NCAA seeks TV bids for 96-team tournament

[Pakuni]

http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/64712

Key graphs:

The broadcasters are basing their bids on an expanded tournament field, according to a request for proposal issued by the NCAA to potential bidders late last year. A copy of the RFP was obtained by SportsBusiness Journal.

The NCAA has its sights set on expanding from a 65-team tournament to either 68 or 96 teams if it opts out of the CBS contract, according to the 12-page RFP.

In the RFP, the NCAA outlines two 96-team split formats that have an over-the-air partner teaming with a cable partner.

[KipsBayEagle]

I guess getting into the Ncaa tournament will be easier than getting into Arizona state........

[MarquetteDano]

Jeesh... jumping from 65 to 96?  Quite a jump indeed.  Can't we do it a little more slowly like from 65 to 72? Or even just 80?

[cheebs09]

Wow. One big argument for the BCS in football is that way each game in the regular season means something. In basketball they are working to do something that makes the regular season almost meaningless. We've been solid this year but obviously this has been looked at as a rebuilding year and the bubble talk is pretty constant and I find it pretty exciting. If it were 96 teams the word bubble wouldn't even be mentioned here. I hope this doesn't happen, at worst have 4 play-in games and make it 68 teams, but 96 teams seems to water down the tournament a lot.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I guess getting into the Ncaa tournament will be easier than getting into Arizona state........

Not really....it actually brings it back to levels it used to be.  In 1985, 64 teams made it and there were far fewer DI teams. 

I've been advocating for this for a long time and everything I'm hearing on the tv side in sports internally, says it's going to happen.  Maybe not immediately, but eventually.

I know our CBS deal is up after this tournament for our product with them.  The national CBS contract still has some tenure on it, but that can be scrapped by the NCAA via an out clause after this tournament.  ESPN is drooling over this, I assure you.  CBS, however, does not want to lose one of their cornerstone products.

[Blackhat]

Regular season would be essentially meaningless for most BCS schools. 

[dsfire]

There'd be a huge difference between getting an 8 seed versus being a 9 seed and having to play the first round.  Top seeds would also have significantly harder first games against at-large bids instead of the champion of the Northeast Conference.  Count me as not a fan of tourney expansion.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Regular season would be essentially meaningless for most BCS schools. 

Disagree.  The largest benefactors by percentage, will be schools from the Missouri Valley, A-10, WAC, etc.  Yes, additional BCS schools will get in, but from a percentage stand point, you will see a bigger dispersion of the pie elsewhere.   You're going to see a lot more 20+ win teams make it that schools are not going to want to play.  You'll also see more upsets because there will be more valid competition coming in.

Right now you have 40 to 45 legit teams in the tournament, the rest are conference tournament winners.  Now you'll have about 65 to 70 teams that have some legitimate quality to them and the rest are conference tournament winners.

As much as people give me crap for Utah State, those type of teams will be in the tournament and causing a lot of problems.  It's a minor miracle we won that game last year.

I know most don't see it right now, but this is going to be a lot of fun and will catch on.  There will be many detractors that will scream it's watered down, but I'm guessing that passes after 1 or 2 years at most. 

At 96 teams, it means 27.67% of DI teams make it to the NCAA tournament.  This is still one of the lowest playoff berths in sports.  Bowl games are 50%.  NFL is at 39%.  NBA is at 50%+.  NHL the same. 

The only sport that is lower is Major League Baseball at 26.67%....barely below this proposal.  I don't think anyone is saying that the MLB has too many teams in the playoffs.

[Eye]

I'd go for 68. Allows 3 more at-large teams to get in as something like 13 seeds, and gives the bottom 8 conferences the ability to claim they won an NC2A tourney game.

Perfect world for me would be 68 teams plus ESPN/ABC gets the bid. Would allow games to be placed on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU. I can understand completely why ESPN/ABC would be enthralled to get this. It'd be a week of a lot of people clamoring to get ESPNU, kind of like the NFL Network has been able to do to some degree nationally and the Miniscule 11 Network has been able to do in this part of the world.

I guess if I had to choose between 96 teams or ESPN/ABC getting the package, I'd stay with 68 teams.

Wouldn't ESPN/ABC getting the package be bad for you guys at DTV Chicos? You guys would lose a ton of marketability with your MMM package, wouldn't you?

[Pakuni]

I don't think anyone is saying that the MLB has too many teams in the playoffs.

Hi.

[TallTitan34]

I want Costas for MLB commish once Bud finally goes away.

As for a 96 team tournament that's just crazy.  Almost 1/3 of teams would be in the big dance.

Would they still have the NIT or would the tournament and tv time merge into the NCAA's?

[hdog1017]

The NCAA loves $$$$$.   

[Ari Gold]

Would they still have the NIT or would the tournament and tv time merge into the NCAA's?

96 would pretty much eliminate the need? for an NIT or any other tournament. I'm with Chicos, in suggesting that there should be an expansion, but I wonder if that will decrease the impact of a team's regular season win/loss record.

I also want to know if there would be 96 "tournament worthy" teams. Every year ESPN features somewhere around a dozen teams that were 'on the bubble' but failed to qualify. Even including those is +/-76 teams. Are there really 20 other teams that can be added that will improve the tournament.

[AlumKCof93]

Aside from coaches and the networks, who wants this?  Has there been an outcry from fans to expand?  As with others, I'd be fine with a move to 68, though that would lead to more "play-in" games that no one watches.  But a move to 96 would lessen not only the regular season but also the first round of the tournament.  This would suck!

[ChicosBailBonds]

Hi.

Beautiful, if that little pug said it then I know it's the right call.  Thanks Pakuni!!


There will always be some gnashing at teeth on this (or anything that means change) and people will say "64 is the perfect number" (when ironically it's 65 right now).  Of course people bitched about the wild card add on for football and for baseball, and now no one bitches about it.

I'm not old enough to remember what the landscape was when it went from 32 to 48, but I'm sure there were some people then that said "32 is the perfect number".  Everyone is fixated on 64 being the perfect number.  Why? 

This is about $$$$$ and it's about opportunity. 

For those asking "who wants this"....was their an outcry to move from 32 to 48?  From 48 to 64?  Of course not, yet the NCAA and the networks delivered it to the fans, the fans embraced it and it got more popular than ever. 

Does anyone honestly think people will boycott watching the tournament?  And no, it would NOT lessen the first round of the tournament.  In fact, it would make it better in many ways if they do this right. 

The NIT goes away with all this.  It served it's purpose, but it goes bye bye.  There is very little relevancy now for it, and going to 96 kills it completely.


And quite frankly, with the spectre of conference realignment and super conferences down the road, trust me as a Marquette fan without football, we want this to happen very much!  VERY VERY MUCH!

[dsfire]

At 96 teams, it means 27.67% of DI teams make it to the NCAA tournament.  This is still one of the lowest playoff berths in sports.  Bowl games are 50%.  NFL is at 39%.  NBA is at 50%+.  NHL the same. 

The only sport that is lower is Major League Baseball at 26.67%....barely below this proposal.  I don't think anyone is saying that the MLB has too many teams in the playoffs.

NBA regular season is a joke, and most of the early bowl games are the equivalent of the NIT.  Beyond that, do you really think college basketball is directly comparable to pro sports?  The 340+ D1 basketball teams are not all on the same level, and probably 250-300 of them have no chance to win a title in any given year, invite or not.  As it stands, all but 15ish (independents and the one new conference) have reasonable chances to make the tournament either through their conference tournaments or at-large bids.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I want Costas for MLB commish once Bud finally goes away.

As for a 96 team tournament that's just crazy.  Almost 1/3 of teams would be in the big dance.

Would they still have the NIT or would the tournament and tv time merge into the NCAA's?

Barely 25% would be in the dance....only the MLB would be lower.

[ChicosBailBonds]

The NCAA loves $$$$$.   

Yes, they need it to operate.

[ChicosBailBonds]

NBA regular season is a joke, and most of the early bowl games are the equivalent of the NIT.  Beyond that, do you really think college basketball is directly comparable to pro sports?  The 340+ D1 basketball teams are not all on the same level, and probably 250-300 of them have no chance to win a title in any given year, invite or not.  As it stands, all but 15ish (independents and the one new conference) have reasonable chances to make the tournament either through their conference tournaments or at-large bids.

That's correct...the NBA is a joke as are the bowl games....and they're both at 50% + for their playoffs.  This takes it to 27.6%....we're not even close to that.

I also agree that there are differences within Division I, but there are also many more good teams than their used to be.  This gives tremendous opportunity for conferences like the A10, Mountain West, CUSA, Missouri Valley and for the future for teams like MU, Nova, G'Town, etc that could be screwed without football. 

You guys need to look longer term.  The world is changing, the college athletics world is also.

[wyoMUfan]

If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Some may say it is broken because of the handful of teams that miss at large bids each year because automatics are given to teams that don't stand a chance any way. I say to those teams, win one more game in the regular season and you won't be on the outside looking in.
If the field is increased the prestige will decline, it's tough enough to win 7 games in a row now were gonna add a few more. ugh

[TallTitan34]

I think 64 is perfect as there are no bye's or play-in-games.  I could care less about 2 teams who don't deserve to be in the tournament playing each other in Dayton.

The next level up to have no bye's or play-in-games would be 128 which is way too many.  The next level down would be 32 which is too few games.  Thus, in my opinion anyway, 64 is the perfect number.

[damuts222]

The next level up to have no bye's or play-in-games would be 128 which is way too many.  The next level down would be 32 which is too few games.  Thus, in my opinion anyway, 64 is the perfect number.

Agree. Chicos, yes Marquette will have a better chance of making the tournament yet all this will do is allow the bigger conferences more teams into the tournament and some of the smaller conference schools will still be left out.

The first round of the tournament will have less quality games in it IMO.

[AlienWarrior]

Isn't that the same Belmont-Abbey where AL coached in Nashville?

[AlumKCof93]

What I'll find interesting is the amount of stories about coaches who will come out in favor of expansion - of course, they will.  It will ease the pressure on them to make the tournament.  What is the drawback from their perspective?

[ChicosBailBonds]

If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Some may say it is broken because of the handful of teams that miss at large bids each year because automatics are given to teams that don't stand a chance any way. I say to those teams, win one more game in the regular season and you won't be on the outside looking in.
If the field is increased the prestige will decline, it's tough enough to win 7 games in a row now were gonna add a few more. ugh

Never understood this analogy.  My 8 track wasn't broken 25 years ago, but they decided to invent cassette tapes anyway.  Then, despite the cassette not being broken, they created the DVD.

Products can always be improved upon whether they are perceived to be broken or not.

You guys will be laughing in a few years and wondering what all the fuss was about.