|
Some coaches feel it's not just about the money.
"I don't think they'll make a decision like that strictly on financial (reasons), but if there's a significant difference in the amount of money that you could make" that has to be considered, Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski said, adding the revenue generated by the men's tournament funds almost all of the championships in other sports.
"The NCAA has to look at, for the good of all college sports, what might be there. That's a part of the equation. I don't think it's the only part, but it is part of the equation, how do you make enough money to fund all the things that you want to fund? If you just looked at basketball, singularly, you wouldn't have to make that decision on it because we make enough to fund ourselves, but it's about funding everything else. It'll be an interesting spring and summer in that regard."
If the field is expanded, which teams should get invited becomes the hot topic. The mid-majors and lower Division I teams think it should be them who get the bulk of the new bids. Others are worried it would just be an excuse to get most of the "power" conference teams off the bubble and in the field.
"If it's going to be an experience in which, sure, the Southern Conference regular season winner goes, but then the ninth-place finisher in the SEC or the ACC or the Big East goes with those additional 30-plus or 10-plus or 5-plus slots, I don't think that's fair to the mid-major and low-major programs," said Davidson coach Bob McKillop, whose mid-major Wildcats almost reached the Final Four in 2008.
He and other mid-major coaches know how just precious a bid can be.
"If I don't go to the NCAA tournament in the next five years they're going to fire (me) no matter how many games I won," Akron coach Keith Dambrot said.
"Our jobs are hard, man. It's tough to win and harder to be good every year. And even if you are good and you don't make the tournament, people say, 'Well, he's no good.' For us, you can play great all year and then get beat in our tournament on a bank shot and you don't get to go to the NCAA tournament."
Kansas coach Bill Self said he doesn't see the real benefit to jumping to a number like 96. Like Krzyzewski, he'd take a more gradual approach.
"I think if expansion should occur, it should occur to 68 or 72 and have maybe additional play-in-type games," he said. "I love the tournament the way it is and I don't think we should be so shortsighted, though, that it isn't possible to make it better. I just don't know if going to 96 is the way because it was a great tournament when it was at 32 and it was a great tournament when it was at 48 ... and now 65. It's always been a great tournament but it's always gotten a little bit better."
Some big-time coaches can't seem to make up their minds.
"A lot of things, I really do have a strong feel for, but I really don't on this one," North Carolina coach Roy Williams said.
"You can make a case to me that there's so many great teams or so many good teams and the margin between 64 and 66 is so slight, why not take it and add one more game, add all these teams. You could make a case and I'd say, 'All right, that's pretty good.' And then you could make a case how special the tournament is, it really makes the regular season mean a lot more. You can make the case how special 65 is, and you'd finish talking to me, and I'd say, 'Yeah, you're right.' So if I were to have a lean, I would lean toward the fact that it's pretty special the way it is, but I could be convinced either way."
[Associated Press;
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor