Much like my blog post a few months ago about the NFL moving the Pro Bowl to before Super Bowl Sunday, this potential move by the NCAA is all about money. It's not about featuring small schools and giving them an opportunity on the big stage. It's not about increasing competition and making a "true champion" win more games.
ESPN Personality Colin Cowherd explains:
As Cowherd explained, by expanding to 96 teams, the product is diluted. The relationship can be explained in economic terms:
There is an equilibrium that exists between the producer and what it is providing, and the consumer. This all depends on the quantity and quality of the item being produced. If the quantity is too high and demand is not there, there is a surplus. If quality is low, consumers will not buy in.
Applied to the NCAA Tournament, they want to expand revenue by adding more quantity, but people may not want that much quantity. One of the important things about the NCAA Tournament is the exclusivity. Fans appreciate how hard it is to get into the tournament, and the desire to watch goes up. As is seen in college football, useless bowl games have low ratings and they become the butt-end of jokes.
There is an NIT Tournament for a reason. It is for teams who did not perform well enough to get into the NCAA's. People still watch the NIT, but they recognize it is not on the same level as the NCAA. Ninety-six teams in the tournament would get rid of the NIT and mash them together, bringing the overall quality down. Who wants to watch an underperforming high-major take on a no-name mid-major in the round of 96?
Not me.
As the old adage goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The NCAA should heed that advice.
No comments:
Post a Comment