Pros and Cons of 96

Donate To GopherHole
There are no pros, whats next putting advertisments on jerseys, adding a second hoop, adding a 4 point shot, HOW ELSE CAN THEY RUIN THE GAME
 

Roland Brooks said:
There are no pros!
Click to expand...

If you're a mediocre coach there is. "Hey, we made the tourney! You can't fire me because next year we'll be even better!". Maybe Bo Ryan will actually do something with those high seeds he gets if he doesn't have to play those darn "inferior" schools in the first two rounds.

If anything really needs to be done it's the elimination of a schools from the D-1 level and a couple of the smaller conferences merging into Big East style basketball only leagues. There are too many schools that are chasing a dream that's just no cost effective for them with little to no payoff and then passing those costs onto the student body in the forms of athletic fees, participation or activities fees, or even tuition hikes etc.
 

tjgopher said:
One more thing to add on this regarding the hand-wringing.

There was similar hand-wringing when MLB announced plans for a Wild Card and reformatting divisions. Many purists said it would ruin the regular season, water down the playoffs, drive down attendance and kill revenue. In fact, just the opposite happened. There were more pennant races. The playoffs added a round and it became more exciting to many. Revenues went up, attendance has never been better. I'm not saying there aren't legit reasons to not like the Wild Card, etc. Not saying it was even great. But, this idea that it was going to ruin the regular season or force people to quit watching, or dampen someone's passion for their local team, etc. is misguided, IMO. The game survived the changes, and you could argue is thriving after the changes.

Same with a lot changes. Designated hitter. Shot clock. Three-point line. College football overtime. NFL division re-alignment. All of these were MAJOR changes and many were against the change. I understand if you don't like some of them. But, you know what? The games survived because at the end of the day, people LOVE the games. Same here. The NCAA Tournament will be as popular as ever. If you like college hoops, you'll watch. It is that simple. Ask yourself this question. Will you quit watching because of an expanded field? Will you cancel season tickets? Will you like the Gophers any less? I would guess no, no, and no.

Embrace it. It is happening. You'll be happier this way:) In three years you'll ask yourself what was all the fuss about?
Click to expand...

This post assumes many things, but most notably it assumes that ALL changes wrought by the rulers of these sports are okay in the end, because of the general 'blind love' of the viewing public. Just because a change went through, and people got used to it, doesn't make the change any more or less stupid. The designated hitter rule is still stupid. Having a wild card in baseball is not stupid. Both of those changes are now in the past, but can still be judged for their relative worth.

The field of 64 is, most people think, just about right. It allows a broad cross-section of college basketball to play for the title, while maintaining a certain air of exclusivity. Might we get used to 96? Sure. Does that make it better than 64? No way.
 

Bring it

It's good for Nevada, no doubt about it. More games means more wagering action which means more money flowing through the state of Nevada, which I'm all for. No income tax was one of the draws of moving to the desert and stuff like this just helps keep the machine rolling without me paying taxes. Gotta love the tourists.

Outside of that, I'm not a fan.
 

Here is a sample of what this year's bracket would have looked like under the NIT and auto-bid plans.

I can't say that I would be at all interested in any of those first round games.
 


tjgopher said:
Exactly. And, no one is going to love the Gophers less because of NCAA tourney expansion. That will have zero impact on a local fan's passion for his/her team and it might even increase the passion as you know you've got a shot at an NCAA berth. I don't know about you, but I know personally I've always gotten into my team more when they were in playoff/NCAA contention. Expansion includes MORE fans in that category. They won't ignore it.

And, I don't think anyone is going to cancel their season tickets because the field was expanded to 96. If the Gophers are good, people will come if they expand it to include all 347 DI schools. Most people enjoy the game. They enjoy watching Tubby Smith coach against Tom Izzo. They enjoy anticipating a Rodney Williams dunk or a Blake Hoffarber 3-pt shot. They enjoy the pep band playing the Rouser. They like the Barn. They are Gopher fans. No one is going to say, "well, they've gone to 96, no use going to games." No one. The games are for entertainment. If it was all about cherry-picking games and canceling season tickets, that could have been done with a Field of 64, too. Any fan could do that last year, the year before, the year before. But, in general, they don't. They love the Gophers. They love the idea of having season tickets. They enjoy the games. A Field of 96 won't lessen that.

Way too much hand-wringing. This will be a non-factor in 2-3 years.
Click to expand...

You may not 'love' them any less. But are you going to go out of your way to attend a Tuesday game against Northwestern in a season like we just had? You might, but many people won't bother. Are you even going to bother watching a December game against SDSU on TV? Probably not.

It may not even be this way every year. But there's going to be a pretty wide chasm where you're not close to getting a top 32 bye, but you're more then safely in. When it becomes obvious you're in this no man's land, there's not going to be a huge motivation for some games. The games against Bucky or Sparty will always be good. But a Tuesday game against Northwestern on February 15th, when you are basically locked into a seed somewhere between 33 and 96 is not very compelling.
 

tjgopher said:
One more thing to add on this regarding the hand-wringing.

There was similar hand-wringing when MLB announced plans for a Wild Card and reformatting divisions. Many purists said it would ruin the regular season, water down the playoffs, drive down attendance and kill revenue. In fact, just the opposite happened. There were more pennant races. The playoffs added a round and it became more exciting to many. Revenues went up, attendance has never been better. I'm not saying there aren't legit reasons to not like the Wild Card, etc. Not saying it was even great. But, this idea that it was going to ruin the regular season or force people to quit watching, or dampen someone's passion for their local team, etc. is misguided, IMO. The game survived the changes, and you could argue is thriving after the changes.

Same with a lot changes. Designated hitter. Shot clock. Three-point line. College football overtime. NFL division re-alignment. All of these were MAJOR changes and many were against the change. I understand if you don't like some of them. But, you know what? The games survived because at the end of the day, people LOVE the games. Same here. The NCAA Tournament will be as popular as ever. If you like college hoops, you'll watch. It is that simple. Ask yourself this question. Will you quit watching because of an expanded field? Will you cancel season tickets? Will you like the Gophers any less? I would guess no, no, and no.

Embrace it. It is happening. You'll be happier this way:) In three years you'll ask yourself what was all the fuss about?
Click to expand...


That's an awfully simplistic and somewhat arrogant view. So the wise old men in smoke filled rooms always make the best decisions and us rubes should just shut-up and love whatever they tell us to?

NFL Division realingment is tolerated. It didn't do anything wonderful. Seattle and Denver used to be big rivals. Now they're not even in the same conference. Tampa Bay and Green Bay had a great rivalry. It's no more. All for what? The great franchise that IS the Houston Texans? I'd love it if they'd change it back.

The MLB Wild-card was a good change. But they still only let 8 of 32 teams into the play-offs. Expand that to 12, and you will indeed ruin the regular season. The NBA and NHL HAVE ruined thier regular seasons by letting too many teams in.

The NBA regular season is a complete joke. I'd rather watch paint dry then watch a regular season NBA game. I used to watch it regularly. Now, the 4 teams in each conference who have a real chance to win the title coast until about March. The 3-4 teams scrapping for the last spot have no chance anyway, so it doesn't matter. Unlike the NCAA there's no pride in 'just getting in' as the 8th seed. The NCAA is slipping towards this status if they make it this easy for the major-conference teams to get in. If you're not competing for your regular season title, you may as well take it easy and rest players when needed. Gear everything towards being 'healthy and fresh' for when the tournament starts. After all, it'll be the only thing that matters.
 

A couple of ambivalent reactions:

1) The positive: I remember when the NCAAs were just a 25-team field and folks complained about dilution when it went to 64. (For you younger whipper-snappers, Drake began their streak of one NCAA appearance every 40 years back in 1969 when it was a 25-team field. That's right: once every forty flippin' years)

The expansion of the field has been okay and about 3-4 years after it goes to 96 teams, many of you will be able to tell a new crop of college fans about the "good ol' days" when it was just 64 teams.

2) That said, unless a local school or an alma mater is playing in the "Round of bottom 32 seeds" I think interest and viewership will drop off on the first set of Thursday and Friday games. I've traditionally taken the first Thursday and Friday off simply because there are some decent games along with some some possible Cinderella matches then. If I had to predict, I suspect I'll not take Thursday or Friday off (unless I'm officially retired rather than inactive).

My interest will get juiced up on Saturday and Sunday which will have the games that are played on Thursday and Friday this year. But my interest will probably get tested at the next round which will be played on weekday nights (I presume). I know I kinda get "basketball-tired" after the first four sets of games and now look forward to the week off. Not sure how it'll be when there's not as much time between.

But the NCAA will do what it wants and we'll just have to see how it plays out. With the current tariffs on broadcasts and cable rights, etc it seems inevitable.

It's hard for me to get as excited about a #9 vs 24 except when it might involve the U, maybe another B-10 school, Drake (and I had 37 years to wait for another appearance for the 64-game field).
 

howeda7 said:
You may not 'love' them any less. But are you going to go out of your way to attend a Tuesday game against Northwestern in a season like we just had? You might, but many people won't bother. Are you even going to bother watching a December game against SDSU on TV? Probably not.
Click to expand...

Sure, I go to every home game. For the life of me I cannot figure out why expanding the field to 96 should lessen my enjoyment of a Tuesday night game against Northwestern. Why should it? Why would expanding to 96 stop me from watching my favorite team on TV? I'm clearly missing something there. I'm baffled by it. Just because we're now in the tourney and not on the bubble? So, if I have this right, by that standard, if we had finished solidly in third place this year (out of title contention, but clearly in the field) then we should have stopped going to games and caring because we were in the field? Is the only time the game is meaningful or worth watching if it has NCAA tourney implications? Does that mean we need to continue to be on the perpetual bubble to make sure the games have meaning so the fans can enjoy them and will continue to go to them?

I mean if all games are meaningless if we expand to 96, then I guess we can expect to see an empty Breslin Center and an empty Kohl Center and an empty Mackey Arena since they know they'll be in the Field of 96 every year. None of their games will matter. No one will go to any of those games. I think that sounds silly. Those places will continue to sell out. Why would Minnesota games be any less important? We sold out all but one Big Ten game this past year. Why would expanding to 96 make people believe they should all of the sudden stop going to games?
 



howeda7 said:
That's an awfully simplistic and somewhat arrogant view. So the wise old men in smoke filled rooms always make the best decisions and us rubes should just shut-up and love whatever they tell us to?
Click to expand...

Absolutely, it was a simplistic example. I am not suggesting all the old dudes in the board room know best. Just implying that this notion that the tournament will somehow be ruined and that no one will watch and the advertisers will go away and doomsday, doomsday, doomsday is a bit over the top.

Although, I admit I've been wrong on many, many things in the past, maybe I'll be totally off with this, too. I just think in 2-3 years the tourney will be fine, no one will really think twice about a Field of 96 and it will still be a magnificent sporting event.
 

MNSnowman said:
A couple of ambivalent reactions:

1) The positive: I remember when the NCAAs were just a 25-team field and folks complained about dilution when it went to 64. (For you younger whipper-snappers, Drake began their streak of one NCAA appearance every 40 years back in 1969 when it was a 25-team field. That's right: once every forty flippin' years)

The expansion of the field has been okay and about 3-4 years after it goes to 96 teams, many of you will be able to tell a new crop of college fans about the "good ol' days" when it was just 64 teams.

2) That said, unless a local school or an alma mater is playing in the "Round of bottom 32 seeds" I think interest and viewership will drop off on the first set of Thursday and Friday games. I've traditionally taken the first Thursday and Friday off simply because there are some decent games along with some some possible Cinderella matches then. If I had to predict, I suspect I'll not take Thursday or Friday off (unless I'm officially retired rather than inactive).

My interest will get juiced up on Saturday and Sunday which will have the games that are played on Thursday and Friday this year. But my interest will probably get tested at the next round which will be played on weekday nights (I presume). I know I kinda get "basketball-tired" after the first four sets of games and now look forward to the week off. Not sure how it'll be when there's not as much time between.

But the NCAA will do what it wants and we'll just have to see how it plays out. With the current tariffs on broadcasts and cable rights, etc it seems inevitable.

It's hard for me to get as excited about a #9 vs 24 except when it might involve the U, maybe another B-10 school, Drake (and I had 37 years to wait for another appearance for the 64-game field).
Click to expand...

I've taken the Thursday and Friday of the first round off the last several years as well. It's the best two sports days of the year. I'll no longer do this. Sorry, but I'm not blowing a vacation day to watch a #9 vs #24 game between UNLV and IUPUI. It's not the same. They will have effectively ruined the two best sports days of the year. If the Gophers are playing, I'll find a way to watch it, but otherwise, I'll pass on the first round.
 

howeda7 said:
Sorry, but I'm not blowing a vacation day to watch a #9 vs #24 game between UNLV and IUPUI. It's not the same.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about that, either. Is UNLV-IUPUI any different than Murray State-Vanderbilt or Robert Morris-Vanderbilt or Old Dominion-Notre Dame? On paper, all of those games seemed like ho-hum games. Yet, most considered those games three of the most entertaining games of the first round this year. Point is, no one knows for sure what will end up being the story in any given round. I can tell you with 32 games total, there will be some real good ones every year in those opening round nights. A couple of #20ish seeds will win a first round game or two each year, guaranteed. And, people will love it. If IUPUI upsets UNLV in that game, everyone will enjoy it. It is all relative really. Whenever David beats Goliath it is fun. No matter whether it happens in a #23-#10 NCAA game or in a non-conference game in November. It is really what makes the opening rounds of the tourney (IMHO) and this will heighten the possibilities of such upsets. Again, my opinion only.
 

I don't know if anyone else posted this, but while I am not a fan of the expansion, maybe it won't be that bad. it will essentially be a merging of the NCAA and the NIT (esp if Coach K gets his voice heard and they take reg season champions automatically). is that SO bad?? in terms of quality of games, the first and second round of games will be like the current first round (about half will be good games and about half will be ugly/lopsided).
the only real downside I see right off the bat that I cannot spin positively is the death of the Cinderella. not a Butler or George Mason (can and will still happen) but a Murray St or Northern Iowa is more unlikely now...the ratty rats appear to have a red carpet to the Sweet 16 because they have to play one less game.

**let me reiterate, I am not a fan of 96, it could ruin one of the best sporting events that there is...but I am trying to be positive.
 




You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom