slu72 Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Just read an aritcle on cnnsi.com (men's bb section) about Mike Alden's answer when asked the question, "what would you do if you were head of the NCAA?". Alden's response was basically he'd find a way for the power schools to manage their own championships in all sports, ala the BCS model for FB. The article was titled something like, "Cinderalla could be kept out of March Madness." This article is a little scary since it states a lot of BCS coaches and AD's are wondering why they have to share the pot of gold that is the Dance w/ the little guys. Their argument is basically, they are the brand names and the networks know it. There is a strong implication here, that men's BB could go the way of FB and that the networks would welcome such a move. I have no idea how this would affect SLU and others like us. But it does make you wonder if this is why schools like UMass, Charlotte, and Villanova are all looking into upgrading their FB programs so that they are on board if this ever comes to pass. Not difficult to imagine this happening once the bigs get their conferences all re-aligned. So, enjoy these trips to the Big Dance, because in the not too distant future we're likely going to find ourselves on the outside looking in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Absolutely. The model already exists in the FBS and the FCS or whatever they call it now. Division 1 football versus Division 1A. Basketball seems a likely candidate to follow. Change is inevitable. Many years ago, I think it was roy who advocated an argument that all D1 schools getting into the Dance ala the indiana state high school basketball tournamnet. Someone countered that, what with conference tournaments, that was already happening (sans a couple of real bottom feeders like #s 13 and 14 in the A10). This greed-run, monopoly-making mentality is just the next evolution. It would be self-made for TV already ----- four, sixteen team mega conferences means, what? Why the magical 64 teams! They'd ALL get in. And a portion of roy's argument would be true (sans the mid-majors and have nots) as would the portion that the rich keep getting rewarded and the rest of the NCAA (or whatever they will call themselves) can go to hell. Change is inevitable. The NFL is looking at now banning all kickoffs. Arguably the greatest Chinese fire drill this side of chinese fire drills ... and punts. If they ban kickoffs, punts will be next. Things change. Someone once remembered how great the Valley and its basketball was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 P.S. -- and this is the guy in charge of the fate of a Mizzou/Billiken basketball series? Yeah, let me know how that turns out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I believe the TV contract for a 68-team tournament selected from among the 350 or so NCAA teams is in place through 2024. That should insulate the basketball structure and tournament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Of course Alden thinks such. In Alden's World Mizzou would not have had the opportunity to make history by losing to Norfolk State of the MEAC in the "Second Round" (de facto First Round) of the NCAA Tournament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someoneelse Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Just read an aritcle on cnnsi.com (men's bb section) about Mike Alden's answer when asked the question, "what would you do if you were head of the NCAA?". Alden's response was basically he'd find a way for the power schools to manage their own championships in all sports, ala the BCS model for FB. The article was titled something like, "Cinderalla could be kept out of March Madness." This article is a little scary since it states a lot of BCS coaches and AD's are wondering why they have to share the pot of gold that is the Dance w/ the little guys. Their argument is basically, they are the brand names and the networks know it. There is a strong implication here, that men's BB could go the way of FB and that the networks would welcome such a move. I have no idea how this would affect SLU and others like us. But it does make you wonder if this is why schools like UMass, Charlotte, and Villanova are all looking into upgrading their FB programs so that they are on board if this ever comes to pass. Not difficult to imagine this happening once the bigs get their conferences all re-aligned. So, enjoy these trips to the Big Dance, because in the not too distant future we're likely going to find ourselves on the outside looking in. Looking at it a slightly different way, women are the majority of college students these days. If you want men to come to your school, you have to have things that draw men, like big(ger) time football. 'Come for the football, stay for the classes!' I think that it is a disastrous long term strategy as this repetitive head trauma issue is not going away and pro football, without significant changes, will be looked upon just above MMA in 25 years or so. That will decrease football's popularity broadly. Of course, I could be wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backhand Backhand Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Alden is an idiot. The NCAA hoops tourney is the most exciting time of the year in sports, while the NCAA football bowl games are generally boring and irrelevant, aside from the championship game. Would be a huge mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted April 17, 2012 Author Share Posted April 17, 2012 The way FB's set up now watching the other 4 BCS bowls and the other toilet bowls is like watching 50 or so consolation games. Who really cares? There's only one game. The rest mean nothing. Therefore, I think a FB playoff is coming, but who gets invited to that party and who will control it, the BCS (which the Alden's of the world want)or the NCAA (which is what they don't want, because of the $$)? Read the article there's no doubt if these guys put their heads together they may just abandon the NCAA altogether and leave it to govern only the small, read poor. I don't know how this would effect the CBS/NCAA BB deal up until 2024, but the old legal term of "contracts are made to be broken" would come into play for sure. These schools are greedy and with state budgets being trimmed they need the bigger piece of the pie. Plus, then they'd get to write their own rules for eligibility, stipends, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 A few thought: 1) Alden was still pissy about his vaunted Tigers losing to Norfolk St. when he made those quotes. Its a classic, I lost so I'm going to take my ball and leave moment. 2) Alden is wrong about what interests the casual fan and drives t.v. ratings. The best mix possible is a mid-major vs. blue blood. Case in point, this year's UK-KU game, which was sort of close, was down 9% in ratings from last year's Butler/UConn 30 point debacle. The UConn game was down 13% from the previous year's nail-biter between Butler/Duke which was one of the most heavily watch games in recent years. Casual fans are not interested in seeing two blue-blood powers with a bunch of one and done non-student athletes play. They want the drama of the underdog. On a related note, BCS football ratings were WAY down this year. 3) The only reason the BCS "we are going to take our ball and play by ourself" attitude was able to pass in football was there never was a true national championship game. The cat is out of the bag on basketball and the BCS powers will never be able to eliminate the small time schools. Simply put, the people won't stand for it. The big schools will continue to minimize the small schools and will continue to expand the tournament which will make the truly small schools all play extra rounds, but they'll never be able to eliminate it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted April 17, 2012 Author Share Posted April 17, 2012 P.S. -- and this is the guy in charge of the fate of a Mizzou/Billiken basketball series? Yeah, let me know how that turns out. I thought about that, TajMahal79, and after reading Alden's comments it's pretty clear a Mizzery v SLU game ain't gonna happen in my lifetime unless we get a shot at 'em in the dance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 I thought about that, TajMahal79, and after reading Alden's comments it's pretty clear a Mizzery v SLU game ain't gonna happen in my lifetime unless we get a shot at 'em in the dance. Who cares. Last time we played them in that three-year series, it became obvious to everybody that we couldn't "hang" with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 2) Alden is wrong about what interests the casual fan and drives t.v. ratings. The best mix possible is a mid-major vs. blue blood. Case in point, this year's UK-KU game, which was sort of close, was down 9% in ratings from last year's Butler/UConn 30 point debacle. The UConn game was down 13% from the previous year's nail-biter between Butler/Duke which was one of the most heavily watch games in recent years. Casual fans are not interested in seeing two blue-blood powers with a bunch of one and done non-student athletes play. They want the drama of the underdog. On a related note, BCS football ratings were WAY down this year. 3) The only reason the BCS "we are going to take our ball and play by ourself" attitude was able to pass in football was there never was a true national championship game. The cat is out of the bag on basketball and the BCS powers will never be able to eliminate the small time schools. Simply put, the people won't stand for it. The big schools will continue to minimize the small schools and will continue to expand the tournament which will make the truly small schools all play extra rounds, but they'll never be able to eliminate it. Spot on. The tournament would be as unsuccessful as the bowl games if they did not include mid majors and auto bid leagues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 A few thought: 1) Alden was still pissy about his vaunted Tigers losing to Norfolk St. when he made those quotes. Its a classic, I lost so I'm going to take my ball and leave moment. 2) Alden is wrong about what interests the casual fan and drives t.v. ratings. The best mix possible is a mid-major vs. blue blood. Case in point, this year's UK-KU game, which was sort of close, was down 9% in ratings from last year's Butler/UConn 30 point debacle. The UConn game was down 13% from the previous year's nail-biter between Butler/Duke which was one of the most heavily watch games in recent years. Casual fans are not interested in seeing two blue-blood powers with a bunch of one and done non-student athletes play. They want the drama of the underdog. On a related note, BCS football ratings were WAY down this year. 3) The only reason the BCS "we are going to take our ball and play by ourself" attitude was able to pass in football was there never was a true national championship game. The cat is out of the bag on basketball and the BCS powers will never be able to eliminate the small time schools. Simply put, the people won't stand for it. The big schools will continue to minimize the small schools and will continue to expand the tournament which will make the truly small schools all play extra rounds, but they'll never be able to eliminate it. -i hope you are right on #3 -on the tv ratings, the biggest change was uconn for duke as butler played both years, did not having duke lead to the decline? gosh i hope not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlarry Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 These AD's are idiots. The best part of the NCAA tournament is watching a small no name school knock off a big dog and go on a run. Ill admitt I loved watching two historic programs like kansas and kentucky battle it out for the title but even a game like that will lose its appeal if they got there by only beating teams exactly like themselves. My favorite part of the tournament is the first two day when the little guy has a chance to make history and a name for themselves. Kicking the small schools out would ruin the tournament, and that so many bcs AD's want them out just shows how big of cowards they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Just read an aritcle on cnnsi.com (men's bb section) about Mike Alden's answer when asked the question, "what would you do if you were head of the NCAA?". Alden's response was basically he'd find a way for the power schools to manage their own championships in all sports, ala the BCS model for FB. The article was titled something like, "Cinderalla could be kept out of March Madness." This article is a little scary since it states a lot of BCS coaches and AD's are wondering why they have to share the pot of gold that is the Dance w/ the little guys. Their argument is basically, they are the brand names and the networks know it. There is a strong implication here, that men's BB could go the way of FB and that the networks would welcome such a move. I have no idea how this would affect SLU and others like us. But it does make you wonder if this is why schools like UMass, Charlotte, and Villanova are all looking into upgrading their FB programs so that they are on board if this ever comes to pass. Not difficult to imagine this happening once the bigs get their conferences all re-aligned. So, enjoy these trips to the Big Dance, because in the not too distant future we're likely going to find ourselves on the outside looking in. All I hear from Alden is this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 -i hope you are right on #3 -on the tv ratings, the biggest change was uconn for duke as butler played both years, did not having duke lead to the decline? gosh i hope not No, the biggest change was one game was a 30 point blowout, the other was a thriller that nearly resulted in the best moment in sports history (half court shot by Butler to beat Duke would be unmatched, IMO). People tune out of blowouts and in to close games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 No, the biggest change was one game was a 30 point blowout, the other was a thriller that nearly resulted in the best moment in sports history (half court shot by Butler to beat Duke would be unmatched, IMO). People tune out of blowouts and in to close games. Actually, the final score for the Butler-UConn game was 53-41. Butler was actually up 3 at halftime. The game was noteworthy for the p!ss-poor shooting performance by Butler (only 3-31 from 2-pt range!) but it wasn't a blowout. Perhaps it just seemed that way because of the horrid shooting of Butler. I do know that it was a pretty tough game to watch, especially in the 2nd half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 No, the biggest change was one game was a 30 point blowout, the other was a thriller that nearly resulted in the best moment in sports history (half court shot by Butler to beat Duke would be unmatched, IMO). People tune out of blowouts and in to close games. -i took your '30 point debacle' to mean it was a low scoring game as neither team could hit water from a dock, clearly a poor interpretation, so now i am confused as the uconn-butler game was not a blowout Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted April 17, 2012 Share Posted April 17, 2012 Actually, the final score for the Butler-UConn game was 53-41. Butler was actually up 3 at halftime. The game was noteworthy for the p!ss-poor shooting performance by Butler (only 3-31 from 2-pt range!) but it wasn't a blowout. Perhaps it just seemed that way because of the horrid shooting of Butler. I do know that it was a pretty tough game to watch, especially in the 2nd half. My apologies. You and Cowboy are right. I completely mis-remembered that game as a total blowout but it was relatively close, albeit very ugly. I still think the rating difference between that game and the Duke one was largely a result of the exciting nature of that game but my 30 point comment was WAY off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.