It's sounding more and more like tournament expansion is about to become a reality, as soon as next year. While the talking heads are boo-hooing the expansion, I couldn't be more excited. Like I've said before, I guess I'm just not sophisticated enough to understand how more of a good thing isn't just more of a good thing.
Sure, tourney expansion is a shameless money-grab by the NCAA. But who cares? They've built the single best sporting event, so why shouldn't they cash in on it? The increased windfall trickles down to the schools that play under the NCAA banner, which includes UVA. An expanded field gives UVA a better chance to make the tournament in any given year. So even when peering through the orange and blue lens, I love the idea of a 96-team tournament!
One last point: If you thought the concept of a 16-seed beating a 1-seed was exciting, wait until a 17-seed beats a 1! Or until a 24-seed beats a 9! Et cetera. Again, how can more of a good thing not just be more of a good thing???
Here are some pieces from some of those talking heads and keyboard warriors. With this year's wacky, wild, wonderful brackets still dancing in your head, I encourage you to read while the iron is still hot. Understand their points, but dare to keep things simple for yourself and just be a fan.
CBS's Gary Parrish, Gregg Doyel, and Mike Freeman have mixed feelings on tournament expansion.
ESPN's Dana O'Neil thinks that greed-driven tournament expansion will taint the tournament experience.
ESPN's Mark Kreidler thinks the answer is not a bigger tournament, but better teams. He suggests following baseball's lead in this endeavor.
SI's George Dorman offers four solid reasons why tournament expansion would be horrible.
SI's Alexander Wolff unveils the real reason behind tournament expansion: TV money. (Ya think?)
But if you read any of these, you should read this one. The Washington Post's John Feinstein wraps up the tournament expansion topic into a neat little package.
No comments:
Post a Comment