Expanding the NCAA Field to 80 Teams?

[ORUProf]

From Today's USA Today

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ ... ield_x.htm

Field of 80? Tournament size debated

5/18/2006

By Steve Wieberg, USA TODAY

For the first time since adding a 65th team in 2001, the committee that oversees the NCAA Division I men's basketball tournament is weighing expansion of the field.

Spurred by Syracuse's Jim Boeheim and other coaches, who called in March for at least modest expansion and met with the committee last week, incoming chairman Gary Walters said he expects the 10-man panel to address the issue, probably when it next meets June 26-30 in Orlando.

"We're going to have a serious discussion," said Walters, who takes over as chairman in September, "and then we'll make some decision about where we'll proceed from there."

The committee has been cool in the past to suggestions of expansion, reluctant to tamper with a hugely popular and successful event. "What we have right now is working pretty well. There's no outcry out there," Walters said. "(But) I don't know that we should be influenced by whether there's an outcry or there isn't. What we should do is act in what's in the best interests of the game as stewards of the game."

Expansion, if it happened, would require approval by NCAA legislative bodies and probably couldn't come before 2009. Neither Walters nor others would speculate on how many berths could be added, though suggestions have ranged from three (and an overall 68-team field) to 15 (and an 80-team bracket).

Among concerns: when and where additional games would be played and how the current 22-day window could be expanded; the effect on an 11-year, $6 billion CBS contract that runs through 2013; and potential changes in how that revenue is shared by participating conferences and schools.

The tournament's last significant expansion came in 1985, when it went from a 53-team bracket to 64. A 65th berth was added in 2001 to accommodate the champions of all 31 Division I conferences and 34 at-large selections, with the two lowest-rated entries assigned to a play-in game.

Division I's growth from 282 teams in 1985 to 334 today and growing parity in the sport ? underscored by George Mason's Final Four appearance in April ? have fueled coaches' calls for a larger field. Boeheim, among others, advocated perhaps eight to 10 more teams, and the National Association of Basketball Coaches pursued the proposal during its annual meeting with the NCAA committee last week in Atlanta.

[ORUJason]

If they extend the field to 68 teams, then I assume that each bracket would be seeded 1-17, and the 4 play-in games would feature the 17 vs. the 16, with the winner advancing to play a 1 seed.

Since we have lost Valpo and as a result the overall RPI of the confererence will be even worse as a result, the Mid-Con representative would usually end up in one of the 4 play-in games (as a 16 or 17 seed), or could at best hope for a 15 or 14 seed that would avoid a play-in game.

If they extend the field to 80 teams, then I assume each bracket would be seeded 1-20, and there would be 16 play-in games, with the 13 vs. 20, 14 vs. 19, etc... Then the winner of the 13 vs. 20 play-in game would probably be matched up against a 1 seed, the winner of the 14 vs. 19 would be matched up against a 2 seed, etc.

In this scenario, the Mid-Con representative would probably be a 19 seed, with an 18 or 17 seed a possibility in a really good year. While the play-in game opponent would be more challenging, if you won the play-in game, then you would have a better chance to avoid playing a 1 seed in the next game.

If they extend it to 80 games, and still keep the NIT (48 games now?) intact, then it would improve the NIT bid chances for Mid-Con teams substantially.

And if ORU had a really strong year, but lost in the finals of the Mid-Con championship (like what happened in 2004-2005 vs. Oakland), I would think that we would receive an at-large bid due to the conference championship, strong record, and strong RPI (since 15 additional at-large bids would be available).

[richieoru]

If they extend the field to 80 teams, then I assume each bracket would be seeded 1-20, and there would be 16 play-in games, with the 13 vs. 20, 14 vs. 19, etc... Then the winner of the 13 vs. 20 play-in game would probably be matched up against a 1 seed, the winner of the 14 vs. 19 would be matched up against a 2 seed, etc.

I like where your heads at, but the 13 seed having to play the 1 seed if they win their play in games kind of hurts. Seems like you would be really hopeing for the 16-17 matchup since you would get to play a 4 seed. Although I do like the idea of the extra teams, they can really help out some mid majors although more major programs would probably get the slots anyways. Maybe they could randomize a block of the 20 play in games kind of like the draw for the World Cup. I.E. randomly drawing for what seed you get. I would like to see what the NCAA comes up with, and at least the NIT can't complain about getting worse teams since NCAA bought them out anyways.

[ORUJason]

You're right. In this scenario, the 13 vs. 20 winner would probably be seeded up with the 4 seed, because it would be assumed that the 13 seed would usually win, and should be rewarded for being a 13 seed.

Because it could open up more opportunities for mid-major teams to get an at-large bid, I think it's a good idea.

Even though the Mid-Con representative would have to play an extra "play-in" game, it would be a very winnable game, which could only help the positive exposure opportunities for ORU.

I would think that in reality, an expansion to 72 teams would have a better chance of being approved than an expansion to 80 teams.

I wonder if they would have the higher seeded teams host the play-in games.

[praetorfenix86]

It depends. Which way does the NCAA stand to make the absolute most money. That is the way they will run this thing.

[richieoru]

It depends. Which way does the NCAA stand to make the absolute most money. That is the way they will run this thing.

Seems like adding more games means adding more money, so hopefully they will think of adding those games. With the additions of so many new D1 teams since the inception of the 64 team field seems like adding to the tournament would help out a lot of people.