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

[Marquette84]

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.

But how is that any different that the situation we have right now?

Lets take one of your examples: Washington.

This year Washington played MU on Thursday 3/18, New Mexico on Saturday 3/20 and West Virginia on the following Thursday 3/25.

Lets assume the tournament had 96 teams:  Washington still plays their opening game on 3/18--but its versus the #22 seed.  They then face #6 MU in the 2nd round on 3/20, #3 seed New Mexico on Monday 3/22 and in the Sweet 16 West Virginia on 3/25.


In short, I'm not sure I understand the point behind this quote:

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.

Why does "GOD FORBID" apply?  Its exactly the same as they'd be gone with the current system.

If anything, its better for teams like MU, because the top 32 teams could delay travel for two days.   They probably won't, but they could.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Here's the quote from Greg Shaheen himself: http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=62561

Thank you.  I can tell you that the way it was presented (at least in some circles) was to start on that Tuesday/Wednesday, same day as the play in game, then have the 2nd round games on Thursday/Friday and 3rd round on Sat/Sun.   Basically doing exactly what they do today but have games on Tues/Wed when they normally have the practices at the facilities.

The problem I have with McNamara's article is that as a sports writer he also doesn't understand the NCAA's involvement with DI football, which is pretty damn embarrassing for college sports writer.  He needs to get up to speed.  His comment about the kids out of school clearly illustrates he doesn't understand this.

[Brewtown Andy]

But how is that any different that the situation we have right now?

Lets take one of your examples: Washington.

This year Washington played MU on Thursday 3/18, New Mexico on Saturday 3/20 and West Virginia on the following Thursday 3/25.

Lets assume the tournament had 96 teams:  Washington still plays their opening game on 3/18--but its versus the #22 seed.  They then face #6 MU in the 2nd round on 3/20, #3 seed New Mexico on Monday 3/22 and in the Sweet 16 West Virginia on 3/25.


In short, I'm not sure I understand the point behind this quote:

Why does "GOD FORBID" apply?  Its exactly the same as they'd be gone with the current system.

If anything, its better for teams like MU, because the top 32 teams could delay travel for two days.   They probably won't, but they could.

Washington went back to Seattle after the New Mexico game.  They were probably back on campus before midnight on Saturday and didn't leave to go to Syracuse until Tuesday afternoon.  With a game on Tues/Wed, they can't go back to campus.

And I said GOD FORBID, because it seems to me that in the suggested setup, the NCAA is trying to avoid a Cinderella by forcing a 9-24 seed to play 5 games in 10 days.

And the NCAA needs to "double seed" if they go to 96.  The bottom 8 teams are all 16 seeds and play each other for a crack at the 1s, etc.  Otherwise you end up with the 16-17 game getting a 1 seed in the next round and there's no way Duke signs off on getting to play St. John's in their first game.

[brewcity77]

But if the CBS contract for 64 goes through, wouldn't it have the same effect, as far as locking teams in? I'd have to think, though, that any deal could lead the mega-conference breakaway. CBS signs the big deal, BCS schools and ESPN think they can do better and create a rival tourney, of course, it's all just speculation.

[ChicosBailBonds]

But if the CBS contract for 64 goes through, wouldn't it have the same effect, as far as locking teams in? I'd have to think, though, that any deal could lead the mega-conference breakaway. CBS signs the big deal, BCS schools and ESPN think they can do better and create a rival tourney, of course, it's all just speculation.

Well, the CBS deal is tied to the NCAA and "their" tourney.  So the money is going to the NCAA and subsequently through the distribution process.  If the BCS, etc were to break off and create their own tourney, they would need their own deal because the money from the NCAA tourney wouldn't flow through.  That's one leverage point that the NCAA has. 

I'm really hoping that cooler heads prevail and only one team is taken.  Otherwise, the Big Ten will basically be known for destroying much of the college athletic landscape tradition as we know it.  Yes, there have been considerable shifts over the years, but this would be the major one and it would be driven by them with $$$$ as the only driver.