NCAA, TV talk about bigger men’s tourney
Print This Story By JOHN OURAND & MICHAEL SMITH
Staff writers

Published December 07, 2009 : Page 01
The NCAA has started meeting with broadcasters to explore the media value of expanding the men’s basketball tournament field, industry sources say.

The NCAA is the best sporting event in this country. So why mess with it- I guess because it might mean more money for somebody.

(12-10-2009 08:15 PM)mjs Wrote:  NCAA, TV talk about bigger men’s tourney
Print This Story By JOHN OURAND & MICHAEL SMITH
Staff writers

Published December 07, 2009 : Page 01
The NCAA has started meeting with broadcasters to explore the media value of expanding the men’s basketball tournament field, industry sources say.

The NCAA is the best sporting event in this country. So why mess with it- I guess because it might mean more money for somebody.

I read where the coaches are pushing for it too. You can imagine that an expanded field will keep some coaches employed.

Add a week and expand it to 256.

Those 1 v 64 games would not be pretty.

(12-10-2009 08:22 PM)Scotto Wrote:  Add a week and expand it to 256.

Those 1 v 64 games would not be pretty.

(12-10-2009 08:22 PM)Scotto Wrote:  Add a week and expand it to 256.

Those 1 v 64 games would not be pretty.

Why even play the season? Just have one big tournament. Invite everyone- DII, NAIA, and DIII.

It would stink being the 257th team.

I still say that if they are going to expand it, they need to do like Indiana HS used to do and make it open to everyone.

(12-10-2009 08:15 PM)mjs Wrote:  NCAA, TV talk about bigger men’s tourney
Print This Story By JOHN OURAND & MICHAEL SMITH
Staff writers

Published December 07, 2009 : Page 01
The NCAA has started meeting with broadcasters to explore the media value of expanding the men’s basketball tournament field, industry sources say.

The NCAA is the best sporting event in this country. So why mess with it- I guess because it might mean more money for somebody.

Isn't is just a strange coincidence that they decide to think about doing this just as congress is about to look into passing legislation against the BCS for the football monopoly. Believe me, someone has whispered in someone's ear that unless they make some changes, they'll be looking at the same problem in basketball, and that's as it should be.

MJS and I disagree on this one, since I think the current system is far from perfect. I can't believe anyone except the BCS members who get most of the profits would think this is a perfect system. From a fan's point of view, allowing more mid majors in, even if they don't win a game, will create more interest. I could care less when someone like Syracuse is playing Georgetown, but if Syracuse was playing Butler, or Oral Roberts or obviously UALR, was playing Syracuse or some other BCS school, I would be more interested in watching. And it would be much easier to make changes in the basketball than football, since the tournament is already there. Just add another week and you have nearly every half way worthy team in the mix. That would be a ball, IMO.

Give the Top 100 +/- a bye and let the remaining 256 play the first weekend.

(12-11-2009 09:58 AM)Scotto Wrote:  Give the Top 100 +/- a bye and let the remaining 256 play the first weekend.

I would have no problem with that. And here's another interesting concept. Wait until after first week to seed the teams. That first week, don't seed anyone. Just draw the names out of a hat. That way, everyone would have somewhat of a chance to win a game or two in the tournament.