Posted by scaturo on 3/21/2016 12:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/20/2016 9:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 3/20/2016 9:06:00 PM (view original):
If you look for conspiracies, you will find them.

when you find them they aren't conspiracies....

Except most of that **** is real weak. Who cares about Syracuse, Michigan St? Is that some sort of rivalry in the booming metropoli of East Lansing and Syracuse? Are you waiting for a Sherman Douglass/Mateen Cleaves video montage? ND/Mich because they didn't play in football? Seriously? ND could play Our Lady of the Worthless Miracle and their lunatic fans would watch. It's the NCAA tournament, other than the Super Bowl it's the one sporting event that who plays doesn't matter....they don't need to rig ****, we'll buy what they're selling regardless.

Some of it's a stretch, but you're telling me more people would turn into Michigan State playing a non major team like say Temple, compared to Michigan State verse Syracuse two giant programs? It's not a rivalry, but it's big names. And you think more people would turn into ND playing Tulsa or VCU than Michigan?

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/20/2016 8:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by yanks250125 on 3/20/2016 6:03:00 PM (view original):
I think that's a pretty good analysis

and it's not just this year either, however this year was by far the most obvious

Kansas Wichita seeded next to each other

Wisconsin and Arizona seeded in the same bracket

Ohio State-Arizona matchup

Duke with the easiest bracket in the world

2014

OSU Dayton and what was expected to be OSU-Syracuse in the next round both teams were #1/2 for a long period that season

Kentucky getting an 8 seed in Wichita's bracket

2013

UNC being an 8 seed in Kansas bracket

ridiculous 12 seeding

they put these teams for possible 2nd round matchups that refuse to play each other in the regular season (kansas/wichita and Kentucky/Indiana). yeah ok tell me it's not rigged

Posted by zorzii on 3/20/2016 10:07:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, I think theOnly is right about that. I mean, they need to stop thinking television and feel good movies, and just be fair.

Why do they need to do that? The NCAA gets around $11 billion reasons to be concerned with how the tournament plays on TV.

i dont know if there are shenanigans to create certain matchups or not. I would kind of doubt it, just seems like there is nothing in it for the committee to do that and risk thier reputations. unless you are telling me they are getting kickbacks from cbs to create attractive matchups (which seems really risky for both parties and would be pretty scandolous if proven. or that they are mandated by ncaa to create attractive matchups despite the public being told they are not. I think its just a case of you create a bunch of matchups and some are going to be tasty, just because there are alot of interesting matchups to be had.


But, as i say , I could be wrong about that.

HOWEVER, do not tell me they have "RUINED" anything. to say that this years tourney is "ruined" is preposterous. To me it was a fantastic first weekend. (and , yes, I was saying that even before the Miracle in OKC... whoop!)

how , exactly, was the tourney ruined?

Posted by oldave on 3/21/2016 7:48:00 AM (view original):
i dont know if there are shenanigans to create certain matchups or not. I would kind of doubt it, just seems like there is nothing in it for the committee to do that and risk thier reputations. unless you are telling me they are getting kickbacks from cbs to create attractive matchups (which seems really risky for both parties and would be pretty scandolous if proven. or that they are mandated by ncaa to create attractive matchups despite the public being told they are not. I think its just a case of you create a bunch of matchups and some are going to be tasty, just because there are alot of interesting matchups to be had.


But, as i say , I could be wrong about that.

HOWEVER, do not tell me they have "RUINED" anything. to say that this years tourney is "ruined" is preposterous. To me it was a fantastic first weekend. (and , yes, I was saying that even before the Miracle in OKC... whoop!)

how , exactly, was the tourney ruined?

The comittee makes the ncaa a bunch of money by providing good matchups on television.

They didn't "ruin" it as it has to be the most exciting first round ever, but there has to be an asterisk when they talk about most first round upsets with seedings like Wichita, UNI, MSU and SFA, Zaga and over seedings of Cal, Baylor and Oregon state,

"The comittee makes the ncaa a bunch of money by providing good matchups on television."

explain this the0.

this years contract is already set, right? so some future years negotiations are affected by who plays who in the second round this year?

and again, even if that is true, the specific individuals who are on the committee... these are not ncaa employees, and they seem to be a pretty upstanding group of people... if they are not getting paid under the table to provide these matchups... why would they do it? why would they risk thier reputation to possibly make the ncaa a few more dollars?

regarding indiana and kentucky... i would think there would be plenty of interest regardless of who each of those played in the second round and if someone was going to conspire to do something, i would think it would be to try to seed things so that powers like that were more likely to go deep in the tourney.

i still contend if you throw 68 teams in a hat, you are going to come up with some great matchups. and then you have games mich st and wvu that i think most folks would have told you were yawners when the bracket came out, but didnt turn out that way.

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/21/2016 6:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by scaturo on 3/21/2016 12:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/20/2016 9:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 3/20/2016 9:06:00 PM (view original):
If you look for conspiracies, you will find them.

when you find them they aren't conspiracies....

Except most of that **** is real weak. Who cares about Syracuse, Michigan St? Is that some sort of rivalry in the booming metropoli of East Lansing and Syracuse? Are you waiting for a Sherman Douglass/Mateen Cleaves video montage? ND/Mich because they didn't play in football? Seriously? ND could play Our Lady of the Worthless Miracle and their lunatic fans would watch. It's the NCAA tournament, other than the Super Bowl it's the one sporting event that who plays doesn't matter....they don't need to rig ****, we'll buy what they're selling regardless.

Some of it's a stretch, but you're telling me more people would turn into Michigan State playing a non major team like say Temple, compared to Michigan State verse Syracuse two giant programs? It's not a rivalry, but it's big names. And you think more people would turn into ND playing Tulsa or VCU than Michigan?

I am saying it doesn't matter who is playing. Everyone's watching regardless of matchup. This isn't Big Monday on ESPN, this is the tournament and a million schlubs like me are watching regardless of who is playing.

Posted by dacj501 on 3/21/2016 1:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by scaturo on 3/21/2016 12:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/20/2016 9:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 3/20/2016 9:06:00 PM (view original):
If you look for conspiracies, you will find them.

when you find them they aren't conspiracies....

Except most of that **** is real weak. Who cares about Syracuse, Michigan St? Is that some sort of rivalry in the booming metropoli of East Lansing and Syracuse? Are you waiting for a Sherman Douglass/Mateen Cleaves video montage? ND/Mich because they didn't play in football? Seriously? ND could play Our Lady of the Worthless Miracle and their lunatic fans would watch. It's the NCAA tournament, other than the Super Bowl it's the one sporting event that who plays doesn't matter....they don't need to rig ****, we'll buy what they're selling regardless.

who doesn't love a good Sherman Douglas montage?

25 million St. John's fans....

Did I ever tell you about the Ronny Seikally doppleganger I used to straight up ball against on the mean streets of Lawrenceville, NJ?

Posted by Trentonjoe on 3/21/2016 8:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/21/2016 6:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by scaturo on 3/21/2016 12:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/20/2016 9:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 3/20/2016 9:06:00 PM (view original):
If you look for conspiracies, you will find them.

when you find them they aren't conspiracies....

Except most of that **** is real weak. Who cares about Syracuse, Michigan St? Is that some sort of rivalry in the booming metropoli of East Lansing and Syracuse? Are you waiting for a Sherman Douglass/Mateen Cleaves video montage? ND/Mich because they didn't play in football? Seriously? ND could play Our Lady of the Worthless Miracle and their lunatic fans would watch. It's the NCAA tournament, other than the Super Bowl it's the one sporting event that who plays doesn't matter....they don't need to rig ****, we'll buy what they're selling regardless.

Some of it's a stretch, but you're telling me more people would turn into Michigan State playing a non major team like say Temple, compared to Michigan State verse Syracuse two giant programs? It's not a rivalry, but it's big names. And you think more people would turn into ND playing Tulsa or VCU than Michigan?

I am saying it doesn't matter who is playing. Everyone's watching regardless of matchup. This isn't Big Monday on ESPN, this is the tournament and a million schlubs like me are watching regardless of who is playing.

hardcore Basketball fans will watch regardless, but you get way more people with Kentucky, Indiana in the 2nd round than Kentucky verse someone like Seton Hall

Posted by oldave on 3/21/2016 8:58:00 AM (view original):
"The comittee makes the ncaa a bunch of money by providing good matchups on television."

explain this the0.

this years contract is already set, right? so some future years negotiations are affected by who plays who in the second round this year?

and again, even if that is true, the specific individuals who are on the committee... these are not ncaa employees, and they seem to be a pretty upstanding group of people... if they are not getting paid under the table to provide these matchups... why would they do it? why would they risk thier reputation to possibly make the ncaa a few more dollars?

regarding indiana and kentucky... i would think there would be plenty of interest regardless of who each of those played in the second round and if someone was going to conspire to do something, i would think it would be to try to seed things so that powers like that were more likely to go deep in the tourney.

i still contend if you throw 68 teams in a hat, you are going to come up with some great matchups. and then you have games mich st and wvu that i think most folks would have told you were yawners when the bracket came out, but didnt turn out that way.

Better 2nd round amtchups lead to an increase in viewers and the more they can make for future negotiations.

The NCAA also sells corporate sponsors making multi millions, the bigger the audience then they can charge more and more later on.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/march-madness-follow-the-money/

up to 30-35 million dollars for "champion" level corporate sponsors.

Let's totally not assume the NCAA is invovled in some shading dealings, they have a historically clean record and all other sports have great records to just like the NFL and FIFA.

I don't think anyone who knew basketball though WVU and SFA was going to be a yawner it had decent hype for a 3-14 game considering they play pretty much the exact style.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 3/21/2016 8:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/21/2016 6:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by scaturo on 3/21/2016 12:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/20/2016 9:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 3/20/2016 9:06:00 PM (view original):
If you look for conspiracies, you will find them.

when you find them they aren't conspiracies....

Except most of that **** is real weak. Who cares about Syracuse, Michigan St? Is that some sort of rivalry in the booming metropoli of East Lansing and Syracuse? Are you waiting for a Sherman Douglass/Mateen Cleaves video montage? ND/Mich because they didn't play in football? Seriously? ND could play Our Lady of the Worthless Miracle and their lunatic fans would watch. It's the NCAA tournament, other than the Super Bowl it's the one sporting event that who plays doesn't matter....they don't need to rig ****, we'll buy what they're selling regardless.

Some of it's a stretch, but you're telling me more people would turn into Michigan State playing a non major team like say Temple, compared to Michigan State verse Syracuse two giant programs? It's not a rivalry, but it's big names. And you think more people would turn into ND playing Tulsa or VCU than Michigan?

I am saying it doesn't matter who is playing. Everyone's watching regardless of matchup. This isn't Big Monday on ESPN, this is the tournament and a million schlubs like me are watching regardless of who is playing.

Agreed. Matchups-schmatchups. It's basketball's version of the Super Bowl. You'll get the office secretary, who couldn't give a **** about hoops otherwise, watching to see how his or her bracket is doing. I agree 100% with TJ, if you look for conspiracies, you'll find them. Whether they exist or not. The whole "Michigan State set up to play Syracuse" thing. Total reach. People will watch regardless, if not for the "giant programs" then for the Cinderellas.....everyone loves watching David beat Goliath.

Zags weren't underseeded bases on their resume. They weren't gonna even be in if they didn't win their conf tourney.

I agree, no conspiracy here.

However. If there was and they were setting up these match ups on purpose then GOOD. Thank you selection committee. Giving me some great bball to watch.

Posted by Benis on 3/21/2016 7:49:00 PM (view original):
Zags weren't underseeded bases on their resume. They weren't gonna even be in if they didn't win their conf tourney.

I agree, no conspiracy here.

However. If there was and they were setting up these match ups on purpose then GOOD. Thank you selection committee. Giving me some great bball to watch.

I'll still think (as a Hoosier) that IU was not a 5 after winning the big Ten by 2 GAMES! (over a team who got a 2 seed...) and no OP, it wasn't RPI (MSU was 12, IU was 24, UK 11...), they just used a very odd eye test. I have a hard time with a regular season champ of any Big 6, let alone the SEC and Big 10 being lower than 2 seeds, maybe 3 in extreme cases.

Posted by asher413 on 3/21/2016 8:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 3/21/2016 7:49:00 PM (view original):
Zags weren't underseeded bases on their resume. They weren't gonna even be in if they didn't win their conf tourney.

I agree, no conspiracy here.

However. If there was and they were setting up these match ups on purpose then GOOD. Thank you selection committee. Giving me some great bball to watch.

I'll still think (as a Hoosier) that IU was not a 5 after winning the big Ten by 2 GAMES! (over a team who got a 2 seed...) and no OP, it wasn't RPI (MSU was 12, IU was 24, UK 11...), they just used a very odd eye test. I have a hard time with a regular season champ of any Big 6, let alone the SEC and Big 10 being lower than 2 seeds, maybe 3 in extreme cases.

Not saying I disagree that Indiana wasn't underseeded but winning a conf regular season nowadays doesn't mean as much because of unbalanced scheduling.

You're also disregarding the non conf portion of Indiana's schedule. MSU's non conf was FAR superior.

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/21/2016 12:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 3/21/2016 8:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/21/2016 6:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by scaturo on 3/21/2016 12:31:00 AM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/20/2016 9:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 3/20/2016 9:06:00 PM (view original):
If you look for conspiracies, you will find them.

when you find them they aren't conspiracies....

Except most of that **** is real weak. Who cares about Syracuse, Michigan St? Is that some sort of rivalry in the booming metropoli of East Lansing and Syracuse? Are you waiting for a Sherman Douglass/Mateen Cleaves video montage? ND/Mich because they didn't play in football? Seriously? ND could play Our Lady of the Worthless Miracle and their lunatic fans would watch. It's the NCAA tournament, other than the Super Bowl it's the one sporting event that who plays doesn't matter....they don't need to rig ****, we'll buy what they're selling regardless.

Some of it's a stretch, but you're telling me more people would turn into Michigan State playing a non major team like say Temple, compared to Michigan State verse Syracuse two giant programs? It's not a rivalry, but it's big names. And you think more people would turn into ND playing Tulsa or VCU than Michigan?

I am saying it doesn't matter who is playing. Everyone's watching regardless of matchup. This isn't Big Monday on ESPN, this is the tournament and a million schlubs like me are watching regardless of who is playing.

hardcore Basketball fans will watch regardless, but you get way more people with Kentucky, Indiana in the 2nd round than Kentucky verse someone like Seton Hall

Right, but how does that make CBS or the NCAA any money.

CBS is going to make money on this season by advertising, which is already sold. The MCAA already was paid by CBS for this contract.

So, how does higher ratings make either of them more money this season?

It MIGHT make them more money in future negotiations.