the conferences which are represented by more than their conference tourney champion to start with, then conferences like the Big South with only one team will see their share of the tournament revenue cut by a third.  A nice subtle disincentive to keep more teams from moving up to Division I and forming new Division I conferences.

[HouWarrior]

While I have no proof, and I guess if I'm honest I'll have to admit I don't really know, BUT I strongly suspect that the BCS conferences are happy to have the public confused on this point.  It keeps them from being seem as money grabbers for taking Div I football out of the NCAA.  When they have those short TV spots at halftime touting the schools involved in the game being televised, they always talk about the NCAA, not the BCS. (maybe that's some evidence)

I agree. BCS' formation/vote was done in secrecy. Its the name of a $/Bowl control conspiracy, not a governing organization. Its low profile, big $ control, and NCAA front remind me of the Hyman Roth/Michael Corleone cuban alliance--"bigger than US Steel".

The NCAA w/its billions is US Steel

[ChicosBailBonds]

But if you're winning, you don't even have the option to go to Monday or Tuesday classes.

The NCAA's plan is start games on the same Thursday they usually do, so round of 96 on Th-F, 64 on Sa-Su, 32 on Tu-W, 16 on Th-F, and 8 on Sa-Su.

If GOD FORBID a 9 or lower seed makes the Sweet 16, they will have to miss 2 full weeks of school.  That would have been Washingon, Cornell, St. Mary's and Northern Iowa this year.

Where are you reading that they will start on Thursday as they normally do?  I'm curious because that's not what I'm hearing.

[Marquette84]

Where are you reading that they will start on Thursday as they normally do?  I'm curious because that's not what I'm hearing.

Here:
http://www.projo.com/pc/content/ncaa_tournament_expansion_04-06-10_Q8I15EN_v2.2bbc4cd.html

Note that this is what "could" occur--not what the NCAA is necessarily thinking.

•The tournament would begin on Thursday and Friday, as it now does, and kick off with 32 games featuring teams seeded 33 through 96.

•Those winners would face teams 1-32 on Saturday or Sunday.

•Winners of those games would next play on Monday and Tuesday in the same cities, in what would equate to this season’s second-round games.

•Those winners would advance to a Sweet 16 scheduled on Thursday and Friday, as always.

If this report is accurate, then Brewtown Andy is right in that the start will be the same time--but he is incorrect in suggesting that the 9+ seeds would be out longer than they are right now. 

[Brewtown Andy]

Here:
http://www.projo.com/pc/content/ncaa_tournament_expansion_04-06-10_Q8I15EN_v2.2bbc4cd.html

Note that this is what "could" occur--not what the NCAA is necessarily thinking.


If this report is accurate, then Brewtown Andy is right in that the start will be the same time--but he is incorrect in suggesting that the 9+ seeds would be out longer than they are right now. 

It *IS* what the NCAA is thinking.  They announced it as such as their "state of college basketball" press conference before the Final Four.

And I meant the 9+ would be out of class since the Tuesday before the Thursday games because of travel to play games on Thursday, and if they make the E8, playing the following Sa-Su, they miss (essentially) two weeks.  John Feinstein attempted to get Greg Shaheen to admit as much, but Shaheen was so focused on the teams that were losing and going home, he refused to admit that teams would miss almost two weeks of class.

[Brewtown Andy]

Where are you reading that they will start on Thursday as they normally do?  I'm curious because that's not what I'm hearing.

Here's the quote from Greg Shaheen himself:

The model that has been talked about a great deal, the 96-team model, looks as follows: .
It starts on the same day. Technically speaking it starts two days later than the current championship because it would eliminate the opening round game. Rather than starting on Tuesday, it would start on Thursday. Start at the same time as the current championship does. It would conclude on the same day. It would conclude on Monday that the current championship does, as well.

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=62561