To expand or not to expand: That's the multibillion-dollar question (NCAA Tournament)

SI ^ | March 2, 2010 | Stewart Mandel

[C19fan]

The calendar turned to March this week, which means one of our nation's most celebrated sporting events is just around the corner. Two Sundays from now, CBS studio host Greg Gumbel will read off the names of 65 college basketball teams. Millions of fans around the country will race to fill out their brackets. Many will find excuses to skip work or take long lunch breaks the following Thursday and Friday, as another NCAA tournament tips off.

But behind the scenes, executives in charge of this multibillion-dollar event are holding discussions that could drastically alter the future of March Madness. On the eve of potential network television renegotiations, committees and panels representing the NCAA and its members must soon decide whether to implement the first major expansion of the tourney's field in 25 years.

[C19fan]

This is coming up because the NCAA can walk away from the current contract with CBS and the expanded tournament would serve to get a bigger contract. I would boycott the first round of the expanded tournament. This really is a sop to the BCS conferences so their second to last member can get it if it has an above .500 record.

[oust the louse]

they need to keep this at 64 teams PERIOD. Don’t mess with perfection.

[rsobin]

If they expand the field to 400 teams North Carolina might make it.

[KarlInOhio]

You are already down to the teams which have no chance to win. Just imagine adding 31 teams worse than Alabama State (last year's play-in game loser). All I expect it would do is shake up the 9-16 seeds and tire them out a little so they are less likely to beat a 1-8 seed team in the new second round.

[denydenydeny]

As Whitney Houston would say, Hell to the no.

The symmetry of the 64 teams is perfect. The only thing in sports that would be worse is adding a 33rd team to the NFL.

[dinoparty]

I’m sure I’m in the minority but I think its already too big. I think all conference winners should make it plus some of the very best second-place teams, but that’s it. If you can’t even be in the top 2 of your conference you don’t deserve a shot at the National Title. Moreover, do away with the conference tournaments.

[dinoparty]

except its actually 65.

[discostu]

They shouldn’t, but they will. Everybody wants mo money.

[MediaMole]

The only way it would work is if the higher seeds got a first-round bye, but then the early rounds would be a bunch of nobodies playing nobodies. Do we really need a matchup between Alcorn State and UW-Green Bay?

[Yossarian]

It’s nice to see the NCAA once again looking out for college student’s education by giving them yet another game to practice for and perform in.

The NCAA Division I revenue-generating sports get many youth, primarily African-Americans, to toil away full-time for free, for someone else’s profit. Sound familiar?

[bjorn14]

Yeah, I was piised when they added that stoooopid play-in game. It’s like a big ol’ pimple on your face.

[Yossarian]

EDIT: “ student’s “ should read “ students’ “.

[political1]

Go UAB Blazers