•    HOME   
•    NEWS   
•    BUSINESS   
•    INTERNATIONAL   
•    TECH   
•    SPORTS   
•    LIFE & TIMES   
•    OPINION   
•    MY JAKARTA   
•    BLOGS   

New York. Former President Bill Clinton sat courtside at Madison Square Garden on Thursday, chatting with Big East commissioner John Marinatto. The conversation turned to the potential expansion of the NCAA men’s basketball tournament.

Around the country the possibility that the tournament will grow, most likely to 96 teams, has become one of this March’s most heated topics.

As the NCAA tournament unveils its 65-team field on Selection Sunday, the possibility of radically altering the format — perhaps as soon as next year — is being seriously considered.

Although the idea of changing the beloved bracket has been panned by fans and criticized by pundits, the promise of more television money and greater access to the tournament for teams has made change conceivable.

“The opportunity to decide what’s going to happen with our revenue is a big deal,” said Greg Shaheen, the senior vice president for basketball and business strategies with the National Collegiate Athletic Association. “It’s what a lot of institutions rely on for their athletic programs. That’s a centerpiece to why all this happens.

“It’s easy to say you don’t want change. But simply put, it’s what’s appropriate to operate in our best interest.”

Most discussions have involved a 96-team field. Expansion is essentially a numbers game, driven by the potential for more television revenue.

The NCAA, which generates about 90 percent of its revenue from the men’s tournament, has a July 31 deadline to decide whether it will opt out of the three years remaining on its 13-year, $6 billion contract with CBS.

The most obvious suitor is ESPN, which broadcasts hundreds of college basketball games on its array of networks but spends the postseason broadcasting the second-tier National Invitation Tournament.

“College sports is a significant part of the culture of our company, and we have a wonderful position in college basketball,” said John Skipper, ESPN’s executive vice president for content. He added, “We love our involvement, and it feels somewhat unfulfilling to stop before the end of the year.”

CBS’s contract with the NCAA is heavily backloaded, scheduled to pay $2.13 billion for the rights to the tournament over the final three years. If the tournament expanded and remained on CBS, the network would probably have to strike a deal with a cable partner to carry some of it.

Shaheen said it was a misconception that the NCAA was aiming to command greater attention over a longer period because the expanded tournament would still be played in a three-week window. In the 96-team model, he said, the top 32 teams would get a first-round bye.

Shaheen said since the tournament last expanded significantly, in 1985, the number of Division I men’s basketball teams had increased to 343 from 284. In 1985, the television contract was worth $27 million. The final year on the current deal pays more than $750 million.

“That puts in perspective how far we’ve come in 25 years,” Shaheen said. “How best to move forward is really our focus. The reality of this event is that it’s buoyed us.”

Although the tournament has carried the NCAA, the issue has become divisive in college basketball circles. This year, the quality of teams on the NCAA bubble has been particularly low, and the notion of adding more weak teams to the tournament is not particularly appealing to some.

“Honestly, this year is the argument for 48,” said Jerry Palm, who runs the Web site CollegeRPI.com and does commentary for CBS College Sports. “This year’s field is so horribly unaccomplished compared to the last few years.”

Most coaches who have voiced opinions are in favor of expansion.

However, they will ultimately have little say as Jim Isch, the NCAA’s interim president, and the 18 university presidents and chancellors on the Division I board decide on the TV contract and the tournament’s format.

Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim went so far as to say that “any coach that is against expansion is not a good brother.”

“This tournament has been expanded four or five different times,” he said. “The only reason now people don’t want it is it fits in a nice little pocket. Maybe we only need five, six or seven teams, but that doesn’t make any financial sense.”

Some coaches have said bigger may not be better.

“It takes away from the special nature of it,” said Steve Donahue, who has coached Cornell to the NCAA tournament three consecutive years. “It’s supposed to be an incredible award for a great, great season. If you expand it, it’s not that. Everyone thinks more is better. It’s not.”

Davidson coach Bob McKillop went a step further.

“Isn’t this whole thing a window into society?” he said. “We’ve diminished so many other things. We’ve diminished test scores. We’ve diminished admission policies. We diminish so much for reasons that are not accentuating excellence and performance. It’s almost too inclusive.”

Coach Tom Izzo of Michigan State said more tournament invitations might eliminate the practice of teams from power conferences scheduling a dozen so-called “buy games” against weak teams each season to pad their records. That would help midmajor programs that struggle to find quality opponents for home games. They are pushing for the NCAA to give automatic bids to both their regular-season and postseason conference champions if the tournament goes to 96 teams.

Izzo said teams from the six power conferences might feel more comfortable upgrading their schedules because they would have more margin for error in the regular season.

Between now and July 31, the debate will continue.

“Let’s just be real,” Nebraska coach Doc Sadler said. “It doesn’t matter what you think or I think. It’s going to come down to dollars and cents. They can talk about all the other things, but if it makes sense financially, it’s going to happen. If it doesn’t, it’s not going to, no matter.”

  Basketball

The New York Times