On Feb. 3, 2009, I reported that the NCAA basketball tournament field would be expanded to 96 teams, with the change likely to take effect in 2011.
(Consolation: You already tore it up yesterday anyway)
In the past week I’ve learned from a CBS source that the NCAA has privately informed its current March Madness television partner that 96 teams “will happen.” The change will likely take effect beginning next season. 2012 at the latest.
CBS is in the eighth year of an 11-year, $6 billion contract to broadcast the tournament, but, as SPORTSBUSINESS JOURNAL reports, the NCAA can opt out of the deal this year if it does so before August 31.
The NCAA basketball tournament’s “unofficial czar“, senior VP of basketball and business strategies Greg Shaheen, said on March 9:
Contrary to what you’ve read on various blogs and the like, there’s nothing that’s a done deal or decided at this point in time. We’re full steam ahead with our agreement with CBS through 2013.
On the same day, CBS Sports President Sean McManus said:
Our plan is to carry the NCAA Tournament on CBS as long as we can. We’re focused right now on this year and not on next year. As far as expansion of the tournament is concerned, that’s something that Greg Shaheen would address. We really are focused on this year’s tournament. I don’t like to think about anything but this year’s tournament right now.
I think we have a history at CBS of keeping the events that we want to keep on our network. We’ve always done a good job of renewing the rights, and I would like to think that would follow through to the NCAA Tournament.
When we have an event that we like on CBS Sports, I think the track record’s pretty good about figuring out a way - whether it’s the NFL, or SEC football, or the Masters, or the PGA Championship, or U.S. Open Tennis. We’ve been pretty successful at keeping those marquee events where I think they belong, which is on CBS.
McManus didn’t sound as confident about a future arrangement between the parties as the NCAA’s Shaheen did. Though McManus didn’t want talk about tournament field expansion to overshadow his network’s 2010 coverage of March Madness. Especially considering that the expanded tournament might not involve CBS.
If the NCAA does exercise its escape clause with CBS, other networks will try to acquire the rights. (I’ve been told the NCAA has already had detailed discussions with ESPN about it.) Though my CBS source said the network is determined not to lose its flagship sports property, the measure of that determination will be counted in millions in increased rights fees.
While everyone knows money is behind 96, some may be unaware of just exactly who is driving the change.A high-ranking administrator at a Pac-10 school told me this week that though there is sharp division of opinion on the subject of field expansion among NCAA coaches, athletic directors and league commissioners, there’s near-unanimous sentiment from university presidents to increase the size of the field.
As noted here last month, the NCAA Board of Directors, which is made up of university presidents, will ultimately decide the size of the NCAA Tournament field. The next board meeting on the subject is in Indianapolis on April 29.
With the 2010 NCAA Tournament soon to be out of the way, I expect the NCAA to be more forthcoming on its intentions. Intentions that I can confirm will soon include a 96-team NCAA men’s basketball tournament field.
2:54 pm on March 21st, 2010
no way 96 too much, if you cant make the 65 its for a rwason, dont want to see a 16 16 NC team make the tourney BS
3:06 pm on March 21st, 2010
No way folks!!! If it “ain’t broke” don’t fix it! We really don’t need anymore than the 65 team format u have in place now! I know it’s all about money but seriously u will begin to lose interest with that many teams. It will also mean lengthening the tourney coverage. How many of us want to keep watching for how much longer? No Way! No way! It’s about 2 wks now! No way! It’ll come back and bite u in the ass, right next to that big fat wallet!
3:11 pm on March 21st, 2010
The NCAA is insane. They might as well go to 128 or 256 or 512. Idiots.
4:10 pm on March 21st, 2010
Good. Now instead of watching 5th and 6th place also-rans play, we can watch 7th and 8th place also-rans play for the “national championship”.
4:34 pm on March 21st, 2010
After watching the OKC Regional at The Ford Center in Downtown Bricktown….Teams were Florida, BYU, North Texas, Kansas, K-State, UNLV, UNI, Lehigh was a great regional. If you added 8 more teams and another regional….those teams would be like watching this years NIT that NONE of my friends tuned in on.
65 is just fine heck 64 is even better.
5:13 pm on March 21st, 2010
The “sweet 24″, the “elite” 12″ and the “Final Six” just don’t work for me.
5:22 pm on March 21st, 2010
96 teams??? Isn’t that what the NIT is for?? The teams that cannot make the field of 64. Who will play in the NIT then????
5:33 pm on March 21st, 2010
Wishthink…The tourney would still have the Sweet 16, et al. The top 32 teams will be given a bye, and the other 64 will have, in essence, a play-in game to make the field of 64. Then it would be the tournament like normal. You’re basically adding 2 days to the tournament. It’s purely for money, and it’s a terrible idea.
5:36 pm on March 21st, 2010
Greed will be the downfall of us all. As the article says, expansion is all about money. The tournament will no longer be a reward. The regular season will mean nothing more than a protracted practice for the post-season. This “every kid gets a trophy” society deserves to fail.
6:19 pm on March 21st, 2010
I think this is good idea. There is no reason that any team that wins a regular season conference or a conference tournament should be left out of the tournament.
6:20 pm on March 21st, 2010
What a mistake.
The tournament already has tons of irrelevant, bad teams and this just makes the tournament even MORE watered down.
Yea! A sub .500 SEC/Big 12 team got in! Whoppie!
6:41 pm on March 21st, 2010
makes me wanna barf
6:56 pm on March 21st, 2010
There would still be 4 regionals. Each region would have 24 teams instead of 16. The top 8 seeds in each region earn a bye. The other 16 teams per region would have play in games to get the field down to 64 again. Just like the 64/65th team play off on Tuesday. Only now you would have many teams playing earlier in the week to make the final field of 64. I could see maybe expanding to 72 teams and having the small schools/garbage teams play in for all of the 15 and 16 seeds, but 96 is too much.
CFB refuses all playoff discussions but these wankers want to expand to 96! This will kill the NIT completely.
7:24 pm on March 21st, 2010
so whats gonna happen to the NIT? This will make NCAA basketball boring… There wont be as many upsets because of this greedy expansion by the NCAA
7:31 pm on March 21st, 2010
The NIT is owned by the NCAA. It will basically be absorbed into the 96 team field
8:09 pm on March 21st, 2010
If they can expand the field to 96, why can’t they have a football playoff??
8:44 pm on March 21st, 2010
Aw heck…add 4 days instead of 2 and make all D-1 teams be in the tourney. Conference auto-bid winners get a 2-round bye. Everyone else plays away.
Expansion is stupid, but we’re stuck with it, at least it looks that way.
Of course, a D-1 Football playoff is impossible….
8:47 pm on March 21st, 2010
Wrong move — interest will be lost
8:51 pm on March 21st, 2010
I can see adding maybe three to have a play in game for each region, but 96 is absurd.
8:51 pm on March 21st, 2010
A BIG MISTAKE IF THEY EXPAND TO 96 IT IS LIKE A REWARD TO BE IN THE FIELD OF 64 FOR HAVING A GREAT SEASON IF THEY GO TO 96 YOU COULD BE A JOKE TEAM LIKE MICHIGAN AND GET IN WHAT A MISTAKE THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE
9:11 pm on March 21st, 2010
The regular season will be crap. The Conference Tournaments will have a few more teams who have nothing to play for and will tank.
U will see upsets in the regular season but those upsets at the end of the season won’t mean very much when really good teams rest players with minor injuries.
This could be the worst thing of all time for the popularity of the NCAA Tournament!!
9:26 pm on March 21st, 2010
The NCAA can add 32 teams to basketball which already produces a true national champion, but they cannot add a playoff system to college football to produce a true national champion. This idea makes no sense.
9:31 pm on March 21st, 2010
Great, let all of them end and have a double-elimination tournament with the NIT being where the losers go. Hey, it will work. Wouldn’t it? LOL
NCAA, you guys are complete morons! Leave the tournament alone.
9:58 pm on March 21st, 2010
hmmmmmm,,,play extra games(28 reg season 3 in conf tourney,,another 6 or so in NCAA) can you say EXPLOIT student athletes???,,,more outta class just for the big bucks to be made,,sad
10:52 pm on March 21st, 2010
So does EVERYONE get a TROPHY?
11:07 pm on March 21st, 2010
How many teams are in the field of 64 that really did not belong?!? Too many teams get in that do not deserve the bid already. Adding more teams takes away the prestige of getting into the tournament. My gosh, for once, just leave something alone that actually works!
11:16 pm on March 21st, 2010
Not really in favor of this, but if they eliminate the NIT altogether, it might, might be ok. I need more details though.
11:17 pm on March 21st, 2010
If you read at the top, NCAA has a 6 Billion $ deal with TV. It is about the money and only the money. The czars at the NCAA HQ, are no better than the AIG and Wall Street Thugs who we bailed out earlier.
96 teams is a stretch. Why not let the Europeans in in 2011, then the rest of the world after that.
If they need to sell more tickets and expand this thing, have a double elimination tournament and at least give some of the 16th seeded teams a chance to win a game.
11:43 pm on March 21st, 2010
People, people. That is what America is ALL about. $$$$$$$$$$$ What are you communisits??
11:58 pm on March 21st, 2010
No we are not commies, just socialist, they passed the socialist health care bill today, so maybe the NCAA can give the govt some money to pay for the deadbeats medical care.
12:40 am on March 22nd, 2010
I’d rather have a 16 team football playoff
1:49 am on March 22nd, 2010
Does anyone have a better idea on how to pay for all the non-revenue sports like swimming, track and wrestling. It’s either this or those sports get cut, cause they aren’t packing 20,000 folks in to watch a swim meet or a women’s field hockey game.
4:13 am on March 22nd, 2010
no team should get a bye in the tournament, that is the beauty of it.
4:28 am on March 22nd, 2010
I LOVE the idea of addeing 6 teams, (three more play-in games) which all go on to play #1 seeds kinda evens out the reward for getting a 1 seed, by playing a team that had to play a couple days before their opening round game. Plus it actually gives a team an actual shot at beating a #1 cause it would drastically increase the caliber of teams moving in to those 16 seeds, based on RPI anyway, which is not a perferct system, but does seem to be pretty acurate on a teams potential to win. There can’t be a perfect system because of, (”the any given’ day”) scenario that can not be calculated, but the RPI is the best we got and its pretty darn good, when you actually USE IT, instead of conference affiliation, to put in the “bubble teams”. This in its self would generate much more money becuase of the much wider spread of interest in these games, the 6 more cities/areas these teams are from, and the 3 other areas in which the winners would be playing (the 1 seeds), would create a very large veiwing audience. Plus you have some fans like me, that even if it don’t effect teams I’m routing for, I still LOVE to watch these games because they are usually pretty evenly matched teams, and make for good games. The true fan loves to watch a close game no matter whose playing, and those games are played so hard, its like their National championship game, it’s great. But the biggest reason I would like to see the 6 team expansion is because that’s about how many teams have a legit argument about why they should be in instead of another bubble team. And yes I realize that there will still be this number of teams saying they should be in instead of someone else, but the fact is the buble talk is some of the most fun, interesting, and intricle part of building up the forth coming tournament. Its like advertising with a debate, and creates so much anticapation for the tourney, I REALLY don’t think you want to lose that, and at 96 teams I think you would, becuase now and with a 6 team expansion, either way, your talking about the caliber of teams that can make a legit run in the tournament, if they get in. At 96 teams, the bubble teams, are only going to have legit chances to when their play-in games and thats it, which might create a small debate in a few local areas, but it will lose the Great Debate that we have now, which really gets people primed for the tourney. I mean if I potentially have to play Va Tech or Illinois, I,m going to be watching this debate (selection process) like a hawk, beause they are good enough to beat anybody anywhere, but when the debate turns to (and no offence to these schools, just examples) Binghampton or Southern Utah, I wont really care, only the people in those areas will care, it just won’t have the widespread interest that we have now. To me this is the most vital part of generating the frenzie that makes this March Madness, instead of just the NCAA Tournament. Please don’t underestamate what the “bubble teams” debate means to making this more than just another tournament. Six more teams would be perfect, because you can’t get all of the worthy teams in without dilluting your product, but you can keep your quallity and still fulfill the dreams of 6 more teams, and backers of them, which may not be everybody, but it is thousands of more people thrilled, instead of broken hearted come selection Sunday.
7:22 am on March 22nd, 2010
money money money,could handle 72 team field
7:44 am on March 22nd, 2010
I apologize for my tourney math skills, on my above rant, I beleive it was actually three more teams, that it would take for there to be a play-in game that would go on to play the one seeds, (four play-in games) which would be seeded by RPI, and would be seeded 61-68. 61 would play 68, winner to play lowest #1, 62-67 to 3rd #1, 63-66 to 2nd #1 and 64-65 winner would play #1 overall seed. This seems like the most senseable expansion, still generates much more money (see above) and is a reward for the teams that earn the #1 seeds. The maximum expansion that I beleive would work without dilluting the Quality and reward for Deserving team season is actually 7 more teams, that would go on to play the top 2 seeded teams, based on the lowest 16 RPI rated teams, in that case: 57 plays 72, winner gets lowest, or fourth rated #2 seed, 58-71 against 3rd #2 seed and so on; 59-70, 60-69, 61-68, 62-67, 63-66, until 64-65 winner gets overall #1 seed. I do beleive there is easily enough depth in college basketball to expand to this level and still have the extra teams have a chance to make legit runs in the tournament. These scenarios would also allow the NIT to still have deserving, quality teams and also the College Insider.com tournery, which is a good tournament, and nice reward for particapants, to get some post season experience. I still think 96 is just to many teams for the Big One, and would hurt these other tourneys, in the process. The one thing I will say is that there are about 347 D1 teams now, which is considerably more than we had when the Big tournament expanded to 64 teams, and that expansion worked beautifully. But 96 teams is a 50% increase in tourney teams, as compared to the percent of increase in D1 teams since the field was expanded to 64, which I do not no the number of teams there were at that time, but might be a more reasonable way of determining expansion volume, and at least something the committee could hang their hats on when they’re asked why they’re doing this, which is obviously money. I’ll try to end this seemingly endless rant with this, and oh-by-the-way, yes I am Bipolar, there really is plenty of talented teams every year out there that get left out of this tourney, that are desevering, and if they respond well to the pressure of these big time games can get hot and make deep runs in the this tourney, I mean just look at this years tourney and how the gap between Power 6 con. teams the so called mid- majors is really closing and has been for awhile, because the big conference teams supieror players are playing a year and going to the NBA, most of the smaller conferences teams now overcome the size and athletic disadvantages, with very experienced teams that have stayed and played together for much longer, building a great, unselfish team chemistry advantage that has really leveled the playing field, or I guess I should say playing court. As far as the issue of whether there are enough good teams to fill in these extra tourney spots, like I said 96 seems to be to many and even plain ole’ greedy, but if a team like MissouriState can’t even make the NIT, thy’re playing in the CollegeInsider.com touney, with a 90 RPI and 20-12season coming out of the 9th rated RPI conference, there is definetly SOME room for expansion. They finshed 8th in their conference, and I think could have won a game or two in the Big Tourney, I use them as an example, because they own the two highest RPI’s in history and not make the tourney, because of conference affilation, one year they were mid 20’s in the RPI on selection Sunday and a Big East Team was in the mid-50’s RPI an still got the bid, the next year very similar numbers, same result. You can look at Kent State and Whitcha State’s numbers this year, and although weren,t mid 20’s RPI, they were low 40’s rpi much lower than Florida ,Minnesota, Virginia Tech, and Illinois among others and didn’t even get talked about as a bubble team much less actually get a bid. Kent st was top regular season team in MAC confer. and ask Georgetown if the 7-9 in confer. team that won the confer, tourney and got the ONE bid the confer. got, OHIO, if they’re any good. Whitcha st 12-6 in confer. the MVC, they were 24-9 on select. Sunday good for second in regular season and confer. tourney runner-up in both cases to only to Nothern Iowa, ask UNLV and KANSAS yes Kansas if they’re any good, and these teams don’t even get in the conversation, thats either corruption or stupidity, or both and it does seem to be the only way for some of these teams very deserving teams to get into the tourney is to expand and for that reason I’m for it. And once again 96 teams seems a little ridiculous but I would rather have that than no expansion at all.
7:44 am on March 22nd, 2010
I THINK THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO EXPAND THE TOIURNEY THEN INSTEAD OF JUST SELECTING AT LARGE TEAMS BASED ON THEIR STANDINGS AND RPI, YOU SHOULD SELECT THE FIRST AND SECOND RUNNER UP FROM THE CONFERENCE TOURNEY. AT THIS POINT IN THE YEAR THEY ARE PLAYING THEIR BEST BALL AND WOULD ADD SOME EXCITEMENT TO THE TOURNEY. BUT WHAT DO I KNOW, IM JUST AN IDIOT THAT HAS WATCHED ONE DISAPOINTING TOURNAMENT AFTER ANOTHER. HEY, MAYBE WE SHOULD JUST THROW ALL THE PLAYERS ON THE COURT WITH OUT A BASKET BALL AND JUST LET THEM FIGHT IT OUT, THAT WAY THEY WILL LOOK A LOT MORE LIKE THE NBA LOSSERS. I REALLY THINK YOU GUYS SHOULD GETA GRIP ON LIFE AND TEACH THESE ATHLETES HOW TO READ AND WRITE FOR ONCE, BUT WAIT THAT DOESNT MAKE MONEY. THIS IS A SAD WORLD AND WE ARE ALL DOOMED!!
8:23 am on March 22nd, 2010
Why not open the tournament to every Division 1 college basketball team out there. Give everybody a chance even the lost causes out there. Reward everybody and take away the conferences.
9:27 am on March 22nd, 2010
It’s a shame, we all know the system works well as it is but it all comes down to GREED and money in which few benefit from the many. They’ll spin in in such a way as to not make it look like this but its true. It’s always true.
9:58 am on March 22nd, 2010
Aww Kris ya beat me too it… Bring them all - 347 teams, would be like NBA or NHL playoffs LOL
10:11 am on March 22nd, 2010
These NCAA idiots want they’re money but they’ll lose soo much interest. 65/64 teams is enough!!!! You don’t need anymore teams. It’s just the world goes…benefits the few and takes away from the many.
These NCAA guys are just illogical. The NCAA Basketball Tourney IS NOT broken. DO NOT FIX IT. NCAA Football IS BROKEN. FIX THAT. The BCS is junk!! You’ll get waaaaay more interest in football if you put in the tournament system in college football for the top 8 teams. But still…the idiots up in the NCAA are gonna lose interest if they expand to 96 teams. Rediculous.
10:12 am on March 22nd, 2010
The idea of going to 96 teams is absoluty stupid and shouldn’t be done. The only reason you would expand it is to make more money which might not happen because people will stop watching the games. There would be to many games and people just won’t watch them all and plus everybody would be in the field. It would also eliminate the purpose behind the the regular season which is to earn a tournament bid. So why fix something that isn’t broke. Besides what are going to do put all of the teams from the power confernces like the ACC and Big East in execept the bottom two or something. That would still leave room for a bunch of the Mid Majors too and can those schools really compete with the power schools on a regular basis. So please don’t wreck my favorite sport’s event to watch every year.
10:22 am on March 22nd, 2010
We all know what this is about. It is about allowing De Paul and Virginia to get first round byes in the NCAA. After all, EVERYBODY knows that the Big East and the ACC are the only conferences that can play basketball (insert sarcasm here).
10:32 am on March 22nd, 2010
The main reason most qualified teams are left out is because of the automatic bid for winning a conference tourney bid. The teams that had a bad day for the conference tourney championship find themselves in the NIT. The NCAA needs to do away with automatic conference bid, and the other great idea of 96 teams. I personally will lose interest in a 96 team tourney and will focus only on conference tournament championships.
11:42 am on March 22nd, 2010
Mario Donato
My firm has 90 full time accountants, and another 150 professionals which are part of Netrix, we add up the 90 and 150 for Chicago Crain purposes.
We are listed as the 8th largest firm in Crains only because we include Netrix employees in our overall numbers, Netrix only handles computer outsourcing and doesn’t have one accountant employed for them. Our true accounting professionals are 90 employees of which includes 40 partners. We make almost everyone who has been at our firm a partner after 5 years to make it appear we have more partners than we actually do.
Our revenue in Crains include Netrix, I admit its an exageration but it makes our numbers look good. Without Netrix we would be substantially less than our reported revenue on Crains which is 59 million, very similar to a Warrady and Davis type.
Mario Donato
12:05 pm on March 22nd, 2010
stop the cryin and whining—when field was expanded to 64,people cried–$$$$$$ and thats what makes the NCAA happy… D1 football playoff??? NEVER….college prezzes will see to that–it is what it is….live with it
12:22 pm on March 22nd, 2010
So NCAA: How do you propose you televise 96 teams. You can’t even televise the 64 teams correctly because you have your dumb - *&^(ss favorites and won’t show all of the teams in all of the areas. When watching the tournament folks should be able to watch who they want to watch regardless of where they live. People should be able to watch their team ,say the Big Ten outside of the Big Ten viewing area, not be stuck with watching Duke play Lehigh unless you want to watch these two teams. You should be given a choice on what team you want to watch instead of being forced to watch what the CBS executives want you to watch.
1:21 pm on March 22nd, 2010
I saw three or six corn butts the other day, and let me tell you they were DELICIOUS.
8:03 pm on March 26th, 2010
Finally a way for a 16-seed to win a game. Why not have a 10-12 game regular season- all conference games. Then start playoffs. Top ACC team against last PAC-10 team and so on until a field of 64 is set.