Public Opinion: Tournament Expansion

Every sport has "hot-button issues". For the NFL, it's concussion safety and collective bargaining agreements, The MLB's is obviously steroids, and college football has the BCS debate. No college hoops topic has been more "hot-button" this year than tournament expansion talk.

Nearly every blogger, columnist, analyst, commentator and coach has voiced their opinion on the matter in some fashion. But after 3-4 months of discussion, it is very easy to forget who said what, who was for it and who was vehemently against it.

We are here to help draw that line in the sand. I could sit here and tell you my opinion on the matter, but somebody probably already said what I was thinking in a much more educated and constructive manner.. It's a much better waste of my time to construct a list of the coaches and media-type who have addressed the matter.

Coaches

Scott Drew - Baylor

I think we should expand even more. Go up to 128. I've thought that for several years. There's that many good teams, and it gives everybody one more game.

To everyone who says, 'What about a missed class?'—trust me, those players would trade a day of class for a chance to play in this tournament any day.

Jim Boeheim - Syracuse

I've been for expansion for years. The NCAA tournament has always been expanded when there's been a need. It started out with eight teams and then went to 12, to 16, to 24, to 32, to 48, to 64.

I mean, it's been expanded seven or eight times. Expansion is nothing new. And we're in the longest time between expansions in history. The fact is, we have better teams. We have more good teams than ever before. And they should get the chance to play in the Tournament.

Paul Hewitt - Georgia Tech

We have [347] Division I teams now, and only 65 are going. We've increased it by one since 1985. That just doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

It should be expanded. The obvious cry is going to be, ‘Well, coaches are just trying to save their jobs.' I look at the bowl season, and I see that 50 percent of the teams play in bowl games. And I see the emotion those kids have after they win a bowl game, how good they feel about themselves. That should be a part of college basketball. I think you should have more kids participate in the NCAA tournament.

Billy Donovan - Florida

I felt bad for our kids the last couple of years. You’re right there, a game or two away from maybe being in and then they don’t get a chance to go.

And then there’s a perception that if you’re in the NIT, it’s quote-unquote a loser’s tournament. And I think that any time you expand something, where you’re playing for that main trophy that everyone’s trying to play for, I think it’s always good to have more opportunities for more people.

Bruce Pearl - Tennessee

I think the public conversation is great; I can’t believe it starts in January. But you’ve got a lot of good teams that aren’t going to make the tournament every year; this year might be the most in a long, long time.

Now I know the purists, and I’m one of them, are going to say, ‘If it’s not broke, don’t fix it. It’s a great tournament, don’t lessen the quality.’ My favorite weekend … is the first weekend. It’s all those crazy matchups that just have you glued. We’ll still have that if 32 teams get a bye and you pick it up from there.

When you’ve got 20-something win teams not going to the NCAA tournament and you’ve got 6-5 really bad football teams going to the toilet bowl, it’s not equal. I do think we need some expansion. Is 96 teams too many? Maybe. … I’ve gotta represent my side of things. … Right now, for fans, making the NCAA tournament doesn’t mean anything. They just expect you to make the NCAA tournament It’s HARD to make the NCAA tournament.

Jay Wright - Villanova

There are so many great teams, and I think coaches' jobs are being determined on whether they are picked in the 65 rather than are they are doing a good job. If more teams got into the tournament, I think you could see coaches concentrate on what they all want to do, and that is teach and educate.

Al Skinner - Boston College

I can’t be against it because coaches are penalized tremendously for not making the tournament.To me, too much attention is paid to (making the tournament), but I understand it because everybody needs dollars and it generates dollars. At the end of the day, that’s what it’s about.

Greg Marshall - Wichita State

My point is, that's ridiculous. Obviously there's the bias that the 7th place team in a BCS league is better than the second or third place team in our league. With the non-conference performance from our league this year and the wins we have against BCS teams, I just don't think that's the case.

Rod Barnes - Georgia State

You have teams with great records being left out. When these kids play on teams that have won 23 and 24 games but don't get in because their team didn't win their conference tournament, I just don't agree with that. I just think that if you go out every night and play decent against the teams that are on your schedule and in your conference and you win 23 and 24 games, you should get in.

Oliver Purnell - Clemson

George Mason could have easily been left out. Obviously, they're a deserving team. If you expand it, you decrease the possibility of leaving out more deserving teams.

Rick Barnes - Texas

You see what expansion has done around the country in all these leagues, in some ways it's diluted it. I don't know that there is a benefit. You talk about expansion, but it does start in your conference tournament. That's really the beginning of the N.C.A.A. tournament.

Pat Knight - Texas Tech

If you're talking about adding more teams, I don't think the games would change a bit. They'd be just as competitive and I think you'd see more Cinderella stories, more teams people didn't think had a chance and there'd be a lot more upsets if the NCAA expanded the tournament.

Mike Krzyzewski - Duke

That would add more relevance to the regular season, instead of just having big games being bracket busters and things like that.I could see it going to 96, but if they do, I would like to see the regular season champs rewarded. That would give the conferences who don't get more than one bid a chance to have two bids. If you expand, you would want that to happen.

Ken Bone - Washington State

I think it makes it a really special tournament when only 64 get in. I really like the way it is right now.

Ben Jacobson - Northern Iowa

I like it where it's at. I like the 65. Obviously it's difficult to make that field but that's why it's the best sporting event of the entire year, regardless of college or professional.

Mark Few - Gonzaga

I like the way the tournament is right now. I think it's an honor when that name flashes up there on Selection Sunday. It's a sense of accomplishment -- not everybody gets invited. I mean, just think of the teams that aren't going to make it this year.

To reach the tournament should be a very special accomplishment. There are not 96 teams that are deserving to go.

Bruiser Flint - Drexel

I can understand why they might say it and want it, but I like it the way it is. With the NIT the way it is now [40 teams], you're putting 100 teams in the postseason. That's about one-third of Division I. Sixty-four teams gives it a little bit of legitimacy.

Jim Calhoun - UConn

The basketball tournament takes 98 percent of all the money the NCAA makes; it's another way in which they can use basketball to take money. If I thought it benefited the student-athletes and, most importantly, benefited basketball ... I'm opposed to it only in the sense that it means we'll make 99 percent of the money. That's the only reason I'd be necessarily opposed to it because I just don't think everything should be on our back.

I know that's a funny, different answer, but I think it's the reason they want to go to 96 because it's so many more games being televised which means advertising spots during those times.

Mark Fox - Georgia

Having come from a school [Nevada] where we looked at that process very closely, I think the NCAA tournament would be best served and most easily adjusted by going to 68 teams. You would not have to add any more TV weekends. You wouldn't have to change the basic structure of the tournament.

Usually there are not many more than one or two teams that have a legitimate argument about being left out. I don't think you should dilute the tournament by going much bigger than that.

There are not 96 programs that schedule in the non-conference in a way that says they're dying to get to the NCAA tournament and are willing to do what it takes.

Thad Motta - Ohio State

The greatest thing I ever heard was from John Wooden and he said, ‘People put too much emphasis on the last game of the year.’ There is so much excitement along the way and I think that we lose the sight of what’s happening now as it’s all geared toward getting into the NCAA Tournament. There is so much great basketball to be played in the month of February and even in early March.

[A larger tournament] allows you to be a little more risky in your non-conference schedule. We’ve [played] Tennessee, we’ve done Florida and we’ve done LSU, but you can get out and do those things a little bit better and know that you’re going to be rewarded.

Bill Carmody - Northwestern

If you expand it this much, it seems like you'd dilute it a little bit.

Doug Elgin - Commissioner of Missouri Valley Conference

The early rounds are the riveting part of the tournament. If we had an expansion, it would deepen the tournament in the middle. You're going to see much more balance and maybe more upsets in these first and second round games. I know there's going to be whining and moaning when the 97th and 98th teams don't get in, but right now, they're leaving out a lot of teams that are worthy.

Bernadette McGlade - Commissioner of Atlantic-10

I'm a proponent of the tournament expanding. There's so much parity in the game today, it's become necessary.

The Media

Gene Wojciechowski - ESPN

Yes, of course, we should absolutely expand the NCAA men's basketball tournament to 96 teams. And while we're at it, let's rework the opening of Clapton's "Layla," tell Penelope Cruz she needs a nip and tuck, and replace all the azaleas and pines at Augusta National with strip-club signage.

Tracee Hamilton - Washington Post

It's so great, it's co-opted the name of an entire month. We don't have April Ennui or May Mania or December Delirium. Well, we may have all those things, but they aren't official national monikers. March Madness is. As the great Andy Williams sang, "It's the most wonderful time of the year."

So of course the NCAA wants to screw it up.

The good ol' NCAA, the burr under the saddle of college sports, is considering expanding the men's basketball tournament field from 65 to 96 teams. This would lengthen the tournament by a week, give the top 32 seeds a first-round bye and make zillions of dollars for the NCAA and some lucky TV network, probably ESPN.

In other words, this is the worst idea in the history of ideas. Well, Jay Leno at 10 p.m. was the worst idea in the history of ideas. This is the worst idea in the history of sports ideas, and that includes the Bowl Championship Series, the previous leader in the category.

John Feinstein - Sports Illustrated, Washington Post

The important part of the story concerned the make-up of the tournament. Apparently the NCAA is looking into expansion—going from the current 65 teams to 96 in order to add a week of TV that would add more money to the new contract.

I can’t call this the worst idea I’ve ever heard because the BCS still exists. But it is a solid No. 2.

Chris Chase - The Dagger

It would be a flop on par with New Coke, the Edsel or Adam Morrison in the NBA: The NCAA is exploring the possibility of expanding the field of the NCAA tournament.

It's the worst idea the NCAA has ever had, and it has had a bunch of them. Decisions based solely on financial reasons inevitably fail. And since money is the only -- ONLY -- reason the NCAA would consider expanding the tournament, this would be a disaster. (And that's assuming expansion would make money, which I don't think it would in the long run.)

Seth Davis - Sports Illustrated, CBS

Do. Not. Expand.

I'm sure you've heard about the crusade led by coaches such as Syracuse's Jim Boeheim and Georgia Tech's Paul Hewitt to get more teams into the NCAA tournament. Their central argument is that, aside from the addition of the opening round game in 2001, the tournament has not expanded since it went to 64 teams in 1985. But when you actually sit down, crunch the numbers and try to find 34 teams deserving of an at-large bid, the problem isn't that you have too many good teams to choose from. The problem is you don't have nearly enough. As you look at all the résumés, all you can see are warts.

Pat Forde - ESPN

In what might be the dumbest idea since "Rocky VI," a movement has emerged to double the size of the NCAA Tournament to 128 teams.

If you want to know how galvanizing the 128-team tournament might have been, scan the final pre-tournament RPI from the 2005-06 season. When you reach triple digits, cue the CBS tournament theme music in your head and feel your pulse pound as you envision the Drexel Dragons taking the floor in the first round.

That's 15-16 Drexel, the No. 128 team in America.

Do you want to be the guy who draws up the bracket for this thing? Plans the sites, does the seeding, arranges the team hotels, the practice schedules, the interview schedules? It's a mammoth undertaking as it is. Doubling it for the sake of Siena and UMass is silly.

Gary Parrish - CBS

I never want to hear about expanding the NCAA tournament field again.

Never.

And when I say never, what I mean is as long as I live -- plus as long as my 6-year-old son lives -- plus as long as all eight of Octo-Mom's kids live -- and then like 600 more years after that. Seriously, never again. Because it's ridiculous. So ridiculous, in fact, that I'm ready to cut the field of 65 to 32 -- just give automatic bids to the champions of the 16 best leagues, then dish out 16 at-large bids and call it a day.

I have no desire to watch 65 schools be rewarded with a trip to the NCAA tournament when roughly 30 of them are mediocre. And if you sat around Wednesday night watching college basketball and tracking scores right here at CBSSports.com, then you know why I feel this way, and you probably feel this way, too.

John Gasaway - The Mid-Majority

Personally, I am very leery of changing the tournament, for the simple reason that when you find yourself in the rare and treasured moment of having something that you actually venerate, you don't set about knocking down walls and adding whole new wings. Careful preservation and simple upkeep are enough.

To the depths of my sports being, I am hard-wired with the same protective impulse that drives this outrage. No, the 65-team tournament isn't perfect, but then again neither are any of us. Good grief, I watched this tournament for years--decades--when it was announced by Billy Packer. Need I say more? March Madness is quite simply the gold standard to which all other American team-sport postseasons are held. (Ask college football.) You don't trifle with the gold standard lightly.

Jeff Eisenberg - The Dagger

Have you ever had an inkling that something awful was about to happen and you were powerless to stop it? That's the way I feel about the possibility of the NCAA Tournament expanding to 96 teams.

Andrew Sharp - SB Nation

Oh, right. It's always good to have more opportunities for people. We should just go ahead and expand to 128, just to make sure not a single underachieving team (like Florida the past few years) ever gets left out of the NCAAs.

Like last year, the Florida team that started 16-2, and then finished the year losing five of eight in an SEC down year. That team totally should've made the tournament. Nick Calathes!!

In college basketball, there are no true losers. And you know what that means? Everyone gets a spot in the tournament... AND a trophy!

Darren Everson - Wall Street Journal

The NCAA is in the very early stages of exploring making changes to its men's basketball tournament. One idea that's been batted around: expanding it to 96 teams. Here's a simple suggestion: Stop exploring. Start doing.

Expanding the 65-team tournament—the NCAA's universally beloved, crown-jewel property—is the biggest no-brainer in sports right now. Far bigger, even, than all the talk of imposing a playoff on college football.

Most important of all, adding an extra round or stage to the tournament would mean an extra helping of what fans love most about the event: the early rounds, the unpredictable festival of games that go on all day and create wild excitement all across the country.

Gregg Doyel - CBS

You don't want the NCAA tournament to expand because you're used to it the way it is.

Never mind that the NCAA tournament has been at 65 teams only since 2001. And that before that, it was at 64 teams for 16 years. Before that? It was 53 teams for one year. After being 52 teams for one year. And 48 teams for three years. And 40 teams for one year. And that takes us back to just 1979.

The NCAA tournament started with eight teams in 1939, but grew to 16 in 1951, then to 22, and to 25 and to 32 in 1975. Then came 1979, and those 40 teams.

You follow? Expansion won't hurt the tradition of the NCAA tournament -- expansion is the tradition of the NCAA tournament. So if tradition is your biggest concern here, I'm sorry, but you just lost.

There's not a single valid argument against the NCAA tournament growing to 96 teams.

So If you are keeping score at home, Thats 12 coaches/commissioners for expansion and 10 of them against expansion with three undecided.

Obviously the media was less welcoming of the idea of a 96-team post-season. Seven journalists are avidly against expansion, while just two media people are for some sort of expansion.

While this list could have been as long as Kelvin Sampson's cell phone bill, I think after reading nearly 50 quotes, you should get the picture: some coaches like it, others don't, but everybody watching it thinks it 's the dumbest idea since the XFL.