The NCAA Basketball Tournament Expansion Debate – Quality Over Quantity Wins Out

January 15, 2010

Read the arguments from Babe Ruthless and Bleacher Fan about whether or not the NCAA Basketball Tournament should expand.



Talk of expansion is a natural progression in any sport. Usually, it comes in terms of adding a franchise to a particular league. In my lifetime, I have seen the NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL all add expansion teams. Occasionally, expansion is contained within a particular conference, with the most recent example being the expansion of the ACC earlier this decade with the addition of Boston College, Virginia Tech, and Miami. This particular debate, however, deals with the expansion of the number of teams the NCAA selection committee invites to its men’s NCAA college basketball tournament.

Babe Ruthless played the financial angle. More teams in the tournament equals more games, which in turn leads to more sponsors and TV commercials. That would obviously lead to a bigger flow of revenue. Babe also pointed out the fact that expansion gives more teams an opportunity to make a name, just like Davidson, Winthrop, and others such as George Mason have done in the past decade or so. The public loves a Cinderella story, and having 96 teams in the tournament gives the mid-majors more of a chance to make that dream push through March.

Bleacher Fan, on the other hand, feels that an increase of the teams to 96 would severely water down the tournament. Most college basketball fans know that a team that goes into the tournament ranked as a 16th seed has NEVER won a game in the tournament, though I do feel that one eventually will win a game. Using teams like Nicholls State and Cincinnati in examples, Bleacher Fan writes that these types of teams do not deserve to play in a tournament competing for the national championship.

I really swayed back and forth on this decision. At first, I favored Bleacher Fan, but then my verdict was leaning toward Babe Ruthless. However, it is time to make a decision. It is Judgment Day! It is selection Friday!

Both the debaters are currently on the bubble waiting for my decision. After much deliberation, I award the victory to Bleacher Fan.

I understand what Babe Ruthless is saying. More teams in the tournament definitely brings the opportunity for more money to the NCAA and likely costs a larger contract for whatever network agrees to the broadcast rights for the tournament. But by expanding the amount of teams eligible for the tournament, it is essentially water down the whole event. These extra 31 teams are eligible for postseason play by playing in the NIT. They just do not belong in the sacred field of 65. The NCAA runs the risk for having the tournament last a significant amount of time. Before long, the length of the tournament will be approaching the length of the NBA playoffs!!! That is just too much! Maybe expansion would bring more teams to the party, but at what point does the party become too crowded? And at what cost to the quality of the party?

Maybe the NCAA will come up with a format that pleases everyone, though even at 96 teams, the 97th team is going to feel snubbed. As it stands right now, though, a field of 65 is the perfect amount to determine the national champion.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

1 Comment | The NCAA Basketball Tournament Expansion Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The NCAA Basketball Tournament Expansion Debate – When Does March Madness Become Too Mad?

January 14, 2010

Read the arguments from Babe Ruthless and Bleacher Fan about whether or not the NCAA Basketball Tournament should expand.



There are some sporting events out there that just attract the masses and get the casual fans involved in one way or another. The Super Bowl is one of them. Millions of people that do not watch professional football all year long come together to watch the Super Bowl, even if it is just to socialize. Another event that brings fans together is the NCAA Men’s College Basketball tournament, affectionately known as March Madness.

It is often said that March Madness is responsible for thousands and thousands of lost hours of work productivity and millions and millions of lost dollars as a result… at offices around the country. Are you familiar with the “Boss Button?” Chances are good that you have utilized it at work. Perhaps your office gets into a March Madness pool. I certainly get in numerous March Madness pools, and, every year, it seems like someone who does not even watch basketball wins the darn thing.

Now, it seems that NCAA officials are having preliminary discussions to expand the NCAA tournament. All of the specifics have yet to be ironed out and this is in the preliminary stages of development. However, the NCAA has an escape clause in its billion dollar deal with CBS after this year’s Final Four, so that is why expansion can be discussed.

One of the possibilities being presented is one in which an expansion from 65 teams to a field of 96 takes place. Supposedly, this would essentially merge the NIT (National Invitational Tournament, where the 32 next best teams are invited). If you have not heard about this idea, folks, you will soon enough – especially with college basketball now fully engulfed in conference play.

But, is expansion of THE tournament a good idea? That is where your favorite website comes into play (eh, that’s us, hopefully!) Both Babe Ruthless and Bleacher Fan have been invited to the TSD’s “Big Dance.”

Babe Ruthless will argue that expansion is a terrific idea and that more people get a bigger piece of the pie. Bleacher Fan, on the other hand, will argue that the expansion of the NCAA tournament is a horrific idea that waters down the field and, among other things, lessens the amount of reality TV he would be able to watch!

The field has been set. All pools are locked in. Please put your entry fee into the drop box located in the break room. The floor is yours!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The NCAA Basketball Tournament Expansion Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The NCAA Basketball Tournament Expansion Debate – The Really Big Dance

January 14, 2010

Read the debate intro and the opposing argument from Bleacher Fan about whether or not the NCAA Basketball Tournament should expand.



March Madness is about to explode into full fledged insanity. The NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament is exploring the potential of expanding and moving to cable. This is not a good idea… it is a GREAT idea.

Early estimates suggest that the tournament could grow from 65 teams to 96 teams. A tournament that big would be so full of no look passes, monster dunks, and buzzer beating upsets that it would be too much for broadcast television to handle, it would have to move to cable. This is big. This is really big, and of course bigger is always better. Think about it. What’s better than a 50-inch HDTV? A 72-inch HDTV. What’s better than a 100-foot yacht? A 200-foot yacht. I could go on, but I think you get my point. The tournament is already a billion dollar business and it is about to become even more lucrative.

From a financial standpoint this move is an absolute must. It would immediately result in more money for the NCAA. More teams generate more matchups. While that does increase ticket sales, the big money would come from the TV rights, which already account for approximately 90 percent of the current generated revenue. The NCAA would of course have to exercise its opt out clause and walk away from a 27-year relationship with CBS and more than two billion dollars in guaranteed money, but the potential is too great to ignore. The expanded tournament would certainly benefit the broadcaster as well. The equation is simple.

More teams = More games = More sponsors and commercials.

And of course the benefits trickle down to the participating teams and their respective schools. Unlike college football, college basketball does not have a bowl system that offers individual high profile season-ending matchups. Other than an invitation to the Big Dance the best a team can hope for is a spot in the NIT, but an expanded NCAA tournament would mean fewer disappointed teams. Tournament appearances can result in increases in every thing from ticket and apparel sales to admission applications. With all these benefits it is hard to believe that this idea has not been seriously explored sooner.

The NCAA tournament is ultra important for national exposure. It introduces some schools to America. In 1999, Winthrop University’s basketball team won its first Big South Conference title. As people built their brackets that year they had to research this small university in South Carolina, but their one big break with the tournament blossomed into a three-peat of tournament appearances and a first round victory over Notre Dame in 2007. For other schools the tournament means a Cinderella story, like the 2008 Davidson team who took a #10 ranking and advanced to the Elite Eight. The tournament cements a legacy, an iconic stature in the nation’s basketball memory for teams like Kentucky, Duke and UNC. The tournament makes schools and makes college basketball. It would be foolish not to encourage its growth.

Also, you have to believe that this is something that fans want. To the college basketball junkie the tournament is their moment in the sun. It is their opportunity to boast fictitious degrees (i.e. Masters of Bracketology and PHD in Krzyzewski-tology) that actually impress their friends. To the March Madness faithful, expanding the tournament is like introducing Daylight Savings Time, it actually adds productive hours to their life. The idea is an instant winner.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

3 Comments | The NCAA Basketball Tournament Expansion Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Babe Ruthless

The NCAA Basketball Tournament Expansion Debate – Enough is Enough!

January 14, 2010

Read the debate intro and the opposing argument from Babe Ruthless about whether or not the NCAA Basketball Tournament should expand.



Expanding the NCAA basketball national tournament would serve no purpose other than to water down the talent with teams that have no business being there in the first place.

The March Madness tournament exists to determine a national champion. To my knowledge, there has never been a question at the conclusion of the March Madness Tournament as to who the “real” national champion is. To the contrary, the tournament already provides a definitive process where the champion can be crowned with no question as to the team’s legitimacy.

Want proof? Take on this little Sports Debates Challenge – Try to genuinely convince just ONE person that Nicholls State SHOULD have been invited to the March Madness tournament last year, that they were LEGITIMATELY worthy of consideration as one of the best teams in the country, and that they would have beaten North Carolina in the tournament if they squared off. I’ll even get you started with a little help – Nicholls State won 20 games last year, but Wisconsin and Arizona only won 19 games each, yet both the Badgers AND the Wildcats received at-large bids.

Any luck? I didn’t think so!

The reason you cannot win that argument is because the notion that a school like Nicholls State deserved to be in the national tournament last year is absurd. Yet, Nicholls State is precisely the caliber of team that would be added to the national tournament if the pool of competitors is expanded.

Does that mean that schools like Nicholls State should automatically be excluded from the national championship tournament? Of course not! Every single one of the 347 teams that participate in NCAA Division I basketball ALREADY has an opportunity to compete for the national championship. That’s right, unlike college football, where some schools can literally play through a perfect season and STILL be excluded from consideration for a national championship opportunity, EVERY SINGLE SCHOOL from Air Force to Youngstown State (there are no schools that start with ‘Z’) in Division I college basketball has a real and legitimate opportunity to play for the national championship – win and you’re in!

Each of the 33 conferences in Division I are awarded an automatic bid into the NCAA tournament, equaling 33 invitations which are given to the schools that win conference championships. If Nicholls State won the Southland Conference Tournament last year, they WOULD have been invited to the dance.

That leaves 32 additional ‘At-Large’ invitations which are awarded to those 32 teams that did not win a conference tournament, but still performed well enough to have earned an opportunity for a ‘second chance’ at the crown.

Those 65 teams are then ranked from 1-65, and accordingly seeded into four different brackets. That means that the teams which earned a ranking from 61-65 are the ‘worst’ teams in the tournament, and are subsequently placed as the 16th seeds in their respective brackets (with the 64th and 65th ranked teams first meeting in a play-in game).

Fact: No team that has been ranked as a 16th seed has EVER won a game in the national basketball tournament!

If the “worst” teams (ranked 61 through 65) currently participating in the tournament have NEVER won a game, how could it happen with the teams ranked from 66 through 96?!

Populating that 66-96 range would be a combination of Mid-Major programs that failed to win any big games (including their own conference tournament, as well as games against Major conference members), and the last place teams of Major conferences who already had AMPLE opportunity to prove their worth against those top programs, but failed in the attempt. Those teams had their chance to prove they were worthy of consideration, and were unable to meet the task.

Their performances simply do not warrant any consideration for the tournament. Nicholls State, a Mid-Major, could not even cut it among the ranks of McNeese State and Texas A&M Corpus Christi. Another example is the Cincinnati Bearcats, a team that finished 2009 with a 10th place finish in the Big East thanks to an 8-10 conference record, and an 18-14 overall record. The Bearcats lost to teams such as Louisville, Pitt, Villanova, Connecticut, and Marquette, along with a loss to DePaul in the first round of the Big East Tournament. Do the Bearcats really belong in the national tournament competing AGAIN against many of those exact same teams?

The system today is fair, and it works. The schools that win their conference championships will go on to compete on the national stage along with those programs that proved throughout the rigorous regular season that they, too, are among the best in the nation. Although there will always be four or five “snubbed” schools that were also worthy of consideration, opening the floodgates to 33 additional teams in order to allow those few snubs into the tournament is not the answer.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The NCAA Basketball Tournament Expansion Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.