[NU Sports] NCAA Poised to Expand to Field of 96; NIT Slated for Extinction

Thu Feb 4 16:44:57 CST 2010

Adding another 2 games makes luck even more of an issue. 

Who's to say that MSU comes in flat the first weekend and gets bumped the 2nd game... by a
9th place team from the Ivy League?

C'mon

rsl

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Roy S. Lamberton - Senior Associate & Unix Guru.
Computer Applications & Support Associates
-------------------- Also ----------------------
"Commissioner" Delaware American Legion Baseball
Retired Senior Chief Cryptologic Technician [R]
Northwestern University - Speech 1974 - 
Chi Phi: Pi 1974, KD 1968
Publisher Emeritus: Purple Reign (Fox Sports)
==========  Go Cats -  Beat 'em All  ===========

Remember that when Rome started to fall apart, 
with scandals and financial ruin, the Caesars 
placated the masses with bread and circuses.

The problem is they'll be taking our bread, 
and the circus is in Washington....

Don't re-elect nobody, not even yo mama!
================================================

-----Original Message-----
From: nwu-sports-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:nwu-sports-bounces at tssi.com] On Behalf Of
cherron604 at aol.com
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 12:13 PM
To: artmiller_news at yahoo.com; nwu-sports at romaine.tssi.com; tkmaycock at yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [NU Sports] NCAA Poised to Expand to Field of 96; NIT Slated for Extinction

There can be a compelling argument made for including all Division 1 teams in the
tournament.  John Wooden has made this argument consistently:

http://blog.taragana.com/sports/2009/12/10/ncaa-in-very-early-stages-of-talks-to-expand-nc
aa-tournament-field-move-games-to-cable-55032/

Increasing the field from 64 to 256 would only add 1 weekend/2 games, and the NCAA could
probably increase the money they made based on that added weekend of programming.

The cries of purists always are amusing this time of year - the field size has vaied
wildly over the years (besides, doesn't a purist have to be idealistic about something
inherently pure - and when was the last time that major college basketball was pure ??)

1939-50 - 8 teams
1951-52 - 16 teams
1953-74 - varied between 22 and 25
1975-78 - 32
1979      - 40
1980-82 - 48
1983      - 52 (48 plus 4 play-ins)
1984      - 53 (48 plus 5 play-ins)
1985-00 - 64
2001-      65  (64 plus 1 play-in)

So what is essentially 'pure' about 65 ?  Prior to 1975, only one team per conference was
invited.  This is another reason why 'Bowl droughts' and 'NCAA droughts' are silly stats,
quoted by media types in search of an easy story.  In this case, for 36 of the 70 years
that the tournament has been contested, only one Big Ten team could go.  Meaning that half
of the years that NU could have tried for the tournament, the tournament was limited to
the conference champion.

The first tournament I really remember was the 79 tournament.  I lived near Chicago, and
DePaul made the final 4.  Also Penn, Michigan St, and Indiana St (Magic vs. Bird).  Though
48 teams was always the field size I 'remembered' (that came along in 1980), the 79
tournament had 40 teams.  So to me, at least, cries of 'Purity - 65 teams !' ring hollow.

One can make the argument that the conference tournaments comprise 'virtually' the first 2
rounds of an Indiana-style (all schools) tournament.  A question I would have would be
'what would happen to the conference tournaments under an enlarged NCAA field ?'  They
make money, I can't imagine them going away.  Would they still draw big crowds?

Chuck Herron   Tech '85

-----Original Message-----
From: Arthur Miller <artmiller_news at yahoo.com>
To: nwu-sports at romaine.tssi.com; Tom Maycock <tkmaycock at yahoo.com>
Sent: Wed, Feb 3, 2010 5:42 pm
Subject: Re: [NU Sports] NCAA Poised to Expand to Field of 96; NIT Slated for Extinction

Tom is right; this is a DUMB IDEA.  Are they going to allow the 10th or 11th 
est ACC team with a 12-17 record in the expanded tournament, or will .500 
ecome some kind of hallowed marker like in football?
Anyway, why stop with 96?  If more is always better, let's allow in a few top 
eams from Division II or III.  Or make it a double-elimination tournament!
I would say this tendency to increase the size of tournaments is the main reason 
 am opposed to a football playoff.  I can (barely) accept the logic of a 
our-team post-bowl playoff, but today's news tells only proves that it's just a 
atter of time before the system would expand.

_______________________________________________
wu-sports site list
wu-sports at tssi.com
ttp://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports

_______________________________________________
nwu-sports site list
nwu-sports at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports