NCAA Officials: Expansion To 96 Teams 'Will Happen,' Likely in '11, No More NIT

[Tugg Speedman]

http://ncaabasketball.fanhouse.com/2010/03/19/visser-ncaa-officials-says-expansion-will-happen-likely-in/

Visser: NCAA Officials Says Expansion 'Will Happen,' Likely in '11

CBS Sports reporter Lesley Visser said NCAA officials told network representatives last week that the tournament's expansion to 96 teams "will happen most likely next year."

In an interview on the Fabulous Sports Babe radio show on ESPN 1040-AM in Tampa, Fla., Visser said Thursday the decision also would mean the elimination of the NIT tournament.

However, Big East commissioner John Marinatto told FanHouse Friday that no formal decision to expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams has been reached.

Visser said NCAA tournament selection committee chairman Dan Guerrero and Greg Sheehan, senior vice president of basketball and business strategies for the NCAA, met with NCAA and CBS officials last week in New York. They indicated the expansion would occur "most likely next year."

"I do know this: the head of the selection committee, Dan Guerrero, who's the UCLA AD (Athletic Director), and also Greg Sheehan ... they came and spoke to our NCAA CBS seminar," Visser said. "Ninety-six will happen, most likely next year."
FanHouse TV: Why NCAA Tournament Is Fine the Way It Is

Visser said one reason for the expansion is schools would rather play in the NCAA tournament than the NIT, which currently invites 32 teams after the 65-team NCAA bracket is filled.

"They [the NCAA] also oversee the NIT," Visser said during the interview. "Well as you know, it's not the most popular event for schools to go to. Schools would rather go to the NCAA tournament.

Share  "What Greg Sheehan found when they went around speaking to university presidents, coaches and ADs -- they've been on this idea since 2004, this is not a sudden event or sudden consideration -- and they found as Greg Sheehan said and I quote him 'without exception, university presidents, ADs and coaches want to go to 96.' And it can't be more than that: 96 is the one that fits."

Marinatto, in his first year as the Big East's commissioner, said no decision has been reached about expanding the NCAA tournament.

"Since no 96-team model has formally been advanced to the membership for review and consideration, we as a conference have not formed an official league position," Marinatto told FanHouse.

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe said in a Monday teleconference he's "open-minded" about expanding the NCAA tournament.

"After a lot of discussion, we have to at least be open-minded," Beebe said. "I would be negligent not to look at all opportunities and I think we do have to do that. The NCAA staff, I've encouraged them to take their show on the road, so to speak, and allow a lot of conferences to see what their thinking is.

"They've done a good job of outlining how this would work in combination with pulling the NIT tournament into the NCAA tournament."

In 1985, the NCAA tournament expanded from 48 to 64 teams. A 65th team was added in 2001 when the number of automatic bids increased from 30 to 31.

The NCAA's TV deal with CBS runs through the 2013 tournament, but the NCAA has until July 31 to opt out. CBS' current deal averages $461 million annually, but in the next three years CBS will pay an average of about $710 million, USA Today reported. If the NCAA leaves CBS, it would almost certainly go to ESPN.

"What [the NCAA] found from the university presidents, of which they represent -- it's not what we in the media think, it's what the university presidents think and that's what the NCAA must reflect what their members want and their members want expansion," Visser told the Tampa radio station.

Several Big East coaches, including Syracuse's Jim Boeheim, Villanova's Jay Wright and Georgetown's John Thompson III, said throughout this season that they support expanding the NCAA tournament. Boeheim has been the most vocal about expanding the NCAA tournament.

Marinatto said if the NCAA tournament is expanded his 16-team league could make history.

"If [expansion is] ever adopted, I believe the Big East could very well have 16 schools participate in any given year," Marinatto said.

This year, the Big East received a combined 13 bids to the NCAA and NIT tournaments, including a record eight NCAA berths.

[TallTitan34]

Marquette should never miss the tournament ever again..... and that sucks.  Making it now means nothing.

Bracketology will be a joke. Try separating team 96 from 97 much less seeding them properly.

[TallTitan34]

Several Big East coaches, including Syracuse's Jim Boeheim, Villanova's Jay Wright and Georgetown's John Thompson III, said throughout this season that they support expanding the NCAA tournament. Boeheim has been the most vocal about expanding the NCAA tournament.

Of course they do.  Even if the team struggles they can say they made the tournament.  It really takes away from the regular season.

[g0lden3agle]

Of course they do.  Even if the team struggles they can say they made the tournament.  It really takes away from the regular season.

Wright has actually used this exact argument in the past, I think it was on PTI last week.  Tony straight up asked him "why not push it so everyone gets in and everyone's happy?"

This brings up a very valid point.  Why stop at 96? How do you determine how many teams are "worthy" of making "the big dance"?  Heck, this year people have been talking about the weak bubble... why should we be expanding when common opinion is that the tournament was already too diluted?

[Tugg Speedman]

I thought I heard once that they were considering the top two conference tourney winners (that is, both teams in the finals) would get an automatic bid. If so, at-large bids would only expand by 4. Of course, lots of potential at-large teams will finish in the top two in their conference tourneys freeing up these spots for others.

Bobby Knight responded to this by saying if they expand to 96, it will take an extra week and they should get rid of the conference tourneys all together.  

So, what would make more money, the conference tourneys the week before or expanding to 96 teams?

Additional Thoughts Added Later ....

If this was in place this year, North Carolina would have made it at 16/16 as they made the NIT. Not fair.

And as noted in the story above, all 16 teams from the BE could make it.  13 did this year.  Why have a conference tourney?  It's just more games to wear out your players (some have argued the BE's poor start this year is because they beat each other up the week before in the conference tourney.)

[ChicosBailBonds]

Before everyone goes off the deep end, this is not going to make the regular season worthless.

They are looking at many things, and no way in hell North Carolina would make it.  I've suggested a few thoughts as well on this to my bosses who, yes, are involved in the process to some extent.

Things like, require a minimum .500 conference record....so UNC would not get in under that scenario. 

Let this play out.  Not a done deal anyway, at least not as of a few days ago.....but as I said months ago, this is going to happen sooner or later.

The NIT is a joke now and this is one way for the NCAA to solidify the post season for them.  There's a reason they bought the NIT, and it was to kill it (IMO).

Don't forget that the NCAA has to run basically all championships with the money from the basketball contract....women's tennis, cross country, volleyball, hockey, etc, etc, etc, plus fund the NCAA.  Of course this is largely a money play but they will tweak this enough that I think you'll find the even to be as engaging as it has been in the past.  I'm sure many won't see it that way right now, but give it a chance to see what they come up with.  There will definitely be a "process".

In the long run, with the way conferences are going, this is a WONDERFUL thing for Marquette.  If the Big East were to break up and leave MU in a lesser conference, it is this type of opportunity that allows for basketball only schools that are willing to put in the resources to stay meaningful.  The additional slots, will NOT be taken up primarily by the BCS conferences in my opinion.  I think you'll see of the 32 extra spots, about 55% going to non-BCS conferences like the Mtn West, A-10, CUSA, etc.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Of course they do.  Even if the team struggles they can say they made the tournament.  It really takes away from the regular season.

Yes, but isn't it curious that those three said this when they almost always make it anyway?  Bo Ryan also supports it and the Badgers always make it.  Seems to me, the teams that are on the cusp and missing out constantly would be the ones most in support of it.

If they do this right, and I'm keeping my fingers crossed that they do, you will see more upsets than ever before with the new tournament.  You will also see parity get even more widespread because kids will now be willing to play for more and more teams that they would not have considered playing for in the past.

[Tugg Speedman]

In the long run, with the way conferences are going, this is a WONDERFUL thing for Marquette.  If the Big East were to break up and leave MU in a lesser conference, it is this type of opportunity that allows for basketball only schools that are willing to put in the resources to stay meaningful.  The additional slots, will NOT be taken up primarily by the BCS conferences in my opinion.  I think you'll see of the 32 extra spots, about 55% going to non-BCS conferences like the Mtn West, A-10, CUSA, etc.

Chicos ....

Right now something like 5 to 10 non-power conference teams get at-large bids in any given year.  If the NCAA goes to 96 teams, this could go to 30 or 40 spots for non-power conference teams.  Under this scenario, could you see a team like MU considering going back to being independent?  Does this lessen the need to even be in a conference?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chicos ....

Right now something like 5 to 10 non-power conference teams get at-large bids in any given year.  If the NCAA goes to 96 teams, this could go to 30 or 40 spots for non-power conference teams.  Under this scenario, could you see a team like MU considering going back to being independent?  Does this lessen the need to even be in a conference?

Correct, but look at the NIT bids this year....the "next 32" as it were.  18 of the 32 were from non BCS conferences.  14 were from BCS conferences.

This is why I'm not sure I buy the argument that all power conferences will eat up the bids.  If anything, some of the NIT bids that go to the BCS programs are probably done so just to sell tickets...I'd argue that the 18 number would actually increase to 20 or 22 if UNC and a couple of others were left out of the NIT as they should have been.

As for your question, I don't see where being an independent is financially viable.  The television deals are with conferences and the sharing of that revenue.  An independent just doesn't carry the heft to get a deal like that to make it manageable from the revenue perspective.

[ChicosBailBonds]

By the way, one writer did a proposed bracketing of the 96 teams if it were done this year.  MU would have had a bye.  He took the straight NIT teams and put them in, which I don't think will happen....I don't believe a 6-12 St. John's should be in the NCAA, but we'll see how the expansion works.



EAST (Syracuse Regional)
New Orleans

Tuesday (March 16)

Game 1 - No. 9 Wake Forest vs. No. 24 Jacksonville
Game 2 - No. 12 Cornell vs. No. 21 Montana
Game 3 - No. 13 Virginia Tech vs. No. 20 Northeastern
Game 4 - No. 16 Seton Hall vs. No. 17 Wofford

Thursday (March 18)

Game 5 - No. 1 Kentucky vs. Seton Hall/Wofford winner
Game 6 - No. 8 Texas vs. Wake Forest/Jacksonville winner
Game 7 - No. 4 Wisconsin vs. Virginia Tech/Illinois State winner
Game 8 - No. 5 Temple vs. Cornell-Montana winner

Saturday (Mar. 20)

Game 9 – Game 5 winner vs. Game 6 winner
Game 10 – Game 7 winner vs. Game 8 winner
San Jose

Wednesday (March 17)

Game 1 – No. 15 Wichita State vs. No.18 William & Mary
Game 2 – No. 10 Missouri vs. No. 23 East Tennessee State
Game 3 – No. 11 Washington vs. No. 22 Morgan State
Game 4 – No. 14 UAB vs. No. 19 Illinois State

Friday (March 19)

Game 5 – No. 2 West Virginia vs. Wichita State/William & Mary winner
Game 6 – No. 7 Clemson vs. Missouri/East Tennessee winner
Game 7 – No. 3 New Mexico vs. UAB/Illinois State winner
Game 8 – No. 6 Marquette vs. Washington/Morgan State winner

Sunday (March 20)

Game 9 – Game 5 winner vs. Game 6 winner
Game 10 – Game 7 winner vs. Game 8 winner
SOUTH REGION (Houston)
Jacksonville

Wednesday (Mar. 17)

Game 1 – No. 9 Louisville vs. No. 24 Stony Brook
Game 2 – No. 12 Utah State vs. No. 21 Weber State
Game 3 – No. 13 Arizona State vs. No.20 Robert Morris
Game 4 – No. 16 UConn vs. No. 17 Siena

Friday (Mar. 19)

Game 5 – No. 1 Duke vs. UConn/Siena winner
Game 6 – No. 8 California vs. Louisville/Stony Brook winner
Game 7 – No. 4 Purdue vs. Arizona State/Robert Morris winner
Game 8 – No. 5 Texas A&M vs. Utah State/Weber State winner

Sunday (Mar. 21)

Game 9 – Game 5 winner vs. Game 6 winner
Game 10 – Game 7 winner vs. Game 8 winner
Providence

Tuesday (Mar.16)

Game 1 – No. 15 Dayton vs. No. 18 Tulsa
Game 2 – No. 10 St. Mary's vs. No. 23 Arkansas-Pine Bluff
Game 3 – No. 11 Old Dominion vs. No. 22 Winthrop
Game 4 – No. 14 Rhode Island vs. No. 19 Sam Houston State

Thursday (Mar. 18)

Game 5 – No. 2 Villanova vs. Dayton/Tulsa winner
Game 6 – No. 7 Richmond vs. St. Mary's/Arkansas-Pine Bluff winner
Game 7 – No. 3 Baylor vs. Rhode Island/Sam Houston State winner
Game 8 – No. 6 Notre Dame vs. Old Dominion/Winthrop winner

Saturday (Mar. 20)

Game 9 – Game 5 winner vs. Game 6 winner Game 10 – Game 7 winner vs. Game 8 winner
MIDWEST REGION (St. Louis)
Oklahoma City

Tuesday (Mar. 16)

Game 1 – No. 9 Northern Iowa vs. No. 24 Quinnipiac
Game 2 – No. 12 Mississippi State vs. UC Santa Barbara
Game 3 – No. 13 Cincinnati vs. No. 20 Ohio
Game 4 – No. 16 North Carolina vs. No. 17 St. John's

Thursday (Mar. 18)

Game 5 – No. 1 Kansas vs. North Carolina/St. John's
Game 6 – No. 8 UNLV vs. Northern Iowa/Quinnipiac winner
Game 7 – No. 5 Michigan State vs. Mississippi State/UC Santa Barbara winner
Game 8 – No. 4 Maryland vs. Cincinnati/Ohio winner

Saturday (Mar. 20)

Game 9 – Game 5 winner vs. Game 6 winner
Game 10 – Game 7 winner vs. Game 6 winner
Milwaukee

Wednesday (Mar. 17)

Game 1 – No. 15 South Florida vs. No. 18 Texas Tech
Game 2 – No. 10 Georgia Tech vs. No. 23 Troy
Game 3 – No. 11 San Diego State vs. No. 22 Lehigh
Game 4 – No. 14 New Mexico State vs. No. 19 Houston

Friday (Mar. 19)

Game 5 – No. 2 Ohio State vs. South Florida/Texas Tech winner
Game 6 – No. 7 Oklahoma State vs. Georgia Tech/Troy winner
Game 7 – No. 3 Georgetown vs. New Mexico State/Houston winner
Game 8 – No. 6 Tennessee vs. San Diego State/Lehigh winner

Sunday (Mar. 21)

Game 9 – Game 5 winner vs. Game 6 winner
Game 10 – Game 7 winner vs.Game 8 winner
WEST REGIONAL
Buffalo

Wednesday (Mar. 17)

Game 1 – No. 9 Florida State vs. No. 24 Jackson State
Game 2 – No. 12 UTEP vs. No. 21 Oakland
Game 3 – No. 13 Illinois vs. No. 20 Coastal Carolina
Game 4 – No. 16 Kent State vs. No. 17 N.C. State

Friday (Mar. 19)

Game 5 – No. 1 Syracuse vs. Kent State/NC State winner
Game 6 – No. 8 Gonzaga vs. Florida State/Jackson State winner
Game 7 – No. 4 Vanderbilt vs. Illinois/Coastal Carolina winner
Game 8 – No. 5 Butler vs. UTEP/Oakland winner

Sunday (Mar. 21)

Game 9 – Game 5 winner vs. Game 6 winner Game 10 – Game 7 winner vs. Game 8 winner
Spokane

Tuesday (Mar. 16)

Game 1 – No. 15 Memphis vs. No. 18 Murray State
Game 2 – No. 10 Florida vs. Vermont
Game 3 – No. 11 Minnesota vs. North Texas State
Game 4 – No. 14 Mississippi vs. No. 19 Nevada

Thursday (Mar.18)

Game 5 – No. 2 Kansas State vs. Memphis/Murray State winner
Game 6 – No. 7 BYU vs. Florida/Vermont winner
Game 7 – No. 3 Pitt vs. Mississippi/Nevada winner
Game 8 – No. 6 Xavier vs. Minnesota/North Texas winner

Saturday (Mar. 20)

Game 9 – Game 5 winner vs. Game 6 winner
Game 10 – Game 7 winner vs. Game 8 winner

[Tugg Speedman]

As for your question, I don't see where being an independent is financially viable.  The television deals are with conferences and the sharing of that revenue.  An independent just doesn't carry the heft to get a deal like that to make it manageable from the revenue perspective.

Makes sense

With 96 teams, does this mean that all conference re-alignment will be done for football considerations only?  Why would the BE football schools stay if they are going to get into the tourney in bball?

This would mean the BE breaks up and the non-football catholic schools re-align into a National Catholic conference and add Xavier, Dayton, etc as we have discussed many times before.

[Eye]

I'll be honest, that looks an awful lot like the card for a Saturday afternoon in December, not the NC2A tournament. The tournament is getting to the point where it's the undoubted second-biggest sporting event in the yearly calendar for a lot of sports fans, and expanding the tournament would provide a severe blow to that popularity.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

I think the number of automatic bids, owing to the number of conferences, is just crazy. If you leave aside the fact that probably 6-10 of the conference tournament winners "deserve" to be there (are truly in the top 65 in terms of talent), the tournament is essentially between about 45 serious teams.

So, I don't have a problem with expanding the tournament. But by 34 teams or whatever is crazy ... you're basically adding 75% more "legitimate" teams among at-large bids.

[muwarrior69]

This would mean if the BE breaks up and the non-football catholic schools re-align into a National Catholic conference and add Xavier, Dayton, etc as we have discussed many times before.

Actually I would prefer the American Catholic Conference (ACC)

[Buzz Williams' Spillproof Chiclets Cup]

This would mean the BE breaks up and the non-football catholic schools re-align into a National Catholic conference and add Xavier, Dayton, etc as we have discussed many times before.

[mu_hilltopper]

Disagree that it would be a blow to popularity.  Purists may be upset, but they aint turning the TV off.

[Brewtown Andy]

I know the tickets are two game sessions, so that explains some of it, but I saw A LOT of empty seats over the last two days.  Does the NCAA figure they're going to be able to draw money for Tuesday afternoon games between Utah State and Weber State?

[cheebs09]

http://ncaabasketball.fanhouse.com/2010/03/19/visser-ncaa-officials-says-expansion-will-happen-likely-in/


Visser said one reason for the expansion is schools would rather play in the NCAA tournament than the NIT, which currently invites 32 teams after the 65-team NCAA bracket is filled.

"They [the NCAA] also oversee the NIT," Visser said during the interview. "Well as you know, it's not the most popular event for schools to go to. Schools would rather go to the NCAA tournament.

Well no kidding they would rather go to the NCAA tourney rather than the NIT. I'd also rather play on the men's basketball team than intramurals, but that doesn't mean the NCAA should grant teams more scholarships and Buzz should give me a spot. I think this takes a lot of excitement out of the tournament and regular season. If we use just the NIT teams, wouldn't that mean 13 out of the 16 Big East teams made it? Cincy, UConn, Seton Hall, USF, St. John's? That is just too many and we should never miss the tournament again. Saying 5 straight Tournament appearances wouldn't mean anything anymore.

[Brewtown Andy]

Disagree that it would be a blow to popularity.  Purists may be upset, but they aint turning the TV off.

I've started taking time off from work to watch the first two rounds because A) I have the vacation time built up and B) I really like Basketball Christmas. I'm not doing this to watch games between chump teams that have no chance of winning.

[Brewtown Andy]

And I'm REALLY sick of hearing the "It will help protect the coaches' jobs" excuse from people.  WRONG.  This is just going to get people fired faster.  13 of 16 BE teams get in?  If you finish 14-16 two years in a row in the BE, you're getting fired now.

And the "X% of college football teams get into the post season" excuse doesn't hold up, either.  2 teams get to play for the championship (one that the NCAA doesn't actually recognize, btw), and everyone else plays in exhibition games.  And the teams in the bottom rung games lose money in the process.

[mu_hilltopper]

I've started taking time off from work to watch the first two rounds because A) I have the vacation time built up and B) I really like Basketball Christmas. I'm not doing this to watch games between chump teams that have no chance of winning.

And undoubtedly, the "Tuesday/Wednesday" rounds would have less viewership than the other days.   The remainder of the days would have the same.  That's a net gain of eyeball-hours, how ever you slice it.

[4everwarriors]

I know the tickets are two game sessions, so that explains some of it, but I saw A LOT of empty seats over the last two days.  Does the NCAA figure they're going to be able to draw money for Tuesday afternoon games between Utah State and Weber State?

Yes, certainly if Stew is still coaching.

[Moonboots]

Yes, certainly if Stew is still coaching.

It's not every day you get to watch a legend.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I've started taking time off from work to watch the first two rounds because A) I have the vacation time built up and B) I really like Basketball Christmas. I'm not doing this to watch games between chump teams that have no chance of winning.

You probably will see MORE upsets under the new system than the current one.

[Spaniel with a Short Tail]

Northwestern will be happy.